Plain language summary of zanubrutinib or ibrutinib in chronic lymphocytic leukemia that is resistant to treatment or has come back after treatment.

WHAT IS THIS SUMMARY ABOUT?: This is a plain language summary of a research study called ALPINE. The study involved people who had been diagnosed with, and previously treated at least once for, relapsed or refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) or small lymphocytic lymphoma (SLL). Lymphocytes help to find and fight off viruses and infections in the body, but when someone has CLL or SLL, the body creates abnormal lymphocytes, leaving the patient with a weakened immune system and susceptible to illness. In CLL, these lymphocytes are in the bone marrow and bloodstream, whereas for SLL, they are mostly found in the lymph nodes, such as those in the neck. HOW WAS THE RESEARCH DONE?: The ALPINE study was designed to directly compare the cancer-fighting effects and side effects of zanubrutinib and ibrutinib as treatment for patients with relapsed or refractory CLL/SLL. WHAT WERE THE RESULTS?: After 30 months, zanubrutinib was more effective than ibrutinib at reducing and keeping the cancer from coming back. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT03734016 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Health-related quality of life outcomes associated with zanubrutinib versus ibrutinib monotherapy in patients with relapsed/refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia and small lymphocytic lymphoma: results from the ALPINE Trial.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this analysis was to assess health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in patients treated with zanubrutinib and ibrutinib in the ALPINE trial (NCT03734016). METHODS: HRQoL was measured by the EORTC QLQ-C30 and EQ-5D-5L at baseline, cycle 1, and every third cycle until the end of treatment. Key patient-reported outcome (PRO) endpoints included global health status (GHS), physical and role functioning, as well as symptoms of fatigue, pain, diarrhea, and nausea/vomiting. A mixed model repeated-measure analysis using key PRO endpoints at key clinical cycles (cycles 7 and 13) was performed. RESULTS: 652 patients were randomized to receive zanubrutinib (n = 327) or ibrutinib (n = 325). By cycle 7, GHS scores improved with zanubrutinib versus ibrutinib, and in cycle 13, GHS scores remained higher in the zanubrutinib arm. The zanubrutinib arm experienced clinically meaningful improvements in physical and role functioning, as well as pain and fatigue symptoms at both cycles. Patients in the zanubrutinib arm reported lower diarrhea scores. Nausea/vomiting scores maintained in both arms. EQ-VAS scores showed greater improvement from baseline at both cycle 7 (7.92 versus 3.44) and cycle 13 (7.75 versus 3.92) of treatment with zanubrutinib compared to ibrutinib, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with R/R CLL/SLL treated with zanubrutinib demonstrated improvement versus ibrutinib in the GHS scale at cycle 7. Other endpoints continued to improve, suggesting treatment with zanubrutinib positively affected HRQoL over time. Given the generally good HRQoL at baseline in both arms, the differences between the arms were not significant.

Zanubrutinib or Ibrutinib in Relapsed or Refractory Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia.

BACKGROUND: In a multinational, phase 3, head-to-head trial, ibrutinib, a Bruton's tyrosine kinase (BTK) inhibitor, was compared with zanubrutinib, a BTK inhibitor with greater specificity, as treatment for relapsed or refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) or small lymphocytic lymphoma (SLL). In prespecified interim analyses, zanubrutinib was superior to ibrutinib with respect to overall response (the primary end point). Data from the final analysis of progression-free survival are now available. METHODS: We randomly assigned, in a 1:1 ratio, patients with relapsed or refractory CLL or SLL who had received at least one previous course of therapy to receive zanubrutinib or ibrutinib until the occurrence of disease progression or unacceptable toxic effects. In this final analysis, progression-free survival (a key secondary end point) was assessed with the use of a hierarchical testing strategy to determine whether zanubrutinib was noninferior to ibrutinib. If noninferiority was established, the superiority of zanubrutinib was assessed and claimed if the two-sided P value was less than 0.05. RESULTS: At a median follow-up of 29.6 months, zanubrutinib was found to be superior to ibrutinib with respect to progression-free survival among 652 patients (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.65; 95% confidence interval, [CI], 0.49 to 0.86; P = 0.002), as assessed by the investigators; the results were similar to those as assessed by an independent-review committee. At 24 months, the investigator-assessed rates of progression-free survival were 78.4% in the zanubrutinib group and 65.9% in the ibrutinib group. Among patients with a 17p deletion, a TP53 mutation, or both, those who received zanubrutinib had longer progression-free survival than those who received ibrutinib (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.31 to 0.88); progression-free survival across other major subgroups consistently favored zanubrutinib. The percentage of patients with an overall response was higher in the zanubrutinib group than in the ibrutinib group. The safety profile of zanubrutinib was better than that of ibrutinib, with fewer adverse events leading to treatment discontinuation and fewer cardiac events, including fewer cardiac events leading to treatment discontinuation or death. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with relapsed or refractory CLL or SLL, progression-free survival was significantly longer among patients who received zanubrutinib than among those who received ibrutinib, and zanubrutinib was associated with fewer cardiac adverse events. (Funded by BeiGene; ALPINE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03734016.).

Zanubrutinib Versus Ibrutinib in Relapsed/Refractory Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia and Small Lymphocytic Lymphoma: Interim Analysis of a Randomized Phase III Trial.

PURPOSE: Zanubrutinib is a potent, irreversible next-generation Bruton tyrosine kinase (BTK) inhibitor designed to maximize BTK occupancy and minimize off-target kinase inhibition. We hypothesized that complete/sustained BTK occupancy may improve efficacy outcomes and increased BTK specificity may minimize off-target inhibition-related toxicities. PATIENTS AND METHODS: ALPINE (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03734016) is a global, randomized, open-label phase III study of zanubrutinib versus ibrutinib in patients with relapsed/refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia. The primary end point was investigator-assessed overall response rate (ORR). The preplanned interim analysis was scheduled approximately 12 months after the first 415 patients were enrolled. RESULTS: Between November 1, 2018, and December 14, 2020, 652 patients were enrolled. We present the interim analysis of the first 415 enrolled patients randomly assigned to receive zanubrutinib (n = 207) or ibrutinib (n = 208). At 15 months of median follow-up, ORR (partial or complete response) was significantly higher with zanubrutinib (78.3%; 95% CI, 72.0 to 83.7) versus ibrutinib (62.5%; 95% CI, 55.5 to 69.1; two-sided P < .001). ORR was higher with zanubrutinib versus ibrutinib in subgroups with del(17p)/TP53 mutations (80.5% v 50.0%) and del(11q) (83.6% v 69.1%); 12-month progression-free survival in all patients was higher with zanubrutinib (94.9%) versus ibrutinib (84.0%; hazard ratio, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.23 to 0.69). Atrial fibrillation rate was significantly lower with zanubrutinib versus ibrutinib (2.5% v 10.1%; two-sided P = .001). Rates of cardiac events, major hemorrhages, and adverse events leading to treatment discontinuation/death were lower with zanubrutinib. CONCLUSION: Zanubrutinib had a significantly higher ORR, lower atrial fibrillation rate, and improved progression-free survival and overall cardiac safety profile versus ibrutinib. These data support improved efficacy/safety outcomes with selective BTK inhibition.

ALPINE: zanubrutinib versus ibrutinib in relapsed/refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia/small lymphocytic lymphoma.

Treatment standards for chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) have been transformed with the advent of effective inhibitors of B-cell receptor signaling such as ibrutinib - a first-in-class inhibitor of BTK. Off-target kinase inhibitions by ibrutinib are thought to contribute to its adverse events. Zanubrutinib is a next-generation BTK inhibitor with minimal off-target effects, sustained BTK occupancy in peripheral blood mononuclear cells and lymph nodes from patients with B-cell malignancies and promising responses in patients with CLL. Described here is a head-to-head Phase III study comparing the efficacy and safety of zanubrutinib with those of ibrutinib in patients with CLL/small lymphocytic lymphoma in the relapsed/refractory setting.

Treatment of adult acute myeloid leukemia.

The aim of this study was to analyze the treatment results of 180 adult AML patients treated at Turku University Hospital from 2002 to 2012. 124 patients received intensive therapy according to the protocol of the Finnish Leukemia Group. 86% of them achieved remission. 46 patients underwent allogeneic stem cell transplantation which was beneficial for high and intermediate risk disease. 60 - 70% of patients under 60 years old can be cured. The genetic profile of the disease, patient age and treatment response had a significant impact on survival. Our treatment results are comparable with data in literature.

[Adult acute lymphoblastic leukemia - 20-year treatment results at TYKS]. / Aikuisten akuutti lymfaattinen leukemia - 20 vuoden hoitotulokset TYks:ssa.

Approximately 30 cases of adult acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) emerge in Finland yearly. In literature 35 to 40% of those under the age of 60 are reported to recover from their illness. Of the 67 adult ALL patients treated at the Turku University Hospital from 1990 to 2010, 96% achieved remission. The five-year survival rate was 53%. After remission, an allogeneic stem cell transplant was performed for 22 patients (37%), with 38 patients (63%) continuing on cytotoxic drugs. There was no difference in survival between modes of treatment or risk groups.