Exploring treatment decision-making in chronic myeloid leukemia in chronic phase.

The introduction of tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) has transformed the treatment of chronic myeloid leukemia (CML). Each approved TKI has its own risk-benefit profile, and patients have choices across lines of therapy. Identifying the initial and subsequent treatment that will lead to the best possible outcome for individual patients is challenging. In this review, we summarize data for each approved TKI across lines of therapy in patients with CML in chronic phase, highlighting elements of each agent's safety and efficacy profile that may impact patient selection, and provide insights into individualized treatment sequencing decision-making aimed at optimizing patient outcomes.

Asciminib in Newly Diagnosed Chronic Myeloid Leukemia.

BACKGROUND: Patients with newly diagnosed chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) need long-term therapy with high efficacy and safety. Asciminib, a BCR::ABL1 inhibitor specifically targeting the ABL myristoyl pocket, may offer better efficacy and safety and fewer side effects than currently available frontline ATP-competitive tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). METHODS: In a phase 3 trial, patients with newly diagnosed CML were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either asciminib (80 mg once daily) or an investigator-selected TKI, with randomization stratified by European Treatment and Outcome Study long-term survival score category (low, intermediate, or high risk) and by TKI selected by investigators before randomization (including imatinib and second-generation TKIs). The primary end points were major molecular response (defined as BCR::ABL1 transcript levels ≤0.1% on the International Scale [IS]) at week 48, for comparisons between asciminib and investigator-selected TKIs and between asciminib and investigator-selected TKIs in the prerandomization-selected imatinib stratum. RESULTS: A total of 201 patients were assigned to receive asciminib and 204 to receive investigator-selected TKIs. The median follow-up was 16.3 months in the asciminib group and 15.7 months in the investigator-selected TKI group. A major molecular response at week 48 occurred in 67.7% of patients in the asciminib group, as compared with 49.0% in the investigator-selected TKI group (difference, 18.9 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], 9.6 to 28.2; adjusted two-sided P<0.001]), and in 69.3% of patients in the asciminib group as compared with 40.2% in the imatinib group within the imatinib stratum (difference, 29.6 percentage points; 95% CI, 16.9 to 42.2; adjusted two-sided P<0.001). The percentage of patients with a major molecular response at week 48 was 66.0% with asciminib and 57.8% with TKIs in the second-generation TKI stratum (difference, 8.2 percentage points; 95% CI, -5.1 to 21.5). Adverse events of grade 3 or higher and events leading to discontinuation of the trial regimen were less frequent with asciminib (38.0% and 4.5%, respectively) than with imatinib (44.4% and 11.1%) and second-generation TKIs (54.9% and 9.8%). CONCLUSIONS: In this trial comparing asciminib with investigator-selected TKIs and imatinib, asciminib showed superior efficacy and a favorable safety profile in patients with newly diagnosed chronic-phase CML. Direct comparison between asciminib and second-generation TKIs was not a primary objective. (Funded by Novartis; ASC4FIRST ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04971226).

Anxiety and Depression in Metastatic Cancer: A Critical Review of Negative Impacts on Advance Care Planning and End-of-Life Decision Making With Practical Recommendations.

PURPOSE: Providers treating adults with advanced cancer increasingly seek to engage patients and surrogates in advance care planning (ACP) and end-of-life (EOL) decision making; however, anxiety and depression may interfere with engagement. The intersection of these two key phenomena is examined among patients with metastatic cancer and their surrogates: the need to prepare for and engage in ACP and EOL decision making and the high prevalence of anxiety and depression. METHODS: Using a critical review framework, we examine the specific ways that anxiety and depression are likely to affect both ACP and EOL decision making. RESULTS: The review indicates that depression is associated with reduced compliance with treatment recommendations, and high anxiety may result in avoidance of difficult discussions involved in ACP and EOL decision making. Depression and anxiety are associated with increased decisional regret in the context of cancer treatment decision making, as well as a preference for passive (not active) decision making in an intensive care unit setting. Anxiety about death in patients with advanced cancer is associated with lower rates of completion of an advance directive or discussion of EOL wishes with the oncologist. Patients with advanced cancer and elevated anxiety report higher discordance between wanted versus received life-sustaining treatments, less trust in their physicians, and less comprehension of the information communicated by their physicians. CONCLUSION: Anxiety and depression are commonly elevated among adults with advanced cancer and health care surrogates, and can result in less engagement and satisfaction with ACP, cancer treatment, and EOL decisions. We offer practical strategies and sample scripts for oncology care providers to use to reduce the effects of anxiety and depression in these contexts.

BRUIN MCL-321: phase III study of pirtobrutinib versus investigator choice of BTK inhibitor in BTK inhibitor naive mantle cell lymphoma.

Treatment with covalent Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitors (BTKi) represents an important advance in the management of relapsed or refractory mantle cell lymphoma, but these treatments are not curative and many patients ultimately relapse. Pirtobrutinib, a highly selective, noncovalent (reversible) BTKi, inhibits both wild type and C481-mutant BTK with equal low nM potency, and has favorable oral pharmacology that enables continuous BTK inhibition throughout the dosing interval regardless of intrinsic rate of BTK turnover. Pirtobrutinib is well tolerated and has demonstrated promising efficacy in patients with poor prognosis B-cell malignancies following prior therapy, including covalent BTKi. This phase III, head-to-head, randomized study (NCT04662255) will evaluate whether pirtobrutinib is superior to investigator's choice of covalent BTKi in patients with previously treated, BTKi-naive mantle cell lymphoma.

MCL is an uncommon type of B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma, a cancer of the immune system. It starts in the part of the lymph node called the mantle zone, where unusual B cells gather and crowd out healthy B cells in the lymph nodes, spleen, bone marrow and/or other organs. MCL can be caused by inappropriate cell signaling. BTK has been identified as a key driver of unusual cell signaling and blocking BTK has been shown to help kill the cancer cells. Covalent (not reversible) BTK inhibitors have advanced the treatment of MCL, but the effectiveness of these treatments is limited by side effects and treatment resistance. Pirtobrutinib, a noncovalent (reversible) BTK inhibitor, has been shown to have manageable side effects and to be effective in patients with MCL following previous treatment, including treatment with covalent BTK inhibitors. The BRUIN MCL-321 study compares pirtobrutinib with three currently approved covalent BTK inhibitors (ibrutinib, acalabrutinib or zanubrutinib), in patients with MCL who have never received any form of BTK inhibitor. This trial will look at how many people live with the disease without it getting worse. Like other cancer treatments, pirtobrutinib may affect both healthy cells and tumor cells, which can result in side effects that will also be looked at in this study. This study is active and currently recruiting new patients who have received at least one previous therapy for MCL and have never been treated with a BTK inhibitor. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT04662255 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

A randomized controlled trial of a multi-modal palliative care intervention to promote advance care planning and psychological well-being among adults with advanced cancer: study protocol.

BACKGROUND: Up to half of adults with advanced cancer report anxiety or depression symptoms, which can cause avoidance of future planning. We present a study protocol for an innovative, remotely-delivered, acceptance-based, multi-modal palliative care intervention that addresses advance care planning (ACP) and unmet psychological needs commonly experienced by adults with metastatic cancer. METHODS: A two-armed, prospective randomized controlled trial (RCT) randomizes 240 adults with Stage IV (and select Stage III) solid tumor cancer who report moderate to high anxiety or depression symptoms to either the multi-modal intervention or usual care. The intervention comprises five weekly two-hour group sessions (plus a booster session one month later) delivered via video conferencing, with online self-paced modules and check-ins completed between the group sessions. Intervention content is based on Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT), an acceptance, mindfulness, and values-based model. Participants are recruited from a network of community cancer care clinics, with group sessions led by the network's oncology clinical social workers. Participants are assessed at baseline, mid-intervention, post-intervention, and 2-month follow-up. The primary outcome is ACP completion; secondary outcomes include anxiety and depression symptoms, fear of dying, and sense of life meaning. Relationships between anxiety/depression symptoms and ACP will be evaluated cross-sectionally and longitudinally and theory-based putative mediators will be examined. DISCUSSION: Among adults with advanced cancer in community oncology settings, this RCT will provide evidence regarding the efficacy of the group ACT intervention on ACP and psychosocial outcomes as well as examine the relationship between ACP and anxiety/ depression symptoms. This trial aims to advance palliative care science and inform clinical practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT04773639 on February 26, 2021.

Phase Ib study of avadomide (CC-122) in combination with rituximab in patients with relapsed/refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma and follicular lymphoma.

The multicenter, phase Ib CC-122-DLBCL-001 dose-expansion study (NCT02031419) explored the cereblon E3 ligase modulator (CELMoD) agent avadomide (CC-122) plus rituximab in patients with relapsed/refractory (R/R) diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) or follicular lymphoma (FL). Patients received avadomide 3 mg/day 5 days on/2 days off plus rituximab 375 mg/m2 on day 8 of cycle 1, day 1 of cycles 2 through 6, and day 1 of every third subsequent cycle for 2 years. Primary endpoints were safety and tolerability; preliminary efficacy was a secondary endpoint. A total of 68 patients were enrolled (DLBCL [n = 27], FL [n = 41; 31 lenalidomide-naïve, 10 lenalidomide-treated]). Median age was 62 years (range, 33-84 years), and patients had received a median of 3 (range, 1-8) prior regimens. Among patients with DLBCL, 66.7% had primary refractory disease (partial response or less to initial therapy). Among patients with FL, 65.9% were rituximab-refractory at study entry and 10.0% were lenalidomide-refractory. The most common any-grade avadomide-related adverse events (AEs) were neutropenia (63.2%), infections/infestations (23.5%), fatigue (22.1%), and diarrhea (19.1%). The most common grade 3/4 avadomide-related AEs were neutropenia (55.9%) infections/infestations (8.8%), and febrile neutropenia (7.4%). In patients with DLBCL, overall response rate (ORR) was 40.7% and median duration of response (mDOR) was 8.0 months. In patients with FL, ORR was 80.5% and mDOR was 27.6 months; response rates were similar in lenalidomide-naïve and -treated patients. Avadomide plus rituximab was well tolerated, and preliminary antitumor activity was observed in patients with R/R DLBCL and FL, including subgroups with typically poor outcomes. These results support further investigation of novel CELMoD agents in combination with rituximab in R/R DLBCL and FL.

Randomized trial of acceptance and commitment therapy for anxious cancer survivors in community clinics: Outcomes and moderators.

OBJECTIVE: Anxiety symptoms are common among cancer survivors. This study evaluated whether an acceptance-based group intervention delivered by social workers in community oncology clinics improved anxiety and related symptoms, and healthcare use, relative to enhanced usual care (EUC). METHOD: This multi-site trial included 135 survivors of various cancers with moderate to high anxiety about cancer/survivorship, 1.5-24 months after treatment. Participants were randomized 1:1 to a 7-session acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT)-based group (Valued Living) or EUC (access to onsite supportive care plus resource list). Questionnaires were administered at baseline, 1, 2, 5, and 8 months post-randomization, diagnostic interviews at baseline, 2, and 8 months, and healthcare use tracked throughout. Outcomes included anxiety symptoms (primary), related symptoms, and healthcare use. Putative moderators included age, anxiety, and avoidance. RESULTS: In intent-to-treat comparisons to EUC, Valued Living (VL) showed a nonsignificant pattern of greater improvement on anxiety symptoms (p = .08), improved significantly more on cancer-related post-traumatic stress (p = .002), fear of recurrence (p = .003), and energy/fatigue (p = .02), and missed significantly fewer medical appointments (p < .05). Conditions improved similarly on depressive symptoms, sense of meaning, and most severe anxiety or depressive disorder. Effects were moderated: VL participants with higher baseline anxiety or avoidance (+1SD) improved more on anxiety, meaning (ps ≤ .01), and disorder severity (p = .05) than their EUC counterparts. CONCLUSIONS: An acceptance-based group intervention delivered in community oncology clinics enhanced psychological recovery and energy levels, and reduced missed medical appointments for anxious cancer survivors, with stronger effects for more distressed participants. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

Efficacy and Safety of Weekly Paclitaxel With or Without Oral Alisertib in Patients With Metastatic Breast Cancer: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Elevated expression of AURKA adversely affects prognosis in estrogen receptor (ER)-positive and ERBB2 (formerly HER2)-negative and triple-negative breast cancer and is associated with resistance to taxanes. Objective: To compare paclitaxel alone vs paclitaxel plus alisertib in patients with ER-positive and ERBB2-negative or triple-negative metastatic breast cancer (MBC). Design, Setting, and Participants: In this randomized clinical trial conducted with the US Oncology Network, participants were randomized to intravenous (IV) paclitaxel 90 mg/m2 on days 1, 8, and 15 on a 28-day cycle or IV paclitaxel 60 mg/m2 on days 1, 8, and 15 plus oral alisertib 40 mg twice daily on days 1 to 3, 8 to 10, and 15 to 17 on a 28-day cycle. Stratification was by prior neo or adjuvant taxane and by line of metastatic therapy. Eligible patients were those who had undergone endocrine therapy, 0 or 1 prior chemotherapy regimens for MBC, more than 12 months treatment-free interval from neo or adjuvant taxane therapy, and with measurable or evaluable lytic bone-disease. Data were analyzed from March 2019 through May 2019. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was progression-free survival (PFS) with secondary end points of overall survival (OS), overall response rate, clinical benefit rate, safety, and analysis of archival breast cancer tissues for molecular markers associated with benefit from alisertib. Results: A total of 174 patients were randomized, including with 86 randomized to paclitaxel and 88 patients randomized to paclitaxel plus alisertib, and 169 patients received study treatment. The final cohort included 139 patients with a median (interquartile range [IQR]) age of 62 (27-84) years with ER-positive and ERBB2-negative MBC, with 70 randomized to paclitaxel and 69 randomized to paclitaxel plus alisertib. The TNBC cohort closed with only 35 patients enrolled due to slow accrual and were not included in efficacy analyses. The median (IQR) follow-up was 22 (10.6-25.1) months, and median (IQR) PFS was 10.2 (3.8-15.7) months with paclitaxel plus alisertib vs 7.1 (3.8-10.6) months with paclitaxel alone (HR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.37-0.84; P = .005). Median (IQR) OS was 26.3 (12.4-37.2) months for patients who received paclitaxel plus alisertib vs 25.1 (11.0-31.4) months for paclitaxel alone (HR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.58-1.38; P = .61). Grade 3 or 4 adverse events occurred in 56 patients (84.8%) receiving paclitaxel plus alisertib vs 34 patients (48.6%) receiving paclitaxel alone. The main grade 3 or 4 adverse events with paclitaxel plus alisertib vs paclitaxel alone were neutropenia (50 patients [59.5%] vs 14 patients [16.4%]), anemia (8 patients [9.5%] vs 1 patient [1.2%]), diarrhea (9 patients [10.7%] vs 0 patients), and stomatitis or oral mucositis (13 patients [15.5%] vs 0 patients). One patient receiving paclitaxel plus alisertib died of sepsis. Conclusions and Relevance: This randomized clinical trial found that the addition of oral alisertib to a reduced dose of weekly paclitaxel significantly improved PFS compared with paclitaxel alone, and toxic effects with paclitaxel plus alisertib were manageable with alisertib dose reduction. These data support further evaluation of alisertib in patients with ER-positive, ERBB2-negative MBC. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02187991.

Treatment patterns and outcomes among mantle cell lymphoma patients treated with ibrutinib in the United States: a retrospective electronic medical record database and chart review study.

The experience of patients with mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) in community oncology practices, including reasons for treatment discontinuation, is sparse. This retrospective study sought to elucidate treatment patterns and outcomes of patients with MCL treated with ibrutinib in the community setting. Patients were identified from the US Oncology Network electronic medical records database, iKnowMedTM , between 1 November 2013 and 31 October 2016. Descriptive analysis was performed to describe the demographic and clinical characteristics of the population. Kaplan-Meier estimates were performed to determine clinical outcomes. A Cox proportional hazards model was used to identify predictors of survival. Of the 1914 patients identified with MCL, 159 were treated with ibrutinib. The median age was 71 years and the majority were male (76%) and Caucasian (89%). The overall discontinuation rate was 83·6%; the most common reasons were progression (35%) and toxicities (25·6%). The median overall survival and progression-free survival was 25·82 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 19·94, NR) and 19·55 months (95% CI 16·52, 24·28) respectively. In multivariate modelling, patient age was predictive of survival (hazard ratio 1·041, P = 0·0186). Ibrutinib was temporarily reduced in 16·4% (n = 26) and held in 30·2% (n = 48), primarily due to toxicity 66·7% (n = 32). Survival data showed similarities between community oncology practices and clinical trials.

Inflammatory manifestations in patients with Shwachman-Diamond syndrome: A novel phenotype.

Shwachman-Diamond syndrome (SDS) is an autosomal recessive multisystem disorder characterized by exocrine pancreatic dysfunction, bone marrow failure, and leukemia predisposition. Approximately 90% of cases are due to biallelic mutations in the Shwachman-Bodian-Diamond (SBDS) gene. Additional phenotypic features variably associated with SDS include skeletal, neurologic, hepatic, cardiac, endocrine, and dental abnormalities. We report five subjects with SDS who developed a range of inflammatory manifestations. Three patients developed inflammatory eye conditions. Single cases of juvenile idiopathic arthritis, chronic recurrent multifocal osteomyelitis, and scleroderma were also noted. Clinical presentation and treatment responses are described. Proteomic analysis revealed increased inflammatory signatures in SDS subjects as compared to controls. Treatment of inflammatory manifestations in patients with SDS may be complicated by potential myelosuppressive toxicities of anti-rheumatic medications. Further research is needed to better understand the potential link between inflammatory disorders and SDS to inform effective treatment strategies.

Acceptability, Feasibility, and Efficacy Potential of a Multimodal Acceptance and Commitment Therapy Intervention to Address Psychosocial and Advance Care Planning Needs among Anxious and Depressed Adults with Metastatic Cancer.

Background: Adults with metastatic cancer frequently report anxiety and depression symptoms, which may impact health behaviors such as advance care planning (ACP). Objective: The study leveraged acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT), an evidence-based approach for reducing distress and improving health behaviors, and adapted it into a multimodal intervention (M-ACT) designed to address the psychosocial and ACP needs of anxious and depressed adults with metastatic cancer. The study evaluated M-ACT's acceptability, feasibility, and efficacy potential. Design: The study was designed as a single-arm intervention development and pilot trial. Setting/Subjects: The trial enrolled 35 anxious or depressed adults with stage IV cancer in community oncology clinics, with a referred-to-enrolled rate of 69% and eligible-to-enrolled rate of 95%. Measurements: M-ACT alternated four in-person group sessions with three self-paced online sessions. Acceptability and feasibility were assessed through enrollment, attendance, and satisfaction ratings. Outcomes and theorized intervention mechanisms were evaluated at baseline, midintervention, postintervention, and two-month follow-up. Results: Participant feedback was used to refine the intervention. Of participants starting the intervention, 92% completed, reporting high satisfaction. One-quarter did not begin M-ACT due to health declines, moving, or death. Completers showed significant reductions in anxiety, depression, and fear of dying and increases in ACP and sense of life meaning. In this pilot, M-ACT showed no significant impact on pain interference. Increases in two of three mechanism measures predicted improvement on 80% of significant outcomes. Conclusions: The M-ACT intervention is feasible, acceptable, and shows potential for efficacy in community oncology settings; a randomized trial is warranted.

Pixantrone plus rituximab versus gemcitabine plus rituximab in patients with relapsed aggressive B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma not eligible for stem cell transplantation: a phase 3, randomized, multicentre trial (PIX306).

PIX306 was a phase 3, randomised, single-blind, multicentre trial conducted in adult patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) or follicular lymphoma (FL) grade 3 who relapsed after ≥1 rituximab-containing regimen and were not eligible for a stem cell transplant. Patients were randomised 1:1 to pixantrone 50 mg/m2 or gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 on days 1, 8 and 15 of a 28-day cycle, combined with rituximab 375 mg/m2 on day 1, for up to six cycles. Patients were followed for up to 96 weeks. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), complete response (CR) rate, overall response rate (ORR) and safety. Overall, 312 patients were randomised (median age 73·0 years). The study did not meet its primary endpoint. Median PFS [95% confidence interval (CI)] was 7·3 months (5·2-8·4) with pixantrone + rituximab (PIX + R) and 6·3 months (4·4-8·1) with gemcitabine + rituximab [GEM + R; hazard ratio (HR): 0·85; 95% CI 0·64-1·14; P = 0·28]. Median OS was 13·3 (10·1-19·8) months with PIX + R and 19·6 (12·4-31·9) months with GEM + R (HR: 1·13; 95% CI 0·83-1·53). ORR was 61·9% and 43·9% respectively and CR rate 35·5% and 21·7%. The incidence of adverse events, including cardiac events, was not statistically significant different between PIX + R and GEM + R.

A randomized controlled trial of a group acceptance-based intervention for cancer survivors experiencing anxiety at re-entry ('Valued Living'): study protocol.

BACKGROUND: Anxiety is a common concern of cancer survivors during the transition from active cancer treatment to cancer survivorship (the re-entry phase). This paper presents the study protocol for a novel group-based behavioral intervention to improve mental health, well-being, and medical use outcomes among anxious cancer survivors at re-entry. METHODS/DESIGN: This two-armed, prospective randomized controlled trial will randomize a minimum of 100 re-entry-phase cancer survivors with moderate to high anxiety to the intervention or a usual care control condition. The intervention is delivered in a group format over 7 weeks; content is based on Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT), an acceptance, mindfulness, and values-based intervention. Participants will be recruited from community cancer care centers and the intervention will be led by the onsite clinical social workers. Participants will be assessed at baseline, mid-intervention, post-intervention, and 3- and 6-month follow-up. ACT participants will complete process measures before the beginning of group sessions 2, 4, and 6; all participants will complete the process measures during the regular assessments. The primary outcome is anxiety symptoms; secondary outcomes include anxiety disorder severity, fear of recurrence, depressive symptoms, cancer-related trauma symptoms, sense of life meaning, vitality/fatigue, and medical utilization. DISCUSSION: This clinical trial will provide valuable evidence regarding the efficacy of the group ACT intervention in community oncology settings. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02550925 .

An open-label phase 2 trial of entospletinib in indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma and mantle cell lymphoma.

Spleen tyrosine kinase (Syk) mediates B-cell receptor signalling in normal and malignant B cells. Entospletinib is an oral, selective Syk inhibitor. Entospletinib monotherapy was evaluated in a multicentre, phase 2 study of patients with relapsed or refractory indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma or mantle cell lymphoma (MCL). Subjects received 800 mg entospletinib twice daily. Forty-one follicular lymphoma (FL), 17 lymphoplasmacytoid lymphoma/Waldenström macroglobulinaemia (LPL/WM), 17 marginal zone lymphoma (MZL) and 39 MCL patients were evaluated. The primary endpoint was a progression-free survival (PFS) rate (defined as not experiencing progression or death) at 16 weeks for patients with MCL and at 24 weeks for patients with FL, LPL/WM and MZL. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events were fatigue, nausea, diarrhoea, vomiting, headache and cough. Common laboratory abnormalities were anaemia, neutropenia and thrombocytopenia; aspartate transaminase, alanine transaminase, total bilirubin and serum creatinine were all increased. PFS at 16 weeks in the MCL cohort was 63·9% [95% confidence interval (CI) 45-77·8%]; PFS at 24 weeks in the FL, LPL/WM, MCL and MZL cohorts was 51·5% (95% CI 32·8-67·4%), 69·8% (95% CI 31·8-89·4%), 56·6% (95% CI 37·5-71·8%) and 46·2% (95% CI 18·5-70·2%), respectively. Entospletinib had limited single-agent activity with manageable toxicity in these patient populations.

First-line treatment selection and early monitoring patterns in chronic phase-chronic myeloid leukemia in routine clinical practice: SIMPLICITY.

Achieving successful outcomes in chronic phase-chronic myeloid leukemia (CP-CML) requires careful monitoring of cytogenetic/molecular responses (CyR/MR). SIMPLICITY (NCT01244750) is an observational study exploring tyrosine kinase inhibitor use and management patterns in patients with CP-CML receiving first-line imatinib (n = 416), dasatinib (n = 418) or nilotinib (n = 408) in the US and 6 European countries in routine clinical practice. Twelve-month follow-up data of 1242 prospective patients (enrolled October 01 2010-September 02 2015) are reported. 81% of patients had baseline comorbidities. Treatment selection was based on perceived efficacy over patient comorbidity profile. There was a predominance of imatinib-treated patients enrolled earlier in the study, with subsequent shift toward dasatinib- and nilotinib-treated patients by 2013/2014. Monitoring for either CyR/MR improved over time and was documented for 36%, 82%, and 95% of patients by 3, 6, and 12 months, respectively; 5% had no documentation of CyR/MR monitoring during the first year of therapy. Documentation of MR/CyR testing was higher in Europe than the US (P < .001) and at academic versus community practices (P = .001). Age <65 years, patients being followed at sites within Europe, those followed at academic centers and patients no longer on first-line therapy were more likely to be monitored by 12 months. SIMPLICITY demonstrates that the NCCN and ELN recommendations on response monitoring have not been consistently translated into routine clinical practice. In the absence of appropriate monitoring practices, clinical response to TKI therapy cannot be established, any needed changes to treatment strategy will thus not be implemented, and long-term patient outcomes are likely to be impacted.

Pixantrone-rituximab versus gemcitabine-rituximab in relapsed/refractory aggressive non-Hodgkin lymphoma.

UNLABELLED: We describe the rationale and design of the ongoing randomized, active-controlled, multicenter, Phase III study evaluating the efficacy of pixantrone and rituximab versus gemcitabine and rituximab in patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma or follicular grade 3 lymphoma, who are ineligible for high-dose chemotherapy and stem cell transplantation, and who failed front-line regimens containing rituximab. The administration schedule is pixantrone 50 mg/m(2) intravenously (iv.) or gemcitabine 1000 mg/m(2) iv. on days 1, 8 and 15, combined with rituximab 375 mg/m(2) iv. on day 1, up to six cycles. Pixantrone has a conditional European marketing approval for monotherapy in adults with multiple relapsed or refractory aggressive B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Our trial explores the efficacy of combining pixantrone with rituximab and completes postauthorization measures. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01321541.

Ponatinib versus imatinib for newly diagnosed chronic myeloid leukaemia: an international, randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Ponatinib has shown potent activity against chronic myeloid leukaemia that is resistant to available treatment, although it is associated with arterial occlusion. We investigated whether this activity and safety profile would result in superior outcomes compared with imatinib in previously untreated patients with chronic myeloid leukaemia. METHODS: The Evaluation of Ponatinib versus Imatinib in Chronic Myeloid Leukemia (EPIC) study was a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial designed to assess the efficacy and safety of ponatinib, compared with imatinib, in newly diagnosed patients with chronic-phase chronic myeloid leukaemia. Patients from 106 centres in 21 countries were randomly assigned (1:1, with stratification by Sokal score at diagnosis) using an interactive voice and web response system to receive oral ponatinib (45 mg) or imatinib (400 mg) once daily until progression, unacceptable toxicity, or other criteria for withdrawal were met. Eligible patients were at least 18 years of age, within 6 months of diagnosis, and Philadelphia chromosome-positive by cytogenetic assessment, with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2, and had not previously been treated with tyrosine kinase inhibitors. The primary endpoint was major molecular response at 12 months. Patients who remained on study and had molecular assessments at specified timepoints were studied at those timepoints. Safety analyses included all treated patients, as per study protocol. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01650805. FINDINGS: Between Aug 14, 2012, and Oct 9, 2013, 307 patients were randomly assigned to receive ponatinib (n=155) or imatinib (n=152). The trial was terminated early, on Oct 17, 2013, following concerns about vascular adverse events observed in patients given ponatinib in other trials. Trial termination limited assessment of the primary endpoint of major molecular response at 12 months, as only 13 patients in the imatinib group and ten patients in the ponatinib group could be assessed at this timepoint; the proportion of patients achieving a major molecular response at 12 months did not differ significantly between the two groups (eight [80%] of ten patients given ponatinib and five [38%] of 13 patients given imatinib; p=0·074). 11 (7%) of 154 patients given ponatinib and three (2%) of 152 patients given imatinib had arterial occlusive events (p=0·052); arterial occlusive events were designated serious in ten (6%) of 154 patients given ponatinib and in one (1%) of 152 patients given imatinib (p=0·010). The data monitoring committee criterion for risk assessment (significant difference in serious grade 3 or 4 ischaemic events between groups) was not met (five [3%] of 154 vs one [1%] of 152; p=0·21). Grade 3 or 4 adverse events observed in more than 5% of patients in the ponatinib group were increased lipase (22 [14%] of 154 vs three [2%] of 152 with imatinib), thrombocytopenia (19 [12%] of 154 vs ten [7%] of 152 with imatinib), rash (ten [6%] of 154 vs two [1%] of 152 with imatinib). In the imatinib group, grade 3 or 4 adverse events observed in more than 5% of patients were neutropenia (12 [8%] of 152 vs five [3%] of 154 with ponatinib) and thrombocytopenia (ten [7%] of 152 vs 19 [12%] of 154 with ponatinib). Serious adverse events that occurred in three or more patients given ponatinib were pancreatitis (n=5), atrial fibrillation (n=3), and thrombocytopenia (n=3). No serious adverse event occurred in three or more patients given imatinib. INTERPRETATION: The efficacy of ponatinib treatment of newly diagnosed chronic-phase chronic myeloid leukaemia compared with imatinib could not be assessed due to trial termination, but preliminary data suggest there might be benefit, although with more arterial occlusive events than with imatinib at the doses studied. Because the EPIC trial was terminated early, efficacy of ponatinib in this setting remains to be established. FUNDING: ARIAD Pharmaceuticals.

Disabling immune tolerance by programmed death-1 blockade with pidilizumab after autologous hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation for diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: results of an international phase II trial.

PURPOSE: The Programmed Death-1 (PD-1) immune checkpoint pathway may be usurped by tumors, including diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), to evade immune surveillance. The reconstituting immune landscape after autologous hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation (AHSCT) may be particularly favorable for breaking immune tolerance through PD-1 blockade. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted an international phase II study of pidilizumab, an anti-PD-1 monoclonal antibody, in patients with DLBCL undergoing AHSCT, with correlative studies of lymphocyte subsets. Patients received three doses of pidilizumab beginning 1 to 3 months after AHSCT. RESULTS: Sixty-six eligible patients were treated. Toxicity was mild. At 16 months after the first treatment, progression-free survival (PFS) was 0.72 (90% CI, 0.60 to 0.82), meeting the primary end point. Among the 24 high-risk patients who remained positive on positron emission tomography after salvage chemotherapy, the 16-month PFS was 0.70 (90% CI, 0.51 to 0.82). Among the 35 patients with measurable disease after AHSCT, the overall response rate after pidilizumab treatment was 51%. Treatment was associated with increases in circulating lymphocyte subsets including PD-L1E-bearing lymphocytes, suggesting an on-target in vivo effect of pidilizumab. CONCLUSION: This is the first demonstration of clinical activity of PD-1 blockade in DLBCL. Given these results, PD-1 blockade after AHSCT using pidilizumab may represent a promising therapeutic strategy in this disease.

A phase I dose-finding trial of recombinant interleukin-21 and rituximab in relapsed and refractory low grade B-cell lymphoproliferative disorders.

PURPOSE: We conducted a phase I study to determine the safety, maximum-tolerated dose (MTD), and efficacy of weekly bolus recombinant human interleukin-21 (rIL-21) plus rituximab in patients with indolent B-cell malignancies. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: One week after a lead-in rituximab dose, cohorts of three patients were treated with 30, 100, or 150 µg/kg rIL-21 weekly for four weeks, concurrent with four weekly doses of rituximab. Patients with stable disease or better were eligible for a second course of therapy. RESULTS: Twenty-one patients with relapsed small lymphocytic lymphoma/chronic lymphocytic leukemia (SLL/CLL, n = 11), follicular lymphoma (n = 9), or marginal zone lymphoma (n = 1) were enrolled, with 19 completing at least one course of therapy. The MTD for rIL-21 was 100 µg/kg, based on observed toxicities including nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, hypotension, edema, and hypophosphatemia. Clinical responses were seen in 8 of 19 evaluable patients (42%; 3 CR/CRu, 5 PR), with 4 of longer duration than the patient's previous response to rituximab-based treatment (median 9 months vs. 3 months). CONCLUSIONS: Outpatient therapy of indolent B-cell malignancies with rituximab and weekly rIL-21 was well tolerated and clinically active, with durable complete remissions in a small subset of patients. Additional studies of rIL-21 and anti-CD20 antibodies in lymphoma and SLL/CLL are warranted.