Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 4 de 4
Filtrar
1.
Health Qual Life Outcomes ; 17(1): 173, 2019 Nov 15.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31729982

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: In a phase 3 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, treatment with idelalisib, a phosphoinositol-3 kinase δ inhibitor, + bendamustine/rituximab improved progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in adult patients with relapsed/refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia (R/R CLL). Here we report the results of health-related quality of life (HRQL) analyses from this study. METHODS: From June 15, 2012 to August 21, 2014, 416 patients with R/R CLL were enrolled; 207 patients were randomized to the idelalisib arm and 209 to the placebo arm. In the 416 patients randomized to receive bendamustine/rituximab and either oral idelalisib 150 mg twice-daily or placebo, HRQL was assessed at baseline and throughout the blinded part of the study using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Leukemia (FACT-Leu) and EuroQoL Five-Dimension (EQ-5D) visual analogue scale (VAS) questionnaires. The assessments were performed at scheduled patient visits; every 4 weeks for the first 6 months from the initiation of treatment, then every 8 weeks for the next 6 months, and every 12 weeks thereafter until end of study. Least-squares mean changes from baseline were estimated using a mixed-effects model by including treatment, time, and treatment-by-time interaction, and stratification factors as fixed effects. Time to first symptom improvement was assessed by Kaplan-Meier analysis. RESULTS: In mixed-effects model analysis, idelalisib + bendamustine/rituximab treatment led to clinically meaningful improvements from baseline in leukemia-associated symptoms. Moreover, per Kaplan-Meier analysis, the proportion of patients with symptom improvement was higher and time to improvement was shorter among patients in the idelalisib-containing arm compared with those who did not receive idelalisib. The physical and social/family FACT-Leu subscale scores, along with the self-rated health assessed by EQ-VAS, showed improvement with idelalisib over placebo, but the difference did not reach statistical significance. The functional and emotional FACT-Leu subscale scores remained similar to placebo. CONCLUSIONS: Addition of idelalisib to bendamustine/rituximab, apart from improving PFS and OS, had a neutral to beneficial impact on HRQL in patients with R/R CLL, particularly by reducing leukemia-specific disease symptoms. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT01569295. Registered April 3, 2012.


Assuntos
Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/administração & dosagem , Cloridrato de Bendamustina/administração & dosagem , Leucemia Linfocítica Crônica de Células B/tratamento farmacológico , Purinas/administração & dosagem , Qualidade de Vida , Quinazolinonas/administração & dosagem , Rituximab/administração & dosagem , Adulto , Idoso , Método Duplo-Cego , Feminino , Humanos , Estimativa de Kaplan-Meier , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade
2.
Lancet Oncol ; 18(3): 297-311, 2017 03.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28139405

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Bendamustine plus rituximab is a standard of care for the management of patients with relapsed or refractory chronic lymphocytic leukaemia. New therapies are needed to improve clinically relevant outcomes in these patients. We assessed the efficacy and safety of adding idelalisib, a first-in-class targeted phosphoinositide-3-kinase δ inhibitor, to bendamustine plus rituximab in this population. METHODS: For this international, multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, adult patients (≥18 years) with relapsed or refractory chronic lymphocytic leukaemia requiring treatment who had measurable lymphadenopathy by CT or MRI and disease progression within 36 months since their last previous therapy were enrolled. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) by a central interactive web response system to receive bendamustine plus rituximab for a maximum of six cycles (bendamustine: 70 mg/m2 intravenously on days 1 and 2 for six 28-day cycles; rituximab: 375 mg/m2 on day 1 of cycle 1, and 500 mg/m2 on day 1 of cycles 2-6) in addition to either twice-daily oral idelalisib (150 mg) or placebo until disease progression or intolerable study drug-related toxicity. Randomisation was stratified by high-risk features (IGHV, del[17p], or TP53 mutation) and refractory versus relapsed disease. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival assessed by an independent review committee in the intention-to-treat population. This trial is ongoing and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01569295. FINDINGS: Between June 26, 2012, and Aug 21, 2014, 416 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to the idelalisib (n=207) and placebo (n=209) groups. At a median follow-up of 14 months (IQR 7-18), median progression-free survival was 20·8 months (95% CI 16·6-26·4) in the idelalisib group and 11·1 months (8·9-11·1) in the placebo group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·33, 95% CI 0·25-0·44; p<0·0001). The most frequent grade 3 or worse adverse events in the idelalisib group were neutropenia (124 [60%] of 207 patients) and febrile neutropenia (48 [23%]), whereas in the placebo group they were neutropenia (99 [47%] of 209) and thrombocytopenia (27 [13%]). An increased risk of infection was reported in the idelalisib group compared with the placebo group (grade ≥3 infections and infestations: 80 [39%] of 207 vs 52 [25%] of 209). Serious adverse events, including febrile neutropenia, pneumonia, and pyrexia, were more common in the idelalisib group (140 [68%] of 207 patients) than in the placebo group (92 [44%] of 209). Treatment-emergent adverse events leading to death occurred in 23 (11%) patients in the idelalisib group and 15 (7%) in the placebo group, including six deaths from infections in the idelalisib group and three from infections in the placebo group. INTERPRETATION: Idelalisib in combination with bendamustine plus rituximab improved progression-free survival compared with bendamustine plus rituximab alone in patients with relapsed or refractory chronic lymphocytic leukaemia. However, careful attention needs to be paid to management of serious adverse events and infections associated with this regimen during treatment selection. FUNDING: Gilead Sciences Inc.


Assuntos
Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapêutico , Resistencia a Medicamentos Antineoplásicos/efeitos dos fármacos , Leucemia Linfocítica Crônica de Células B/tratamento farmacológico , Recidiva Local de Neoplasia/tratamento farmacológico , Terapia de Salvação , Adulto , Idoso , Cloridrato de Bendamustina/administração & dosagem , Método Duplo-Cego , Feminino , Seguimentos , Humanos , Leucemia Linfocítica Crônica de Células B/patologia , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Recidiva Local de Neoplasia/patologia , Estadiamento de Neoplasias , Prognóstico , Purinas/administração & dosagem , Quinazolinonas/administração & dosagem , Rituximab/administração & dosagem , Taxa de Sobrevida
4.
JAMA Oncol ; 4(5): 652-659, 2018 05 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29522138

RESUMO

Importance: Myelofibrosis is a hematologic malignancy characterized by splenomegaly and debilitating symptoms. Thrombocytopenia is a poor prognostic feature and limits use of Janus kinase 1 (JAK1)/Janus kinase 2 (JAK2) inhibitor ruxolitinib. Objective: To compare the efficacy and safety of JAK2 inhibitor pacritinib with that of best available therapy (BAT), including ruxolitinib, in patients with myelofibrosis and thrombocytopenia. Design, Setting, and Participants: For this phase 3 randomized international multicenter study-the PERSIST-2 study-of pacritinib vs BAT, 311 patients with myelofibrosis and platelet count 100 × 109/L or less were recruited for analysis. Crossover from BAT was allowed after week 24 or for progression of splenomegaly. Interventions: Patients were randomized 1:1:1 to pacritinib 400 mg once daily, pacritinib 200 mg twice daily, or BAT. Main Outcomes and Measures: Coprimary end points were rates of patients achieving 35% or more spleen volume reduction (SVR) and 50% or more reduction in total symptom score (TSS) at week 24. Efficacy analyses were performed on the intention-to-treat efficacy population, comprising all patients with a randomization date allowing for week 24 data. Results: Overall, 311 patients (mean [SD] age, 63.70 [9.08] years; 171 men [55%] and 140 women [45%]) were included in the study; 149 patients (48%) had prior ruxolitinib. The most common BAT was ruxolitinib (44 patients [45%]); 19 patients (19%) received watchful-waiting only. The intention-to-treat efficacy population included 75 patients randomized to pacritinib once daily; 74, pacritinib twice daily, and 72, BAT. Pacritinib (arms combined) was more effective than BAT for 35% or more SVR (27 patients [18%] vs 2 patients [3%]; P = .001) and had a nonsignificantly greater rate of 50% or more reduction in TSS (37 patients [25%] vs 10 patients [14%]; P = .08). Pacritinib twice daily led to significant improvements in both end points over BAT (≥35% SVR: 16 patients [22%] vs 2 patients [3%]; P = .001; ≥50% reduction in TSS: 24 patients [32%] vs 10 patients [14%]; P = .01). Clinical improvement in hemoglobin and reduction in transfusion burden were greatest with pacritinib twice daily. For pacritinib once daily, pacritinib twice daily, and BAT, the most common (>10%) grade 3 or 4 adverse events were thrombocytopenia (32 patients [31%], 34 patients [32%], 18 patients [18%]), and anemia (28 patients [27%], 23 patients [22%], 14 patients [14%]). In the pacritinib once daily, twice daily, and BAT arms, discontinuation owing to adverse events occurred in 15 patients (14%), 10 patients (9%), and 4 patients (4%). Conclusions and Relevance: In patients with myelofibrosis and thrombocytopenia, including those with prior anti-JAK therapy, pacritinib twice daily was more effective than BAT, including ruxolitinib, for reducing splenomegaly and symptoms. Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02055781.


Assuntos
Hidrocarbonetos Aromáticos com Pontes/uso terapêutico , Mielofibrose Primária/tratamento farmacológico , Inibidores de Proteínas Quinases/uso terapêutico , Pirazóis/uso terapêutico , Pirimidinas/uso terapêutico , Hidrocarbonetos Aromáticos com Pontes/administração & dosagem , Hidrocarbonetos Aromáticos com Pontes/efeitos adversos , Hidrocarbonetos Aromáticos com Pontes/farmacocinética , Terapia Combinada , Feminino , Humanos , Janus Quinase 1/antagonistas & inibidores , Janus Quinase 2/antagonistas & inibidores , Masculino , Nitrilas , Fenótipo , Mielofibrose Primária/diagnóstico , Mielofibrose Primária/etiologia , Mielofibrose Primária/mortalidade , Prognóstico , Inibidores de Proteínas Quinases/administração & dosagem , Inibidores de Proteínas Quinases/efeitos adversos , Inibidores de Proteínas Quinases/farmacocinética , Pirazóis/administração & dosagem , Pirazóis/efeitos adversos , Pirazóis/farmacocinética , Pirimidinas/administração & dosagem , Pirimidinas/efeitos adversos , Pirimidinas/farmacocinética , Baço/patologia , Trombocitopenia/tratamento farmacológico , Resultado do Tratamento
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA