Ixazomib, Lenalidomide, and Dexamethasone (IRD) Treatment with Cytogenetic Risk-Based Maintenance in Transplant-Eligible Myeloma: A Phase 2 Multicenter Study by the Nordic Myeloma Study Group.

Scarce data exist on double maintenance in transplant-eligible high-risk (HR) newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) patients. This prospective phase 2 study enrolled 120 transplant-eligible NDMM patients. The treatment consisted of four cycles of ixazomib-lenalidomide-dexamethasone (IRD) induction plus autologous stem cell transplantation followed by IRD consolidation and cytogenetic risk-based maintenance therapy with lenalidomide + ixazomib (IR) for HR patients and lenalidomide (R) alone for NHR patients. The main endpoint of the study was undetectable minimal residual disease (MRD) with sensitivity of <10-5 by flow cytometry at any time, and other endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). We present the preplanned analysis after the last patient has been two years on maintenance. At any time during protocol treatment, 28% (34/120) had MRD < 10-5 at least once. At two years on maintenance, 66% of the patients in the HR group and 76% in the NHR group were progression-free (p = 0.395) and 36% (43/120) were CR or better, of which 42% (18/43) had undetectable flow MRD <10-5. Altogether 95% of the patients with sustained MRD <10-5, 82% of the patients who turned MRD-positive, and 61% of those with positive MRD had no disease progression at two years on maintenance (p < 0.001). To conclude, prolonged maintenance with all-oral ixazomib plus lenalidomide might improve PFS in HR patients.

Idelalisib (PI3Kδ inhibitor) therapy for patients with relapsed/refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia: A Swedish nation-wide real-world report on consecutively identified patients.

OBJECTIVES: We examined the efficacy and toxicity of the PI3Kδ inhibitor idelalisib in combination with rituximab salvage therapy in consecutively identified Swedish patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). METHODS AND RESULTS: Thirty-seven patients with relapsed/refractory disease were included. The median number of prior lines of therapy was 3 (range 1-11); the median age was 69 years (range 50-89); 22% had Cumulative Illness Rating Scale (CIRS) >6 and 51% had del(17p)/TP53 mutation. The overall response rate was 65% (all but one was partial response [PR]). The median duration of therapy was 9.8 months (range 0.9-44.8). The median progression-free survival was 16.4 months (95% CI: 10.4-26.3) and median overall survival had not been reached (75% remained alive at 24 months of follow-up). The most common reason for cessation of therapy was colitis (n = 8, of which seven patients experienced grade ≥3 colitis). The most common serious adverse event was grade ≥3 infection, which occurred in 24 patients (65%). CONCLUSIONS: Our real-world results suggest that idelalisib is an effective and relatively safe treatment for patients with advanced-stage CLL when no other therapies exist. Alternative dosing regimens and new PI3K inhibitors should be explored, particularly in patients who are double-refractory to inhibitors of BTK and Bcl-2.

Regional differences in treatment and outcome for myeloma patients in Sweden: A population based Swedish myeloma register study.

BACKGROUND: We wanted to evaluate if health care for multiple myeloma (MM) patients is equal in different regions of Sweden. AIM: To study differences in survival for MM depending on health care region and early use of modern treatment. METHODS AND RESULTS: Data from the Swedish Myeloma Register from patients diagnosed between 2008 and 2017 was used. Cohorts were defined by the six healthcare regions (labeled A-F) in Sweden and modern initial treatment was defined as including certain drug combinations. To adjust for time to treatment bias, survival analyses were performed also for patients alive 6 months after diagnosis. In all treated MM patients (n = 5326), we observed a superior overall survival (OS) for region A compared to all other regions (p < .01 for all respectively). After adjusting for time to treatment there was also a superior survival in the region with highest use of modern initial treatment (region A) compared to the regions defined in the study as having intermediate and low use (p < .01 for both). In patients receiving autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) a superior survival was observed for region A compared to all regions besides region B. Similar results were seen when adjusting for a time to treatment bias. In patients not receiving ASCT, 75 years or older and adjusted for time to treatment bias, a difference was noted only between region A and E (log rank p = .04, HR 1.2, CI 1.00-1.44, p = .06). In multivariate analyses including age, international staging system stage and time period of diagnosis, differences in survival remained for patients receiving ASCT between region A versus C, D, E and F (p = .01, p < .01, p < .01, p = .03). CONCLUSION: We observed a superior survival in region A for patients receiving ASCT. Explanations may be higher usage of modern initial treatment or regional residual confounding. For patients not receiving ASCT, 75 years or older, differences in survival could be adjusted for.

Longitudinal minimal residual disease assessment in multiple myeloma patients in complete remission - results from the NMSG flow-MRD substudy within the EMN02/HO95 MM trial.

BACKGROUND: Multiple myeloma remains an incurable disease with multiple relapses due to residual myeloma cells in the bone marrow of patients after therapy. Presence of small number of cancer cells in the body after cancer treatment, called minimal residual disease, has been shown to be prognostic for progression-free and overall survival. However, for multiple myeloma, it is unclear whether patients attaining minimal residual disease negativity may be candidates for treatment discontinuation. We investigated, if longitudinal flow cytometry-based monitoring of minimal residual disease (flow-MRD) may predict disease progression earlier and with higher sensitivity compared to biochemical assessments. METHODS: Patients from the Nordic countries with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma enrolled in the European-Myeloma-Network-02/Hovon-95 (EMN02/HO95) trial and undergoing bone marrow aspiration confirmation of complete response, were eligible for this Nordic Myeloma Study Group (NMSG) substudy. Longitdudinal flow-MRD assessment of bone marrow samples was performed to identify and enumerate residual malignant plasma cells until observed clinical progression. RESULTS: Minimal residual disease dynamics were compared to biochemically assessed changes in serum free light chain and M-component. Among 20 patients, reaching complete response or stringent complete response during the observation period, and with ≥3 sequential flow-MRD assessments analysed over time, increasing levels of minimal residual disease in the bone marrow were observed in six cases, preceding biochemically assessed disease and clinical progression by 5.5 months and 12.6 months (mean values), respectively. Mean malignant plasma cells doubling time for the six patients was 1.8 months (95% CI, 1.4-2.3 months). Minimal malignant plasma cells detection limit was 4 × 10-5. CONCLUSIONS: Flow-MRD is a sensitive method for longitudinal monitoring of minimal residual disease dynamics in multiple myeloma patients in complete response. Increasing minimal residual disease levels precedes biochemically assessed changes and is an early indicator of subsequent clinical progression. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01208766.

Daratumumab, bortezomib, and dexamethasone in relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma: subgroup analysis of CASTOR based on cytogenetic risk.

BACKGROUND: Multiple myeloma (MM) patients with high cytogenetic risk have poor outcomes. In CASTOR, daratumumab plus bortezomib/dexamethasone (D-Vd) prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) versus bortezomib/dexamethasone (Vd) alone and exhibited tolerability in patients with relapsed or refractory MM (RRMM). METHODS: This subgroup analysis evaluated D-Vd versus Vd in CASTOR based on cytogenetic risk, determined using fluorescence in situ hybridization and/or karyotype testing performed locally. High-risk patients had t(4;14), t(14;16), and/or del17p abnormalities. Minimal residual disease (MRD; 10-5 sensitivity threshold) was assessed via the clonoSEQ® assay V2.0. Of the 498 patients randomized, 40 (16%) in the D-Vd group and 35 (14%) in the Vd group were categorized as high risk. RESULTS: After a median follow-up of 40.0 months, D-Vd prolonged median PFS versus Vd in patients with standard (16.6 vs 6.6 months; HR, 0.26; 95% CI, 0.19-0.37; P < 0.0001) and high (12.6 vs 6.2 months; HR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.21-0.83; P = 0.0106) cytogenetic risk. D-Vd achieved deep responses, including higher rates of MRD negativity and sustained MRD negativity versus Vd, regardless of cytogenetic risk. The safety profile was consistent with the overall population of CASTOR. CONCLUSION: These updated data reinforce the effectiveness and tolerability of daratumumab-based regimens for RRMM, regardless of cytogenetic risk status. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02136134 . Registered 12 May 2014.

First-line therapy in chronic lymphocytic leukemia: a Swedish nation-wide real-world study on 1053 consecutive patients treated between 2007 and 2013.

The aim of this study was to investigate long-term outcome following first-line therapy in consecutive chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) patients in a well-defined geographic area: Sweden. All patients diagnosed with CLL (2007-2013) (n=3672) were identified from national registries, screening of patient files identified all (100%) treated first line (n=1053) and for those, an in-depth analysis was performed. End points were overall response rate, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety. Median age was 71 years; 53% had Rai stage III-IV and 97% had performance status grade 0-2. Fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) was performed in 57% of patients: 15% had del(17p). Chlorambucil + prednisone was used in 39% (5% also received rituximab). Fludarabine+cyclophosphamide+rituximab or fludarabine+cyclophosphamide was used in 43% and bendamustine + rituximab in 6%. Overall response rate was 64%; chlorambucil 43%, fludarabine+cyclophosphamide+rituximab 84%, fludarabine+cyclophosphamide 75% and bendamustine + rituximab 75%. Median PFS and OS was 24 and 58 months, respectively, both were significantly associated (multivariate analysis) with type of treatment, del(17p), performance status, gender, age and geographical region (OS only). Chlorambucil-treated patients had a median PFS and OS of only 9 and 33 months, respectively. Chlorambucil usage declined gradually throughout the study period, but one-third of patients still received chlorambucil + rituximab in 2013. Infections ≥grade III were significantly associated with treatment; chlorambucil 19% versus fludarabine+cyclophosphamide+rituximab 30%. Richter transformation occurred in 5.5% of the patients, equally distributed across therapies. This is the largest retrospective, real-world cohort of consecutive first-line treated CLL patients with a complete follow up. In elderly patients, an unmet need for more effective, well-tolerated therapies was identified.

Daratumumab plus bortezomib and dexamethasone versus bortezomib and dexamethasone in relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma: updated analysis of CASTOR.

Daratumumab, a CD38 human monoclonal antibody, demonstrated significant clinical activity in combination with bortezomib and dexamethasone versus bortezomib and dexamethasone alone in the primary analysis of CASTOR, a phase 3 study in relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma. A post hoc analysis based on treatment history and longer follow up is presented. After 19.4 (range: 0-27.7) months of median follow up, daratumumab plus bortezomib and dexamethasone prolonged progression-free survival (median: 16.7 versus 7.1 months; hazard ratio, 0.31; 95% confidence interval, 0.24-0.39; P<0.0001) and improved the overall response rate (83.8% versus 63.2%; P<0.0001) compared with bortezomib and dexamethasone alone. The progression-free survival benefit of daratumumab plus bortezomib and dexamethasone was most apparent in patients with 1 prior line of therapy (median: not reached versus 7.9 months; hazard ratio, 0.19; 95% con fidence interval, 0.12-0.29; P<0.0001). Daratumumab plus bortezomib and dexamethasone was also superior to bortezomib and dexamethasone alone in subgroups based on prior treatment exposure (bortezomib, thalidomide, or lenalidomide), lenalidomide-refractory status, time since last therapy (≤12, >12, ≤6, or >6 months), or cytogenetic risk. Minimal residual disease-negative rates were >2.5-fold higher with daratumumab across subgroups. The safety profile of daratumumab plus bortezomib and dexamethasone remained consistent with longer follow up. Daratumumab plus bortezomib and dexamethasone demonstrated significant clinical activity across clinically relevant subgroups and provided the greatest benefit to patients treated at first relapse. Trial registration: clinicaltrials.gov identifier: 02136134.

Lenalidomide versus lenalidomide + dexamethasone prolonged treatment after second-line lenalidomide + dexamethasone induction in multiple myeloma.

Lenalidomide (Len) plus dexamethasone (Dex) is approved for the treatment of relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). It is possible that single-agent Len may be effective as prolonged treatment regimen in RRMM once patients demonstrate an initial response to Len+Dex induction. Patients with RRMM who responded to first-line Len+Dex in an observational study (NCT01430546) received up to 24 cycles of either Len (25 mg/day) or Len+Dex (25 mg/day and 40 mg/week) as prolonged treatment in a subsequent phase 2 clinical trial (NCT01450215). In the observational study (N = 133), median time to response was 1.7 (range 0.6-9.6) months. A complete response to all treatments received in both studies was observed in 11% of patients; very good partial response and partial response rates were 31% and 38%, respectively. Corresponding response rates in the subgroup of patients who did not enter the phase 2 trial (n = 71) were 3%, 18%, and 39%, respectively. Rates of disease progression at 2 years in the phase 2 trial were 47% versus 31% for Len versus Len+Dex (P = 0.14). After 36 months median follow-up in surviving patients, median time to progression was not reached with Len+Dex and was 24.9 months (95% confidence interval 12.5-not calculable, P < 0.001) with Len. Three-year OS among the total observational study population was 61% (95% CI, 52-69%). The corresponding rate among patients who entered the phase 2 clinical trial was 73% (95% CI, 60-83%) and was significantly lower among those patients who achieved ≥PR but did not proceed into the phase 2 trial (55%; P = 0.01). In the phase 2 trial, OS was 73% in both treatment arms (P = 0.70). Neutropenia and thrombocytopenia were more common with prolonged (phase 2 trial) versus short-term (observational study) Len administration but remained manageable. Prolonged treatment with Len with or without Dex provides sustained, clinically relevant responses and demonstrates an acceptable safety profile.

Pharmacogenetic study of the impact of ABCB1 single-nucleotide polymorphisms on lenalidomide treatment outcomes in patients with multiple myeloma: results from a phase IV observational study and subsequent phase II clinical trial.

PURPOSE: Despite therapeutic advances, patients with multiple myeloma (MM) continue to experience disease relapse and treatment resistance. The gene ABCB1 encodes the drug transporter P-glycoprotein, which confers resistance through drug extrusion across the cell membrane. Lenalidomide (Len) is excreted mainly via the kidneys, and, given the expression of P-gp in the renal tubuli, single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in the ABCB1 gene may influence Len plasma concentrations and, subsequently, the outcome of treatment. We, therefore, investigated the influence of ABCB1 genetic variants on Len treatment outcomes and adverse events (AEs). METHODS: Ninety patients with relapsed or refractory MM, who received the second-line Len plus dexamethasone in the Rev II trial, were genotyped for the ABCB1 SNPs 1199G>A (Ser400Asn, rs2229109), 1236C>T (silent, rs1128503), 2677G>T/A (Ala893Ser, rs2032582), and 3435C>T (silent, rs1045642) using pyrosequencing, and correlations to response parameters, outcomes, and AEs were investigated. RESULTS: No significant associations were found between genotype and either best response rates or hematological AEs, and 1236C>T, 2677G>T or 3435C>T genotypes had no impact on survival. There was a trend towards increased time to progression (TTP) in patients carrying the 1199A variant, and a significant difference in TTP between genotypes in patients with standard-risk cytogenetics. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings show a limited influence of ABCB1 genotype on lenalidomide treatment efficacy and safety. The results suggest that 1199G>A may be a marker of TTP following Len treatment in standard-risk patients; however, larger studies are needed to validate and clarify the relationship.

Real-world results of ibrutinib in patients with relapsed or refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia: data from 95 consecutive patients treated in a compassionate use program. A study from the Swedish Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia Group.

Ibrutinib, a Bruton's tyrosine kinase inhibitor is approved for relapsed/refractory and del(17p)/TP53 mutated chronic lymphocytic leukemia. Discrepancies between clinical trials and routine health-care are commonly observed in oncology. Herein we report real-world results for 95 poor prognosis Swedish patients treated with ibrutinib in a compassionate use program. Ninety-five consecutive patients (93 chronic lymphocytic leukemia, 2 small lymphocytic leukemia) were included in the study between May 2014 and May 2015. The median age was 69 years. 63% had del(17p)/TP53 mutation, 65% had Rai stage III/IV, 28% had lymphadenopathy ≥10cm. Patients received ibrutinib 420 mg once daily until progression. At a median follow-up of 10.2 months, the overall response rate was 84% (consistent among subgroups) and 77% remained progression-free. Progression-free survival and overall survival were significantly shorter in patients with del(17p)/TP53 mutation (P=0.017 and P=0.027, log-rank test); no other factor was significant in Cox proportional regression hazards model. Ibrutinib was well tolerated. Hematomas occurred in 46% of patients without any major bleeding. Seven patients had Richter's transformation. This real-world analysis on consecutive chronic lymphocytic leukemia patients from a well-defined geographical region shows the efficacy and safety of ibrutinib to be similar to that of pivotal trials. Yet, del(17p)/TP53 mutation remains a therapeutic challenge. Since not more than half of our patients would have qualified for the pivotal ibrutinib trial (RESONATE), our study emphasizes that real-world results should be carefully considered in future with regards to new agents and new indications in chronic lymphocytic leukemia.

Improved survival in myeloma patients: starting to close in on the gap between elderly patients and a matched normal population.

The outcome for multiple myeloma patients has improved since the introduction of bortezomib, thalidomide and lenalidomide. However, studies comparing new and conventional treatment include selected patient groups. We investigated consecutive patients (n = 1638) diagnosed in a defined period and compared survival with a gender- and age-matched cohort Swedish population (n = 9 340 682). Median overall survival for non-high-dose treated patients was 2·8 years. The use of bortezomib, thalidomide or lenalidomide in first line therapy predicted a significantly longer overall survival (median 4·9 years) compared to conventional treatment (2·3 years). Among non-high-dose treated patients receiving at least 2 lines with bortezomib, thalidomide or lenalidomide, 69% and 63% have survived at 3 and 5 years as compared to 48% and 22% with conventional drugs and 88% and 79% in the matched cohort populations, respectively. The median overall survival in high-dose treated patients was 6·9 years. Of these patients, 84% survived at 3 years and 70% at 5 years as compared to 98% and 95% in the matched cohort population. Overall survival in the best non-high-dose treated outcome group is closing the gap with the matched cohort. Upfront use of new drugs is clearly better than waiting until later lines of treatment.