Idelalisib plus rituximab versus ibrutinib in the treatment of relapsed/refractory chronic lymphocytic leukaemia: A real-world analysis from the Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia Patients Registry (CLLEAR).

Idelalisib (idela), a phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase inhibitor, and ibrutinib, a Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitor, were the first oral targeted agents approved for relapsed/refractory (R/R) chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (CLL). However, no randomised trials of idelalisib plus rituximab (R-idela) versus ibrutinib have been conducted. Therefore, we performed a real-world retrospective analysis of patients with R/R CLL treated with R-idela (n = 171) or ibrutinib (n = 244). The median age was 70 versus 69 years, with a median of two previous lines. There was a trend towards higher tumour protein p53 (TP53) aberrations and complex karyotype in the R-idela group (53% vs. 44%, p = 0.093; 57% vs. 46%, p = 0.083). The median progression-free survival (PFS) was significantly longer with ibrutinib (40.5 vs. 22.0 months; p < 0.001); similarly to overall survival (OS; median 54.4 vs. 37.7 months, p = 0.04). In multivariate analysis, only PFS but not OS remained significantly different between the two agents. The most common reasons for treatment discontinuation included toxicity (R-idela, 39.8%; ibrutinib, 22.5%) and CLL progression (27.5% vs. 11.1%). In conclusion, our data show significantly better efficacy and tolerability of ibrutinib over R-idela in patients with R/R CLL treated in routine practice. The R-idela regimen may still be considered a reasonable option in highly selected patients without a suitable treatment alternative.

COVID-19 in patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia: a multicenter analysis by the Czech CLL study group.

Patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) have a high risk of poor outcomes related to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). This multicenter cohort study evaluated the impact of COVID-19 infection on the population of CLL patients in the Czech Republic. Between March 2020 and May 2021, 341 patients (237 males) with CLL and COVID-19 disease were identified. The median age was 69 years (range 38-91). Out of the 214 (63%) patients with the history of therapy for CLL, 97 (45%) were receiving CLL-directed treatment at diagnosis of COVID-19: 29% Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitor (BTKi), 16% chemoimmunotherapy (CIT), 11% Bcl-2 inhibitor, and 4% phosphoinositide 3-kinase inhibitor. Regarding the severity of COVID-19, 60% pts required admission to the hospital, 21% pts were admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU), and 12% received invasive mechanical ventilation. The overall case fatality rate was 28%. Major comorbidities, age over 72, male gender, CLL treatment in history, CLL-directed treatment at COVID-19 diagnosis were associated with increased risk of death. Of note, concurrent therapy with BTKi compared to CIT was not associated with better outcome of COVID-19.

Burkitt lymphoma-a retrospective analysis of data from the Registry of the Czech Lymphoma Study Group with external validation of the Burkitt lymphoma International Prognostic Index.

Burkitt lymphoma (BL) is a rare subtype of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma with an aggressive course. To refine the individual patient's prognosis, the International Prognostic Index for BL (BL-IPI) was recently developed and 4 risk factors (RF) were determined as optimal prognostic cut-off by multivariate analysis: age ≥40 years, lactate dehydrogenase >3× upper limit of normal, ECOG performance status ≥2, and central nervous system involvement. The BL-IPI distinguishes 3 prognostic groups, low (without RF), intermediate (1 RF), and high risk (2-4 RF), with significant differences in survival. The aim of the current project was to perform an external validation of the BL-IPI in 101 patients from the Registry of Czech Lymphoma Study Group diagnosed between 1999 and 2016 (median age, 45 years). The median follow-up was 50.4 months. The induction treatment included rituximab plus chemotherapy in 82% and chemotherapy alone in 18%. The overall response rate was 78% and the complete remission rate was 73%. According to BL-IPI, low/intermediate/high risk was present in 21/35/45% of patients, showing high similarity to the training BL-IPI US (United States) dataset (18/36/46%). There were significant differences in progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) between patients with high vs. intermediate risk (PFS: hazard ratio 0.16, 95% confidence interval 0.08-0.31, p<0.0001; OS: hazard ratio 0.17, 95% confidence interval 0.09-0.35, p<0.0001) but not between patients with low vs. intermediate risk. The 3-year OS probability according to BL-IPI with low/intermediate/high risk was 96/76/59% in the BL-IPI training dataset vs. 95/85/45% in our external validation cohort; the 3-year PFS probability with low/intermediate/high risk was 92/72/53% in the BL-IPI training dataset vs. 95/85/42% in our cohort. In summary, our external validation of the BL-IPI confirmed a good separation of high-risk patients, who have a poor prognosis and for whom the new therapeutic approaches are needed; patients with low and intermediate risk had favorable clinical outcomes, and differences between these groups were not significant, likely due to a small number of patients.

Skipping a step: what happened to the design of randomized clinical trials in chronic lymphocytic leukaemia?

Clinical research of chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (CLL) has been advancing at an unprecedented pace. Several randomized studies in the current era of oral targeted agents seem to have skipped one step and proceeded directly to combinations with antibodies, omitting the testing of novel-agent monotherapy. Thus, the ibrutinib + rituximab combination was used as the experimental arm in a major trial for untreated fit patients while two other trials subsequently showed that addition of rituximab to ibrutinib does not produce any meaningful benefit. Similarly, two large trials omitted venetoclax monotherapy and proceeded directly to venetoclax + rituximab or obinutuzumab versus chemoimmunotherapy. While such trials are undoubtedly cheaper, quicker and easier to manage, they leave the CLL community with uncertainty regarding the real role of the monoclonal antibody components. Thus, we are left with regimens which are undoubtedly effective, but might actually be unnecessarily toxic and expensive. The solution to this problem is simple: future randomized trials should be carefully designed in a 'step by step' fashion which would provide the CLL community with simple yet robust answers regarding efficacy of novel regimens so that these can be introduced to practice following the best principles of evidence-based medicine.

External validation of International Prognostic Score for asymptomatic early stage chronic lymphocytic leukaemia and proposal of an alternative score.

Most patients with chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (CLL) are nowadays diagnosed without any symptoms and do not require therapy. A prognostic score identifying patients within this large group who are at high risk of disease progression would be highly beneficial. The recently published International Prognostic Score for Early asymptomatic patients (IPS-E) uses combination of absolute lymphocyte count (ALC) >15 × 109 /l, palpable lymphadenopathy, and unmutated immunoglobulin heavy-chain variable-region (IGHV) gene to predict the time to first-line therapy (TTFT). Patients at low, intermediate, and high risk had estimated 5-year TTFT of 8%, 28%, and 61%. We performed an external validation of the IPS-E score using an unselected, consecutive group of 130 Binet A patients. The 5-year TTFT was 11%, 36%, and 78% (C-statistic 0·74). Furthermore, we propose an alternative system (AIPS-E) using cytogenetic aberrations instead of palpable lymphadenopathy. This system yielded 5-year TTFT of 14%, 40%, and 72%. These results were externally validated in 388 Binet A patients from five Czech centres; the 5-year TTFT was 16%, 37%, and 80% (C-statistic 0·74). In conclusion, we have successfully validated the IPS-E score for patients with early stage CLL. In addition, we propose a modified scoring system, the AIPS-E, combining IGHV, fluorescence in situ hybridisation, and ALC.

Low-dose fludarabine and cyclophosphamide combined with rituximab in the first-line treatment of elderly/comorbid patients with chronic lymphocytic leukaemia/small lymphocytic lymphoma (CLL/SLL): long-term results of project Q-lite by the Czech CLL Study Group.

Therapeutic options used to be very limited for treatment-naïve elderly/comorbid patients with chronic lymphocytic leukaemia/small lymphocytic lymphoma (CLL/SLL) before the introduction of chemo-immunotherapy. Because dose-reduced fludarabine-based regimens yielded promising results, the Czech CLL Study Group initiated a prospective observational study to assess safety and efficacy of low-dose fludarabine and cyclophosphamide combined with rituximab (FCR) in elderly/comorbid patients. Between March 2009 and July 2012, we enrolled 107 patients considered ineligible for full-dose FCR (median age, 70 years; median Cumulative Illness Rating Scale score, 5; median creatinine clearance, 69 ml/min). Notably, 77% patients had unfavourable biological prognosis [unmutated immunoglobulin heavy-chain variable-region gene (IGHV), 74%; deletion 17p, 9%). Fludarabine was reduced to 12 mg/m2 intravenously (iv) or 20 mg/m2 orally on days 1-3 and cyclophosphamide to 150 mg/m2 iv/orally on days 1-3. Grade 3-4 neutropenia occurred in 56% of the patients, but there were serious infections in only 15%. The median progression-free survival was 29 months, but was markedly longer in patients with mutated IGHV (median 53 months), especially in absence of del 11q or 17p (median 74 months). Low-dose FCR is a well-tolerated and effective first-line regimen for selected elderly/comorbid patients with CLL/SLL with favourable biology. The study was registered at clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02156726).

Rituximab, Cyclophosphamide and Dexamethasone (RCD) Chemoimmunotherapy for Relapsed Chronic Lymphocytic Leukaemia.

High doses of corticosteroids in combination with rituximab remain an alternative in the treatment in relapsed or refractory chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (CLL) in the current era of targeted therapies. This study retrospectively evaluates the efficacy of an RCD (rituximab, cyclophosphamide and dexamethasone) regimen in the treatment of 51 patients with relapsed CLL (median age, 72 years). Unfavourable prognostic features, such as Rai stage III/IV, unmutated IGHV, del11q, TP53 mutation/deletion, complex karyotype and bulky lymphadenopathy, were frequent. The overall response or complete remission was of 57% and 7%, respectively, and the median progression-free survival (PFS) was of 12.3 months, median time to next treatment 23.1 months and median overall survival 39.2 months. Significant independent predictors of shorter PFS were TP53 deletion/mutation, advanced Rai stage and ≥2 previous lines of treatment. The incidence of neutropenia grade ≥ 3 was of 13%. Serious (CTCAE grade 3-5) infections were found in 20% of patients. Steroid-induced diabetes or diabetes decompensation occurred in 20% patients. Treatment-related adverse events resulted in RCD dose reduction in 35% of patients. In comparison with a historical R-Dex patient group, the treatment response and/or toxicity in our group was largely similar. However, the substantial differences in the baseline clinical characteristics of the groups may affect this comparison. In conclusion, the RCD regimen is an active, time-limited therapeutic strategy for elderly patients with relapsed CLL. Further, the results of our analysis indicate that the addition of cyclophosphamide to the R-Dex regimen maintains a similar efficacy, even after 50% reduction in the dexamethasone dose.

Real-world data on efficacy and safety of obinutuzumab plus chlorambucil, rituximab plus chlorambucil, and rituximab plus bendamustine in the frontline treatment of chronic lymphocytic leukemia: The GO-CLLEAR Study by the Czech CLL Study Group.

Until recently, a combination of anti-CD20 antibody plus less intensive chemotherapy was a standard of care in elderly population with previously untreated chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). The aim of this observational study was to retrospectively assess efficacy and safety of obinutuzumab + chlorambucil (G-Clb), rituximab + chlorambucil (R-Clb), and bendamustine + rituximab (BR) given as the frontline therapy within routine practice. The final analyzed dataset included 398 consecutive CLL patients from 10 hematology centers cooperating within the Czech CLL Study Group: 63 treated with G-Clb, 78 with R-Clb, and 257 with BR. There were no significant differences in prognostic and predictive markers among the groups. On the contrary, median age at the start of therapy and cumulative illness rating scale (CIRS) score was significantly higher in R-Clb group. Obinutuzumab plus chlorambucil regimen was preferably offered to elderly patients (compared to BR) with less severe comorbidities and lower CIRS score (compared to R-Clb). A time period when a treatment was indicated had also a strong impact on the choice of the regimen. The overall response rate reached 76% (30% complete remissions, CRs) in G-Clb, 75% (22% CRs) in R-Clb, and 85% (47% CRs) in BR group. Median event-free survival was 49.0 months for G-Clb, 20.3 months for R-Clb, and 37.0 months for BR group. Neutropenia grade ≥ 3 developed in 43% of G-Clb, 31% of R-Clb and in 49% of BR patients, grade ≥ 3 infections were recorded in 17% of G-Clb, 6.4% of R-Clb, and 17% of BR patients. In conclusion, real-world therapeutic activity of G-Clb appears to be at least comparable to prospective clinical trial data. R-Clb yields relatively good results in very old and severely comorbid patients.

Single-agent ibrutinib in RESONATE-2™ and RESONATE™ versus treatments in the real-world PHEDRA databases for patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia.

After analyzing treatment patterns in chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) (objective 1), we investigated the relative effectiveness of ibrutinib versus other commonly used treatments (objective 2) in patients with treatment-naïve and relapsed/refractory CLL, comparing patient-level data from two randomized registration trials with two real-world databases. Hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated using a multivariate Cox proportional hazards model, adjusted for differences in baseline characteristics. Rituximab-containing regimens were often prescribed in clinical practice. The most frequently prescribed regimens were fludarabine + cyclophosphamide + rituximab (FCR, 29.3%), bendamustine + rituximab (BR, 17.7%), and other rituximab-containing regimens (22.0%) in the treatment-naïve setting (n = 604), other non-FCR/BR rituximab-containing regimens (38.7%) and non-rituximab-containing regimens (28.5%) in the relapsed/refractory setting (n = 945). Adjusted HRs (95% CI) for progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS), respectively, with ibrutinib versus real-world regimens were 0.23 (0.14-0.37; p < 0.0001) and 0.40 (0.22-0.76; p = 0.0048) in the treatment-naïve setting, and 0.21 (0.16-0.27; p < 0.0001) and 0.29 (0.21-0.41; p < 0.0001) in the relapsed/refractory setting. When comparing real-world use of ibrutinib (n = 53) versus other real-world regimens in relapsed/refractory CLL (objective 3), adjusted HRs (95% CI) were 0.37 (0.22-0.63; p = 0.0003) for PFS and 0.53 (0.27-1.03; p < 0.0624) for OS. This adjusted analysis, based on nonrandomized patient data, suggests ibrutinib to be more effective than other commonly used regimens for CLL.

Efficacy of bendamustine and rituximab as first salvage treatment in chronic lymphocytic leukemia and indirect comparison with ibrutinib: a GIMEMA, ERIC and UK CLL FORUM study.

We performed an observational study on the efficacy of ben-damustine and rituximab (BR) as first salvage regimen in chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). In an intention-to-treat analysis including 237 patients, the median progression-free survival (PFS) was 25 months. The presence of del(17p), unmutated IGHV and advanced stage were associated with a shorter PFS at multivariate analysis. The median time-to-next treatment was 31.3 months. Front-line treatment with a chemoimmunotherapy regimen was the only predictive factor for a shorter time to next treatment at multivariate analysis. The median overall survival (OS) was 74.5 months. Advanced disease stage (i.e. Rai stage III-IV or Binet stage C) and resistant disease were the only parameters significantly associated with a shorter OS. Grade 3-5 infections were recorded in 6.3% of patients. A matched-adjusted indirect comparison with ibrutinib given second-line within Named Patient Programs in the United Kingdom and in Italy was carried out with OS as objective end point. When restricting the analysis to patients with intact 17p who had received chemoimmunotherapy in first line, there was no difference in OS between patients treated with ibrutinib (63% alive at 36 months) and patients treated with BR (74.4% alive at 36 months). BR is an efficacious first salvage regimen in CLL in a real-life population, including the elderly and unfit patients. BR and ibrutinib may be equally effective in terms of OS when used as first salvage treatment in patients without 17p deletion.

Idelalisib or placebo in combination with bendamustine and rituximab in patients with relapsed or refractory chronic lymphocytic leukaemia: interim results from a phase 3, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

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.

A phase 2, multicenter study investigating ofatumumab and bendamustine combination in patients with untreated or relapsed CLL.

The purpose of this study is to assess the safety and efficacy of the combination of ofatumumab and bendamustine in patients with previously untreated or relapsed chronic lymphocytic leukemia. Patients received IV ofatumumab (cycle 1: 300 mg day 1 and 1,000 mg day 8; cycles 2-6: 1,000 mg on day 1 every 28 days) and IV bendamustine 90 mg m(-2) (previously untreated) or 70 mg m(-2) (relapsed) on days 1 and 2 of each 28-day cycle, for up to 6 cycles. Forty-four previously untreated and 53 relapsed patients were enrolled. Median age was 62.5 years (previously untreated) and 68 years (relapsed); relapsed patients had received a median of 1 (range 1-11) prior therapy. The investigator-assessed overall response rate was 95% (43% complete response [CR]) for the previously untreated, and 74% (11% CR) for the relapsed patients. The regimen was well tolerated with 89% (previously untreated) and 85% (relapsed patients) receiving all 6 cycles. No unexpected toxicities were reported. Grade 3/4 events occurred in 57% of previously untreated, and 72% of relapsed patients. At ∼29 months' follow-up, the median progression-free survival (PFS) was not reached for the previously untreated population, and the 28-month PFS estimate was 72.3%. The median PFS for the relapsed population was 22.5 months (95% CI: 14.0-27.3 months). The combination of ofatumumab and bendamustine was well tolerated and effective in these previously untreated or relapsed populations. Am. J. Hematol. 91:900-906, 2016. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Ofatumumab maintenance versus observation in relapsed chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (PROLONG): an open-label, multicentre, randomised phase 3 study.

BACKGROUND: Ofatumumab is a human anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody that has proven efficacy as monotherapy in refractory chronic lymphocytic leukaemia. We assessed the efficacy and safety of ofatumumab maintenance treatment versus observation for patients in remission after re-induction treatment for relapsed chronic lymphocytic leukaemia. METHODS: This open-label, multicentre, randomised phase 3 study enrolled patients aged 18 years or older from 130 centres in 24 countries who had chronic lymphocytic leukaemia in complete or partial remission after second-line or third-line treatment. Eligible patients had a WHO performance status of 0-2, had a response assessment within the previous 3 months, did not have refractory disease, autoimmune haemolytic anaemia requiring treatment, chronic or active infection requiring treatment, and had not previously received maintenance treatment or autologous or allogeneic stem-cell transplant. Using a randomisation list generated by a central computerised system and an interactive voice recognition system, we randomly assigned (1:1) patients to receive ofatumumab (300 mg followed by 1000 mg 1 week later and every 8 weeks for up to 2 years) or undergo observation. Randomisation was stratified by number and type of previous treatment and remission status after induction treatment (block size of four). Treatment assignment was open label. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population. We report the results of a prespecified interim analysis after two-thirds of the planned study events (disease progression or death) had happened. This trial is closed to accrual but follow-up is ongoing. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00802737. FINDINGS: Between May 6, 2010, and June 19, 2014, we enrolled 474 patients: 238 patients were randomly assigned to receive ofatumumab maintenance treatment and 236 to undergo observation. One (<1%) patient in the ofatumumab group did not receive the allocated intervention (withdrawal of consent). The median follow-up was 19·1 months (IQR 10·3-28·8). Progression-free survival was improved in patients assigned to the ofatumumab group (29·4 months, 95% CI 26·2-34·2) compared with those assigned to observation (15·2 months, 11·8-18·8; hazard ratio 0·50, 95% CI 0·38-0·66; p<0·0001). The most common grade 3 or higher adverse events up to 60 days after last treatment were neutropenia (56 [24%] of 237 patients in the ofatumumab group vs 23 [10%] of 237 in the observation group) and infections (31 [13%] vs 20 [8%]). 20 (8%) of 237 patients in the ofatumumab group and three (1%) of 237 patients in the observation group had adverse events that led to permanent discontinuation of treatment. Up to 60 days after last treatment, two deaths related to adverse events occurred in the ofatumumab treatment group and five deaths related to adverse events occurred in the observation group; no deaths were attributed to the study drug. INTERPRETATION: These data are important for the development of optimum maintenance strategies in patients with relapsed chronic lymphocytic leukaemia, notably in the present era of targeted drugs, many of which are to be used until progression.

Ofatumumab retreatment and maintenance in fludarabine-refractory chronic lymphocytic leukaemia patients.

There are limited data on retreatment with monoclonal antibodies (mAb) in patients with chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (CLL). In a pivotal study, ofatumumab (human anti-CD20 mAb) monotherapy demonstrated a 47% objective response rate (ORR) in fludarabine refractory CLL patients. From this study, a subset of 29 patients who had at least stable disease and then progressed were retreated with eight weekly ofatumumab infusions (induction treatment period), followed by monthly infusions for up to 2 years (maintenance treatment period). The ORR after 8 weeks of induction retreatment was 45% and 24% had continued disease control after maintenance at 52 weeks. Efficacy and safety of the retreated patients were compared with their initial results in the pivotal study. Response duration was 24.1 months vs. 6.8 months; time to next therapy was 14.8 months vs. 12.3 months; and progression-free survival was 7.4 months vs. 7.9 months (medians). Upon retreatment, 72% had infusion reactions, mostly Grade 1-2. Three patients had fatal infections. In summary, ofatumumab retreatment and maintenance therapy was feasible in patients with heavily pretreated CLL and appeared to result in more durable disease control than initial ofatumumab treatment in this subset of patients who may have a more favourable disease profile.

Ofatumumab in poor-prognosis chronic lymphocytic leukemia: a phase IV, non-interventional, observational study from the European Research Initiative on Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia.

We report the largest retrospective, phase IV non-interventional, observational study of ofatumumab therapy in heavily pre-treated patients with poor-prognosis chronic lymphocytic leukemia. Total number of patients was 103; median age was 65 years (range 39-85). Median number of prior lines of therapy was 4 (range 1-13), including, in most cases, rituximab-, fludarabine- and alemtuzumab-based regimens; 13 patients had been allografted. Of 113 adverse events, 28 (29%) were considered to be directly related to ofatumumab. Grade 3-4 toxicities included neutropenia (10%), thrombocytopenia (5%), anemia (3%), pneumonia (17%), and fever (3%). Two heavily pre-treated patients developed progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy. On an intention-to-treat analysis, the overall response rate was 22% (3 complete response, 1 incomplete complete response). Median progression-free and overall survival times were 5 and 11 months, respectively. This study confirms in a daily-life setting the feasibility and acceptable toxicity of ofatumumab treatment in advanced chronic lymphocytic leukemia. The complete response rate, however, was low. Therefore, treatment with ofatumumab should be moved to earlier phases of the disease. Ideally, this should be done in combination with other agents, as recently approved for ofatumumab plus chlorambucil as front-line treatment for patients unfit for fludarabine. This study is registered at clinicaltrials.gov identifier:01453062.

Ofatumumab added to dexamethasone in patients with relapsed or refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia: Results from a phase II study.

The treatment of relapsed/refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) remains a challenging clinical issue. An important treatment option is the use of high-dose corticosteroids. The purpose of this clinical trial was to determine the efficacy and toxicity of an ofatumumab-dexamethasone (O-Dex) combination in relapsed or refractory CLL. The trial was an open-label, multicenter, nonrandomized, Phase II study. The O-Dex regimen consisted of intravenous ofatumumab (Cycle 1: 300 mg on day 1, 2,000 mg on days 8, 15, and 22; Cycles 2-6: 1,000 mg on days 1, 8, 15, and 22) and oral dexamethasone (40 mg on days 1-4 and 15-18; Cycles 1-6). The O-Dex regimen was given until best response, or a maximum of six cycles. Thirty-three patients (pts) were recruited. Twenty-four (73%) pts completed at least three cycles of therapy. The remaining nine pts were prematurely discontinued owing to Grade 3/4 infections (seven pts), disease progression (one pt), or uncontrollable diabetes mellitus (one pt). Overall response rates/complete remissions (ORR/CR) were achieved in 22/5 pts (67/15%). The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 10 months. In pts with p53 defects (n = 8), ORR/CR were achieved in 5/2 pts (63/25%) with a median PFS of 10.5 months. The median overall survival (OS) was 34 months. The Grades 3-5 infectious toxicity in 33% of pts represented the most frequent side effect during the treatment period. In conclusion, the O-Dex regimen shows a relatively high ORR and CR with promising findings for PFS and OS. The study was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01310101).

[Rituximab infusion-related toxicity in patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia]. / Infuzní toxicita rituximabu u nemocných s chronickou lymfocytární leukemií.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Rituximab in combination with chemotherapy is an effective treatment of patients (pts) with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). The most frequent adverse event of rituximab is infusion-related toxicity, e.g. cytokine-release syndrome that occurs usually during the first infusion. However, there is scarce data on feasibility and tolerability of rituximab infusions in CLL outside clinical trials. Therefore, we performed a single-center retrospective analysis of the frequency of rituximab infusion-related adverse events during the first- and the second line CLL treatment administered in the routine practice. We also analyzed its relation to parameters of tumor load and possible association with treatment efficacy. The safety of rapid infusion of rituximab in CLL pts was also evaluated. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We analyzed 108 pts with CLL treated with rituximab-containing regimens between March 2005 and May 2011 at our institution. The most common first-line regimens (n = 66, 47 males, median age 63 years) were FCR (43 pts) and low-dose FCR (13 pts); 10 pts were treated by other protocols. Forty-two pts (32 males, median age, 65 years) underwent second line treatment: 18 pts rituximab-dexamethasone, 7 pts FCR, 7 pts low-dose FCR and 10 pts other regimens. Intravenous hydration (2000 ml daily on days 0 and 1 of cycle), allopurinol 300-600 mg p. o. daily and premedication with methylprednisolone 80 mg i. v., acetaminophen 1000 mg p. o. and bluepine 1 mg i. v. were administered before rituximab infusion. Rituximab was given by fractionated infusion (100 mg for 2 hours, then if tolerated well, the rest of the dose with infusion rate escalation from 100 mg/hour up to 400 mg/hour) at the dose of 375 mg/m2 in the first cycle. Subsequent doses (500 mg/m²) were administered by rapid-infusion protocol. RESULTS: Rituximab infusion-related toxicity occurred in 32 % pts (n = 21) during the first line treatment and 19% pts (n = 8) during the second line treatment. Adverse events were predominantly mild and NCI CTCAE grade III/IV occurred rarely (3% in the first line, 2% in the second line). Infusion toxicity manifested predominantly as rigors, chills, fever and hypotension. All patients with adverse events could finish rituximab infusion as initially planned on the same day. Treatment response analysis did not demonstrate statistically significant differences between patients with and without rituximab infusion toxicity. Patients who developed rituximab infusion toxicity had higher absolute lymphocyte count (first line, 87 vs 56 × 109/l, p = 0.21; second line, 101 vs 14 × 109/l, p = 0.043). At the median follow-up of 36 months, there were no statistically significant differences in PFS or OS in both cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: Rituximab infusion-related toxicity in pts with CLL is relatively frequent (32%). However, occurrence of infusion-related symptoms can be reduced by proper premedication and severe adverse events are uncommon. In our experience, all patients were able to receive the planned dose of rituximab. Subsequent doses of rituximab could be safely administered by rapid-infusion protocol. We did not find statistically significant association between rituximab infusion toxicity and effectiveness of treatment.