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 in patients with Waldenström macroglobulinemia: results from the ASPEN trial.

Aim ASPEN is a randomized, open-label, Phase III study comparing zanubrutinib and ibrutinib in patients with Waldenström macroglobulinemia (WM). Materials & methods: Patient-reported outcomes were exploratory end points assessed using the EORTC QLQ-C30 and EQ-5D-5L VAS scores. Results: Overall, 201 patients (102 zanubrutinib; 99 ibrutinib) were enrolled. Clinically meaningful differences were observed in diarrhea and nausea/vomiting in both the intent-to-treat population and in patients attaining very good partial response (VGPR) in earlier cycles of treatment, as well as in long-term physical functioning and fatigue in patients achieving VGPR. Conclusion: Treatment with zanubrutinib was associated with greater improvements in health-related quality of life compared with ibrutinib in patients with WM and MYD88 mutations.Clinical Trial Registration: NCT03053440 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Patient quality of life is importantWhat is this article about? This article talks about a study called the ASPEN trial, which compares two medicines used for treating a rare blood cancer that doctors call Waldenström macroglobulinemia. The medicines are called zanubrutinib (ZAN) and ibrutinib (IBR). They work in the same way, by blocking a protein called Bruton tyrosine kinase. When patients take medicines for an illness, it is important to learn about their physical, social, emotional and mental well-being (quality of life). In this study, we asked patients to fill out questionnaires about their well-being before starting the study treatment for their blood cancer, and again a few times while taking the medication, to see if there were any changes.What were the results of the study? There were two groups of patients. One group took ZAN and the other took IBR. The patients could not choose which medicine they were going to take. Results from both groups of patients were compared. Patients taking ZAN did not feel worse or better about their diarrhea and sickness, but those taking IBR said these symptoms had become worse. Both medicines improved how patients were feeling. However, improvement in tiredness and physical ability was larger in patients taking ZAN than those on IBR, especially for the patients whose cancer was getting better.What do the results mean? For patients with a rare blood cancer in this study, those taking ZAN had a better quality of life than those taking IBR.

Cardiovascular events reported in patients with B-cell malignancies treated with zanubrutinib.

ABSTRACT: First-generation Bruton tyrosine kinase (BTK) inhibitor, ibrutinib, has been associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular toxicities. Zanubrutinib is a more selective, next-generation BTK inhibitor. In this analysis, incidence rates of atrial fibrillation, symptomatic (grade ≥2) ventricular arrhythmia, and hypertension were evaluated in a pooled analysis of 10 clinical studies with zanubrutinib monotherapy in patients (N = 1550) with B-cell malignancies and a pooled analysis of head-to-head studies comparing zanubrutinib with ibrutinib (ASPEN cohort 1; ALPINE). Among the 10 studies, most patients (median age, 67 years) were male (66.3%) and had CLL/SLL (60.5%). Overall incidence and exposure-adjusted incidence rates (EAIR) for atrial fibrillation, symptomatic ventricular arrhythmia, and hypertension were lower with zanubrutinib than ibrutinib. Despite a similar prevalence of preexisting cardiovascular events in ASPEN and ALPINE, atrial fibrillation/flutter incidence rates (6.1% vs 15.6%) and EAIR (0.2 vs 0.64 persons per 100 person-months; P < .0001) were lower with zanubrutinib than with ibrutinib. Symptomatic ventricular arrhythmia incidence was low for both zanubrutinib (0.7%) and ibrutinib (1.7%) with numerically lower EAIR (0.02 vs 0.06 persons per 100 person-months, respectively) for zanubrutinib. The hypertension EAIR was lower with zanubrutinib than ibrutinib in ASPEN but similar between treatment arms in ALPINE. The higher hypertension EAIR in ALPINE was inconsistent with other zanubrutinib studies. However, fewer discontinuations (1 vs 14) and deaths (0 vs 6) due to cardiac disorders occurred with zanubrutinib versus ibrutinib in ALPINE. These data support zanubrutinib as a treatment option with improved cardiovascular tolerability compared with ibrutinib for patients with B-cell malignancies in need of BTK inhibitors. These trials were registered at www.ClinicalTrials.gov as # NCT03053440, NCT03336333, NCT03734016, NCT04170283, NCT03206918, NCT03206970, NCT03332173, NCT03846427, NCT02343120, and NCT03189524.

Biomarker analysis of the ASPEN study comparing zanubrutinib with ibrutinib for patients with Waldenström macroglobulinemia.

ABSTRACT: The phase 3 ASPEN trial (NCT03053440) compared Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitors (BTKis), zanubrutinib and ibrutinib, in patients with Waldenström macroglobulinemia (WM). Post-hoc biomarker analysis was performed using next-generation sequencing on pretreatment bone marrow samples from 98 patients treated with zanubrutinib and 92 patients treated with ibrutinib with mutated (MUT) MYD88 and 20 patients with wild-type (WT) MYD88 treated with zanubrutinib. Of 329 mutations in 52 genes, mutations in CXCR4 (25.7%), TP53 (24.8%), ARID1A (15.7%), and TERT (9.0%) were most common. TP53MUT, ARID1AMUT, and TERTMUT were associated with higher rates of CXCR4MUT (P < .05). Patients with CXCR4MUT (frameshift or nonsense [NS] mutations) had lower very good partial response (VGPR) and complete response rates (CR; 17.0% vs 37.2%, P = .020) and longer time to response (11.1 vs 8.4 months) than patients with CXCR4WT treated with BTKis. CXCR4NS was associated with inferior progression-free survival (PFS; hazard ratio [HR], 3.39; P = .017) in patients treated with ibrutinib but not in those treated with zanubrutinib (HR, 0.67; P = .598), but VGPR + CR rates were similar between treatment groups (14.3% vs 15.4%). Compared with ibrutinib, patients with CXCR4NS treated with zanubrutinib had a favorable major response rate (MRR; 85.7% vs 53.8%; P = .09) and PFS (HR, 0.30; P = .093). In patients with TP53MUT, significantly lower MRRs were observed for patients treated with ibrutinib (63.6% vs 85.7%; P = .04) but not for those treated with zanubrutinib (80.8% vs 81.9%; P = .978). In TP53MUT, compared with ibrutinib, patients treated with zanubrutinib had higher VGPR and CR (34.6% vs 13.6%; P < .05), numerically improved MRR (80.8% vs 63.6%; P = .11), and longer PFS (not reached vs 44.2 months; HR, 0.66; P = .37). Collectively, patients with WM with CXCR4MUT or TP53MUT had worse prognosis compared with patients with WT alleles, and zanubrutinib led to better clinical outcomes.

Changes in positive and negative affect in psychotherapy for depression and anxiety.

OBJECTIVE: Positive and negative affect play critical roles in depression and anxiety treatment, but the dynamic processes of how affect changes over treatment in relation to changes in symptoms is unclear. The study goal was to examine relationships among changes in positive and negative affect with changes in depression and anxiety symptoms. METHOD: This secondary analysis used a combined sample (N = 196) of two trials (Craske et al., 2019, 2023) comparing positive affect treatment (PAT) to negative affect treatment. Longitudinal cross-lag panel models explored whether changes in positive and negative affect (Positive and Negative Affect Schedule; Watson et al., 1988) predicted subsequent changes in depression and anxiety symptoms (Depression Anxiety Stress Scales; Lovibond & Lovibond, 1995), whether symptoms predicted subsequent changes in affect, and whether treatment condition moderated these relationships. RESULTS: Increases in positive affect predicted subsequent decreases in depression and anxiety symptoms, regardless of treatment condition. Symptoms did not reciprocally predict changes in positive affect. For individuals in PAT, decreases in negative affect predicted subsequent decreases in symptoms. Moreover, decreases in symptoms predicted subsequent decreases in negative affect, regardless of treatment condition. CONCLUSIONS: Results did not support a reciprocal relationship between positive affect and symptoms of depression and anxiety since positive affect predicted depression and anxiety symptoms but not vice versa. Results supported a reciprocal relationship between negative affect and symptoms of depression and anxiety since negative affect predicted depression and anxiety symptoms in PAT, and depression and anxiety symptoms predicted negative affect in both treatment conditions. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

Intrinsically disordered regions of the Msn2 transcription factor encode multiple functions using interwoven sequence grammars.

Intrinsically disordered regions (IDRs) are abundant in eukaryotic proteins, but their sequence-function relationship remains poorly understood. IDRs of transcription factors (TFs) can direct promoter selection and recruit coactivators, as shown for the budding yeast TF Msn2. To examine how IDRs encode both these functions, we compared genomic binding specificity, coactivator recruitment, and gene induction amongst a large set of designed Msn2-IDR mutants. We find that both functions depend on multiple regions across the > 600AA IDR. Yet, transcription activity was readily disrupted by mutations that showed no effect on the Msn2 binding specificity. Our data attribute this differential sensitivity to the integration of a relaxed, composition-based code directing binding specificity with a more stringent, motif-based code controlling the recruitment of coactivators and transcription activity. Therefore, Msn2 utilizes interwoven sequence grammars for encoding multiple functions, suggesting a new IDR design paradigm of potentially general use.