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).

A phase 3b study of venetoclax and azacitidine or decitabine in an outpatient setting in patients with acute myeloid leukemia.

Venetoclax, a highly selective BCL-2 inhibitor, combined with hypomethylating agents (HMAs) azacitidine or decitabine, is approved for the treatment of newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia (ND AML) in patients who are ineligible to receive intensive chemotherapy. Previous clinical studies initiated venetoclax plus HMA in an inpatient setting owing to concerns of tumor lysis syndrome (TLS). This study (NCT03941964) evaluated the efficacy and safety of venetoclax plus HMA in a United States community-based outpatient setting in patients with ND AML (N = 60) who were treatment naïve for AML, ineligible to receive intensive chemotherapy, had no evidence of spontaneous TLS at screening, and were deemed as appropriate candidates for outpatient initiation of venetoclax plus HMA by the investigator. Patients received venetoclax in combination with azacitidine (75 mg/m2) or decitabine (20 mg/m2) for up to 6 cycles during the study. With a median time on study of 18.3 weeks, the best response rate of composite complete remission was 66.7%, and the overall post-baseline red blood cell (RBC) and platelet transfusion independence rate was 55.0%, consistent with results of studies in which treatment was initiated in an inpatient setting. Key adverse events included nausea, anemia, thrombocytopenia, neutropenia, and white blood cell count decrease of any grade (≥50% of patients). The observed safety profile was generally consistent with that of venetoclax plus HMA observed in inpatient AML studies. With close monitoring, 2 cases of TLS were identified, appropriately managed, and the patients were able to continue study treatment. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov. The registration identification number is NCT03941964.

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).

In-class transition (iCT) of proteasome inhibitor-based therapy: a community approach to multiple myeloma management.

Long-term proteasome inhibitor (PI) treatment can improve multiple myeloma (MM) outcomes, but this can be difficult to achieve in clinical practice due to toxicity, comorbidities, and the burden of repeated parenteral administration. US MM-6 (NCT03173092) enrolled transplant-ineligible patients with newly diagnosed MM to receive all-oral ixazomib-lenalidomide-dexamethasone (IRd; ≤39 cycles or until progression or toxicity) following three cycles of bortezomib-based induction. Primary endpoint: 2-year progression-free survival (PFS). Key secondary/exploratory endpoints included overall response rate (ORR), overall survival (OS), safety, quality of life (QoL), treatment satisfaction, and actigraphy. At datacut, in the fully accrued cohort of 140 patients, median age was 73 years with 42% aged ≥75 and 61% deemed frail; 10% of patients were ongoing on treatment. After a median follow-up of 27 months, the 2-year PFS rate was 71% (95% confidence interval: 61-78). ORR increased from 62% at the end of induction to 80% following in-class transition (iCT) to IRd for a median of 11 months. The 2-year OS rate was 86%. The overall safety profile/actigraphy levels were consistent with previous reports; QoL/treatment satisfaction scores were stable with ongoing therapy. iCT to IRd may allow prolonged PI-based therapy with promising efficacy and a tolerable safety profile, while maintaining QoL.

Zanubrutinib in patients with previously treated B-cell malignancies intolerant of previous Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitors in the USA: a phase 2, open-label, single-arm study.

BACKGROUND: We hypothesised that zanubrutinib, a highly selective next-generation Bruton tyrosine kinase (BTK) inhibitor, would be a safe and active treatment for patients intolerant of ibrutinib, acalabrutinib, or both. We aimed to assess whether zanubrutinib would prolong treatment duration by minimising treatment-related toxicities and discontinuations in patients with previously treated B-cell malignancies. METHODS: This ongoing, phase 2, multicentre, open-label, single-arm study was done in 20 centres in the USA. Patients aged 18 or older with previously treated B-cell malignancies (chronic lymphocytic leukaemia, small lymphocytic lymphoma, mantle cell lymphoma, Waldenström macroglobulinaemia, or marginal zone lymphoma) who became intolerant of ibrutinib, acalabrutinib, or both, were orally administered zanubrutinib 160 mg twice daily or 320 mg once daily per investigator. The primary endpoint was recurrence and change in severity of ibrutinib or acalabrutinib intolerance events based on investigator-assessed adverse events. Secondary endpoints were investigator-assessed overall response rate; duration of response; disease control rate; and progression-free survival. Analyses included all patients who received any dose of the study drug. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04116437. FINDINGS: Between Oct 14, 2019, and Sept 8, 2021, 67 patients (36 [54%] men and 31 [46%] women) who were intolerant of ibrutinib (n=57; cohort 1) or of acalabrutinib or acalabrutinib and ibrutinib (n=10; cohort 2) were enrolled. 63 (94%) patients were White, one (2%) had multiple ethnicities, and three (5%) had unreported or unknown ethnicity. Most intolerance events (81 [70%] of 115 for ibrutinib; 15 [83%] of 18 for acalabrutinib) did not recur with zanubrutinib. Of the recurring events, seven (21%) of 34 ibrutinib intolerance events and two (67%) of three acalabrutinib intolerance events recurred at the same severity with zanubrutinib; 27 (79%) ibrutinib intolerance events and one (33%) acalabrutinib intolerance event recurred at a lower severity with zanubrutinib. No events recurred at higher severity. No grade 4 intolerance events recurred. 64 (96%) of 67 patients had one or more adverse events with zanubrutinib; the most common adverse events were contusion (in 15 [22%] of 67 patients), fatigue (14 [21%]), myalgia (ten [15%]), arthralgia (nine [13%]), and diarrhoea (nine [13%]). Atrial fibrillation occurred in three (4%) patients (all grade 2). Eight (12%) of 67 patients had serious adverse events (anaemia, atrial fibrillation, bronchitis, COVID-19, COVID-19 pneumonia, febrile neutropenia, salmonella gastroenteritis, transfusion reaction, trigeminal nerve disorder, and urinary tract infection). No treatment-related deaths occurred. The median follow-up time was 12·0 months (IQR 8·2-15·6). Among the 64 efficacy-evaluable patients, disease control rate was 93·8% (60; 95% CI 84·8-98·3) and overall response rate was 64·1% (41; 95% CI 51·1-75·7). The median duration of response was not reached; the 12-month event-free duration of response rate was 95·0% (95% CI 69·5-99·3). Similarly, median progression-free survival was not reached; 18-month progression-free survival was 83·8% (95% CI 62·6-93·6). INTERPRETATION: Patients intolerant of previous BTK inhibitors have limited treatment options. These results suggest that zanubrutinib, a safe and viable treatment for patients with B-cell malignancies, might fill that unmet need for those who exhibit intolerance to ibrutinib or acalabrutinib. FUNDING: BeiGene.

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.

Improvements in Health-related Quality of Life and Symptoms in Patients With Previously Untreated Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia: Final Results From the Phase II GIBB Study of the Combination of Obinutuzumab and Bendamustine.

BACKGROUND: We evaluated health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) receiving first-line chemoimmunotherapy in the GIBB single-arm, Phase II study of obinutuzumab plus bendamustine (BG). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients received six 28-day cycles of BG and were followed for up to 27 months. HRQoL was assessed using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30) and EORTC QLQ Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia 16 (QLQ-CLL16) questionnaires. Scores were linear-transformed to a 100-point scale, with clinically meaningful responses defined as a ≥ 10-point change from baseline. RESULTS: The patient-reported outcome (PRO) population comprised 98 patients (68.4% male; median age 61 years). EORTC QLQ-C30 global health status improvements were noted at all follow-up visits and were clinically meaningful 2 to 3 months after induction and at 3- and 27-months' follow-up. Clinically meaningful improvements were also observed for the EORTC QLQ-C30 role functioning, emotional functioning, fatigue and insomnia scales and the EORTC QLQ-CLL16 fatigue, disease symptoms and future health worries scales. Global health status was maintained throughout follow-up, and no clinically relevant deterioration in other HRQoL parameters was observed. CONCLUSION: PRO data from the GIBB study show improved overall HRQoL in patients with CLL who received first-line chemoimmunotherapy with BG.

Phase 2, multicenter GIBB study of obinutuzumab plus bendamustine in previously untreated patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia.

The single-arm, multicenter, phase 2 GIBB study (NCT02320487) investigated bendamustine plus obinutuzumab (BG) in previously untreated CLL. Patients (N = 102) received six cycles of intravenous obinutuzumab (cycle [C] 1: 100 mg day 1/900 mg day 2, and 1000 mg days 8/15; C2-6 1000 mg day 1) plus bendamustine (C1 90 mg/m2 days 2/3; C2-6 days 1/2). Complete response (CR), the primary endpoint, was 50%, overall response 89%. Estimated 2-year progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 86% and 97%, respectively. Following initial minimal residual disease (MRD) negativity, median MRD negativity duration was 28.9 months. Undetectable MRD (<10-4) was observed in up to 83% of evaluable patients in peripheral blood (any time) and 59% in bone marrow at response evaluation. Most common grade 3/4 adverse events (AEs) were neutropenia (25%; 5% febrile) and infusion-related reactions (9%). BG proved clinically active in CLL with high response, MRD negativity, and survival rates, consistent with other first-line studies of anti-CD20 antibody/bendamustine combinations.

Feasibility of Long-term Proteasome Inhibition in Multiple Myeloma by in-class Transition From Bortezomib to Ixazomib.

BACKGROUND: The ongoing US MM-6 study is investigating in-class transition (iCT) from parenteral bortezomib-based induction to all-oral IRd (ixazomib-lenalidomide-dexamethasone) with the aim of increasing proteasome inhibitor (PI)-based treatment adherence and duration while maintaining patients' health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and improving outcomes. PATIENTS AND METHODS: US community sites are enrolling non-transplant-eligible patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (MM) with no evidence of progressive disease after 3 cycles of bortezomib-based therapy to receive IRd (up to 39 cycles or until progression or toxicity). The patients use mobile or wearable digital devices to collect actigraphy (activity and sleep) data and electronically complete HRQoL, treatment satisfaction and medication adherence questionnaires. The primary endpoint is progression-free survival. The key secondary endpoints include response rates and therapy duration. RESULTS: At the data cutoff, 84 patients had been treated (median age 73 years; 44% aged ≥ 75 years; 49% men; 15% Black or African American; and 10% Hispanic or Latino). Of the 84 patients, 62% were continuing therapy. The mean duration of total PI therapy was 10.1 months and for the IRd regimen was 7.3 months. With an 8-month median follow-up, the 12-month progression-free survival rate was 86% (95% confidence interval, 73%-93%) from both the start of bortezomib-based treatment and the start of IRd. The overall response rate was 62% (complete response, 4%; very good partial response, 25%; partial response, 33%) after bortezomib-based induction and 70% (complete response, 26%; very good partial response, 29%; partial response, 15%) after iCT. The IRd safety profile was consistent with previous clinical trial data, and HRQoL and treatment satisfaction were maintained. CONCLUSION: The patients included in the US MM-6 study are representative of the real-world US MM population. The use of iCT might permit prolonged PI-based therapy with promising efficacy, without impacting patients' HRQoL or treatment satisfaction.

Rivaroxaban for Thromboprophylaxis in High-Risk Ambulatory Patients with Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Ambulatory patients receiving systemic cancer therapy are at varying risk for venous thromboembolism. However, the benefit of thromboprophylaxis in these patients is uncertain. METHODS: In this double-blind, randomized trial involving high-risk ambulatory patients with cancer (Khorana score of ≥2, on a scale from 0 to 6, with higher scores indicating a higher risk of venous thromboembolism), we randomly assigned patients without deep-vein thrombosis at screening to receive rivaroxaban (at a dose of 10 mg) or placebo daily for up to 180 days, with screening every 8 weeks. The primary efficacy end point was a composite of objectively confirmed proximal deep-vein thrombosis in a lower limb, pulmonary embolism, symptomatic deep-vein thrombosis in an upper limb or distal deep-vein thrombosis in a lower limb, and death from venous thromboembolism and was assessed up to day 180. In a prespecified supportive analysis involving the same population, the same end point was assessed during the intervention period (first receipt of trial agent to last dose plus 2 days). The primary safety end point was major bleeding. RESULTS: Of 1080 enrolled patients, 49 (4.5%) had thrombosis at screening and did not undergo randomization. Of the 841 patients who underwent randomization, the primary end point occurred in 25 of 420 patients (6.0%) in the rivaroxaban group and in 37 of 421 (8.8%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.66; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.40 to 1.09; P = 0.10) in the period up to day 180. In the prespecified intervention-period analysis, the primary end point occurred in 11 patients (2.6%) in the rivaroxaban group and in 27 (6.4%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.20 to 0.80). Major bleeding occurred in 8 of 405 patients (2.0%) in the rivaroxaban group and in 4 of 404 (1.0%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 1.96; 95% CI, 0.59 to 6.49). CONCLUSIONS: In high-risk ambulatory patients with cancer, treatment with rivaroxaban did not result in a significantly lower incidence of venous thromboembolism or death due to venous thromboembolism in the 180-day trial period. During the intervention period, rivaroxaban led to a substantially lower incidence of such events, with a low incidence of major bleeding. (Funded by Janssen and others; CASSINI ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02555878.).