Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia Therapy Guided by Measurable Residual Disease.

BACKGROUND: The combination of ibrutinib and venetoclax has been shown to improve outcomes in patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) as compared with chemoimmunotherapy. Whether ibrutinib-venetoclax and personalization of treatment duration according to measurable residual disease (MRD) is more effective than fludarabine-cyclophosphamide-rituximab (FCR) is unclear. METHODS: In this phase 3, multicenter, randomized, controlled, open-label platform trial involving patients with untreated CLL, we compared ibrutinib-venetoclax and ibrutinib monotherapy with FCR. In the ibrutinib-venetoclax group, after 2 months of ibrutinib, venetoclax was added for up to 6 years of therapy. The duration of ibrutinib-venetoclax therapy was defined by MRD assessed in peripheral blood and bone marrow and was double the time taken to achieve undetectable MRD. The primary end point was progression-free survival in the ibrutinib-venetoclax group as compared with the FCR group, results that are reported here. Key secondary end points were overall survival, response, MRD, and safety. RESULTS: A total of 523 patients were randomly assigned to the ibrutinib-venetoclax group or the FCR group. At a median of 43.7 months, disease progression or death had occurred in 12 patients in the ibrutinib-venetoclax group and 75 patients in the FCR group (hazard ratio, 0.13; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.07 to 0.24; P<0.001). Death occurred in 9 patients in the ibrutinib-venetoclax group and 25 patients in the FCR group (hazard ratio, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.15 to 0.67). At 3 years, 58.0% of the patients in the ibrutinib-venetoclax group had stopped therapy owing to undetectable MRD. After 5 years of ibrutinib-venetoclax therapy, 65.9% of the patients had undetectable MRD in the bone marrow and 92.7% had undetectable MRD in the peripheral blood. The risk of infection was similar in the ibrutinib-venetoclax group and the FCR group. The percentage of patients with cardiac serious adverse events was higher in the ibrutinib-venetoclax group than in the FCR group (10.7% vs. 0.4%). CONCLUSIONS: MRD-directed ibrutinib-venetoclax improved progression-free survival as compared with FCR, and results for overall survival also favored ibrutinib-venetoclax. (Funded by Cancer Research UK and others; FLAIR ISRCTN Registry number, ISRCTN01844152; EudraCT number, 2013-001944-76.).

Combination Targeted Therapy in Relapsed Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma.

BACKGROUND: The identification of oncogenic mutations in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) has led to the development of drugs that target essential survival pathways, but whether targeting multiple survival pathways may be curative in DLBCL is unknown. METHODS: We performed a single-center, phase 1b-2 study of a regimen of venetoclax, ibrutinib, prednisone, obinutuzumab, and lenalidomide (ViPOR) in relapsed or refractory DLBCL. In phase 1b, which included patients with DLBCL and indolent lymphomas, four dose levels of venetoclax were evaluated to identify the recommended phase 2 dose, with fixed doses of the other four drugs. A phase 2 expansion in patients with germinal-center B-cell (GCB) and non-GCB DLBCL was performed. ViPOR was administered every 21 days for six cycles. RESULTS: In phase 1b of the study, involving 20 patients (10 with DLBCL), a single dose-limiting toxic effect of grade 3 intracranial hemorrhage occurred, a result that established venetoclax at a dose of 800 mg as the recommended phase 2 dose. Phase 2 included 40 patients with DLBCL. Toxic effects that were observed among all the patients included grade 3 or 4 neutropenia (in 24% of the cycles), thrombocytopenia (in 23%), anemia (in 7%), and febrile neutropenia (in 1%). Objective responses occurred in 54% of 48 evaluable patients with DLBCL, and complete responses occurred in 38%; complete responses were exclusively in patients with non-GCB DLBCL and high-grade B-cell lymphoma with rearrangements of MYC and BCL2 or BCL6 (or both). Circulating tumor DNA was undetectable in 33% of the patients at the end of ViPOR therapy. With a median follow-up of 40 months, 2-year progression-free survival and overall survival were 34% (95% confidence interval [CI], 21 to 47) and 36% (95% CI, 23 to 49), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with ViPOR was associated with durable remissions in patients with specific molecular DLBCL subtypes and was associated with mainly reversible adverse events. (Funded by the Intramural Research Program of the National Cancer Institute and the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences of the National Institutes of Health and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03223610.).

Adjunctive Intravenous Argatroban or Eptifibatide for Ischemic Stroke.

BACKGROUND: Intravenous thrombolysis is a standard treatment of acute ischemic stroke. The efficacy and safety of combining intravenous thrombolysis with argatroban (an anticoagulant agent) or eptifibatide (an antiplatelet agent) are unclear. METHODS: We conducted a phase 3, three-group, adaptive, single-blind, randomized, controlled clinical trial at 57 sites in the United States. Patients with acute ischemic stroke who had received intravenous thrombolysis within 3 hours after symptom onset were assigned to receive intravenous argatroban, eptifibatide, or placebo within 75 minutes after the initiation of thrombolysis. The primary efficacy outcome, the utility-weighted 90-day modified Rankin scale score (range, 0 to 10, with higher scores reflecting better outcomes), was assessed by means of centralized adjudication. The primary safety outcome was symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage within 36 hours after randomization. RESULTS: A total of 514 patients were assigned to receive argatroban (59 patients), eptifibatide (227 patients), or placebo (228 patients). All the patients received intravenous thrombolysis (70% received alteplase, and 30% received tenecteplase), and 225 patients (44%) underwent endovascular thrombectomy. At 90 days, the mean (±SD) utility-weighted modified Rankin scale scores were 5.2±3.7 with argatroban, 6.3±3.2 with eptifibatide, and 6.8±3.0 with placebo. The posterior probability that argatroban was better than placebo was 0.002 (posterior mean difference in utility-weighted modified Rankin scale score, -1.51±0.51) and that eptifibatide was better than placebo was 0.041 (posterior mean difference, -0.50±0.29). The incidence of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage was similar in the three groups (4% with argatroban, 3% with eptifibatide, and 2% with placebo). Mortality at 90 days was higher in the argatroban group (24%) and the eptifibatide group (12%) than in the placebo group (8%). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with acute ischemic stroke treated with intravenous thrombolysis within 3 hours after symptom onset, adjunctive treatment with intravenous argatroban or eptifibatide did not reduce poststroke disability and was associated with increased mortality. (Funded by the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke; MOST ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03735979.).

Seven-year outcomes of venetoclax-ibrutinib therapy in mantle cell lymphoma: durable responses and treatment-free remissions.

ABSTRACT: In the phase 2 clinical trial (AIM) of venetoclax-ibrutinib, 24 patients with mantle cell lymphoma (MCL; 23 with relapsed/refractory [R/R] disease) received ibrutinib 560 mg and venetoclax 400 mg both once daily. High complete remission (CR) and measurable residual disease negative (MRD-negative) CR rates were previously reported. With median survivor follow-up now exceeding 7 years, we report long-term results. Treatment was initially continuous, with elective treatment interruption (ETI) allowed after protocol amendment for patients in MRD-negative CR. For R/R MCL, the estimated 7-year progression-free survival (PFS) was 30% (95% confidence interval [CI], 14-49; median, 28 months; 95% CI, 13-82) and overall survival (OS) was 43% (95% CI, 23-62; median, 32 months; 95% CI, 15 to not evaluable). Eight patients in MRD-negative CR entered ETI for a median of 58 months (95% CI, 37-79), with 4 experiencing disease recurrence. Two of 3 reattained CR on retreatment. Time-to-treatment failure (TTF), which excluded progression in ETI for those reattaining response, was 39% overall and 68% at 7 years for responders. Beyond 56 weeks, grade ≥3 and serious adverse events were uncommon. Newly emergent or increasing cardiovascular toxicity were not observed beyond 56 weeks. We demonstrate long-term durable responses and acceptable toxicity profile of venetoclax-ibrutinib in R/R MCL and show feasibility of treatment interruption while maintaining ongoing disease control. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT02471391.

Fixed-duration pirtobrutinib plus venetoclax with or without rituximab in relapsed/refractory CLL: the phase 1b BRUIN trial.

ABSTRACT: Pirtobrutinib is a highly selective, noncovalent (reversible) Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitor (BTKi). Patients with relapsed or refractory (R/R) chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) were treated with fixed-duration pirtobrutinib plus venetoclax (PV) or pirtobrutinib plus venetoclax and rituximab (PVR) in this phase 1b trial. Prior covalent BTKi therapy was allowed, but not prior treatment with venetoclax. Patients were assigned to receive PV (n = 15) or PVR (n = 10) for 25 cycles. Most patients (68%) had received prior covalent BTKi therapy. At the data cutoff date, the median time on study was 27.0 months for PV and 23.3 months for PVR. Overall response rates were 93.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 68.1-99.8) for PV and 100% (95% CI, 69.2-100.0) for PVR, with 10 complete responses (PV: 7; PVR: 3). After 12 cycles of treatment, 85.7% (95% CI, 57.2-98.2) of PV and 90.0% (95% CI, 55.5-99.7) of PVR patients achieved undetectable minimal residual disease (<10-4) in peripheral blood. Progression-free survival at 18 months was 92.9% (95% CI, 59.1-99.0) for PV patients and 80.0% (95% CI, 40.9-94.6) for PVR patients. No dose-limiting toxicities were observed during the 5-week assessment period. The most common grade ≥3 adverse events (AEs) for all patients included neutropenia (52%) and anemia (16%). AEs led to dose reduction in 3 patients and discontinuation in 2. In conclusion, fixed-duration PV or PVR was well tolerated and had promising efficacy in patients with R/R CLL, including patients previously treated with a covalent BTKi. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT03740529.

Two Phase 3 Trials of Baricitinib for Alopecia Areata.

BACKGROUND: Alopecia areata is an autoimmune condition characterized by rapid hair loss in the scalp, eyebrows, and eyelashes, for which treatments are limited. Baricitinib, an oral, selective, reversible inhibitor of Janus kinases 1 and 2, may interrupt cytokine signaling implicated in the pathogenesis of alopecia areata. METHODS: We conducted two randomized, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trials (BRAVE-AA1 and BRAVE-AA2) involving adults with severe alopecia areata with a Severity of Alopecia Tool (SALT) score of 50 or higher (range, 0 [no scalp hair loss] to 100 [complete scalp hair loss]). Patients were randomly assigned in a 3:2:2 ratio to receive once-daily baricitinib at a dose of 4 mg, baricitinib at a dose of 2 mg, or placebo. The primary outcome was a SALT score of 20 or less at week 36. RESULTS: We enrolled 654 patients in the BRAVE-AA1 trial and 546 in the BRAVE-AA2 trial. The estimated percentage of patients with a SALT score of 20 or less at week 36 was 38.8% with 4-mg baricitinib, 22.8% with 2-mg baricitinib, and 6.2% with placebo in BRAVE-AA1 and 35.9%, 19.4%, and 3.3%, respectively, in BRAVE-AA2. In BRAVE-AA1, the difference between 4-mg baricitinib and placebo was 32.6 percentage points (95% confidence interval [CI], 25.6 to 39.5), and the difference between 2-mg baricitinib and placebo was 16.6 percentage points (95% CI, 9.5 to 23.8) (P<0.001 for each dose vs. placebo). In BRAVE-AA2, the corresponding values were 32.6 percentage points (95% CI, 25.6 to 39.6) and 16.1 percentage points (95% CI, 9.1 to 23.2) (P<0.001 for each dose vs. placebo). Secondary outcomes for baricitinib at a dose of 4 mg but not at a dose of 2 mg generally favored baricitinib over placebo. Acne, elevated levels of creatine kinase, and increased levels of low- and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol were more common with baricitinib than with placebo. CONCLUSIONS: In two phase 3 trials involving patients with severe alopecia areata, oral baricitinib was superior to placebo with respect to hair regrowth at 36 weeks. Longer trials are required to assess the efficacy and safety of baricitinib for alopecia areata. (Funded by Eli Lilly under license from Incyte; BRAVE-AA1 and BRAVE-AA2 ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT03570749 and NCT03899259.).

Comparison of Vonoprazan Versus Intravenous Proton Pump Inhibitor for Prevention of High-Risk Peptic Ulcers Rebleeding After Successful Endoscopic Hemostasis: A Multicenter Randomized Noninferiority Trial.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: High-dose proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy has been recommended to prevent rebleeding of high-risk peptic ulcer (PU) after hemostasis. Vonoprazan has been proven to be noninferior to PPIs in various acid-related diseases. This study aimed to compare the efficacy of vonoprazan vs PPI for preventing high-risk PU rebleeding after hemostasis. METHODS: A multicenter, randomized, noninferiority study was conducted in 6 centers. Pre-endoscopic and endoscopic therapy were performed according to standard protocol. After successful hemostasis, patients with high-risk PU bleeding (Forrest class Ia/Ib, IIa/IIb) were randomized into 1:1 to receive vonoprazan (20 mg twice a day for 3 days, then 20 mg once a day for 28 days) or high-dose PPI (pantoprazole intravenous infusion 8 mg/h for 3 days, then omeprazole 20 mg twice a day for 28 days). The primary outcome was a 30-day rebleeding rate. Secondary outcomes included 3- and 7-day rebleeding rate, all-cause and bleeding-related mortality, rate of rescue therapy, blood transfusion, length of hospital stay, and safety. RESULTS: Of 194 patients, baseline characteristics, severity of bleeding, and stage of ulcers were comparable between the 2 groups. The 30-day rebleeding rates in vonoprazan and PPI groups were 7.1% (7 of 98) and 10.4% (10 of 96), respectively; noninferiority (within 10% margin) of vonoprazan to PPI was confirmed (%risk difference, -3.3; 95% confidence interval, -11.2 to 4.7; P < .001). The 3-day and 7-day rebleeding rates in the vonoprazan group remained noninferior to PPI (P < .001 by Farrington and Manning test). All secondary outcomes were also comparable between the 2 groups. CONCLUSION: In patients with high-risk PU bleeding, the efficacy of vonoprazan in preventing 30-day rebleeding was noninferior to intravenous PPI. (ClinicalTrials.gov, Number: NCT05005910).

Simplified Helicobacter pylori therapy for patients with penicillin allergy: a randomised controlled trial of vonoprazan-tetracycline dual therapy.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of vonoprazan and tetracycline (VT) dual therapy as first-line treatment for Helicobacter pylori infection in patients with penicillin allergy. METHODS: In this randomised controlled trial, treatment-naïve adults with H. pylori infection and penicillin allergy were randomised 1:1 to receive either open-label VT dual therapy (vonoprazan 20 mg two times per day+tetracycline 500 mg three times a day) or bismuth quadruple therapy (BQT; lansoprazole 30 mg two times per day+colloidal bismuth 150 mg three times a day+tetracycline 500 mg three times a day+metronidazole 400 mg three times a day) for 14 days. The primary outcome was non-inferiority in eradication rates in the VT dual group compared with the BQT group. Secondary outcomes included assessing adverse effects. RESULTS: 300 patients were randomised. The eradication rates in the VT group and the BQT group were: 92.0% (138/150, 95% CI 86.1% to 95.6%) and 89.3% (134/150, 95% CI 83.0% to 93.6%) in intention-to-treat analysis (difference 2.7%; 95% CI -4.6% to 10.0%; non-inferiority p=0.000); 94.5% (138/146, 95% CI 89.1% to 97.4%) and 93.1% (134/144, 95% CI 87.3% to 96.4%) in modified intention-to-treat analysis (difference 1.5%; 95% CI -4.9% to 8.0%; non-inferiority p=0.001); 95.1% (135/142, 95% CI 89.7% to 97.8%) and 97.7% (128/131, 95% CI 92.9% to 99.4%) in per-protocol analysis (difference 2.6%; 95% CI -2.9% to 8.3%; non-inferiority p=0.000). The treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were significantly lower in the VT group (14.0% vs 48.0%, p=0.000), with fewer treatment discontinuations due to TEAEs (2.0% vs 8.7%, p=0.010). CONCLUSIONS: VT dual therapy demonstrated efficacy and safety as a first-line treatment for H. pylori infection in the penicillin-allergic population, with comparable efficacy and a lower incidence of TEAEs compared with traditional BQT. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ChiCTR2300074693.

Activity of venetoclax in patients with relapsed or refractory chronic lymphocytic leukaemia: analysis of the VENICE-1 multicentre, open-label, single-arm, phase 3b trial.

BACKGROUND: Most patients with chronic lymphocytic leukaemia progress after treatment or retreatment with targeted therapy or chemoimmunotherapy and have limited subsequent treatment options. Response levels to the single-agent venetoclax in the relapsed setting is unknown. We aimed to assess venetoclax activity in patients with or without previous B-cell receptor-associated kinase inhibitor (BCRi) treatment. METHODS: This multicentre, open-label, single-arm, phase 3b trial (VENICE-1) assessed activity and safety of venetoclax monotherapy in adults with relapsed or refractory chronic lymphocytic leukaemia, stratified by previous exposure to a BCRi. Eligible participants were aged 18 years or older with previously treated relapsed or refractory chronic lymphocytic leukaemia. Presence of del(17p) or TP53 aberrations and previous BCRi treatment were permitted. Patients received 5-week ramp-up to 400 mg of oral venetoclax once daily and were treated for up to 108 weeks, with 2 years follow-up after discontinuation, or optional extended access. The primary activity endpoint was complete remission rate (complete remission or complete remission with incomplete marrow recovery) in BCRi-naive patients. Analyses used the intent-to-treat (ie, all enrolled patients, which coincided with those who received at least one dose of venetoclax). This study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02756611, and is complete. FINDINGS: Between June 22, 2016, and March 11, 2022, we enrolled 258 patients with relapsed or refractory chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (180 [70%] were male; 252 [98%] were White; 191 were BCRi-naive and 67 were BCRi-pretreated). Median follow-up in the overall cohort was 49·5 months (IQR 47·2-54·1), 49·2 months (47·2-53·2) in the BCRi-naive group, and 49·7 months (47·4-54·3) in the BCRi-pretreated group. Of 191 BCRi-naive patients, 66 (35%; 95% CI 27·8-41·8) had complete remission or complete remission with incomplete marrow recovery. 18 (27%; 95% CI 16·8-39·1) of 67 patients in the BCRi-pretreated group had complete remission or complete remission with incomplete marrow recovery. Grade 3 or worse treatment-emergent adverse events were reported in 203 (79%) and serious adverse events were reported in 136 (53%) of 258 patients in the overall cohort. The most common treatment-emergent adverse event was neutropenia (96 [37%]) and the most common and serious adverse event was pneumonia (21 [8%]). There were 13 (5%) deaths reported due to adverse events; one of these deaths (autoimmune haemolytic anaemia) was possibly related to venetoclax. No new safety signals were identified. INTERPRETATION: These data demonstrate deep and durable responses with venetoclax monotherapy in patients with relapsed or refractory chronic lymphocytic leukaemia, including BCRi-pretreated patients, suggesting that venetoclax monotherapy is an effective strategy for treating BCRi-naive and BCRi-pretreated patients. FUNDING: AbbVie.

Atezolizumab, venetoclax, and obinutuzumab combination in Richter transformation diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (MOLTO): a multicentre, single-arm, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: The diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) variant of Richter transformation (DLBCL-RT) is typically chemoresistant with poor prognosis. Aiming to explore a chemotherapy-free treatment combination that triggers anti-tumour immune responses, we conducted a phase 2 study of atezolizumab (a PD-L1 inhibitor) in combination with venetoclax and obinutuzumab in patients with DLBCL-RT. METHODS: This was a prospective, open-label, multicentre, single-arm, investigator-initiated, phase 2 study in 15 hospitals in Italy and Switzerland. Eligible patients had a confirmed diagnosis of chronic lymphocytic leukaemia or small lymphocytic lymphoma as per the International Workshop on Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia (IWCLL) 2008 criteria with biopsy-proven transformation to DLBCL; had not previously received treatment for DLBCL-RT, although they could have received chronic lymphocytic leukaemia therapies; were aged 18 years or older; and had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0-2. No previous treatment with any of the drugs in the triplet combination was allowed. Patients received 35 cycles of 21 days of intravenous obinutuzumab (100 mg on day 1, 900 mg on day 2, 1000 mg on day 8 and day 15 of cycle 1; 1000 mg on day 1 of cycles 2-8) and intravenous atezolizumab (1200 mg on day 2 of cycle 1 and 1200 mg on day 1 of cycles 2-18), and continuous oral venetoclax (ramp-up from 20 mg/day on day 15 of cycle 1 according to chronic lymphocytic leukaemia schedule, then 400 mg/day from day 1 of cycle 3 to day 21 of cycle 35). The primary endpoint was overall response rate at day 21 of cycle 6 in the intention-to-treat population. We considered an overall response rate of 67% or more to be clinically active, rejecting the null hypothesis of a response of 40% or less. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04082897, and has been completed. FINDINGS: Between Oct 9, 2019, and Oct 19, 2022, 28 patients were enrolled (12 [43%] male patients and 16 [57%] female patients). Median follow-up was 16·8 months (IQR 7·8-32·0). At cycle 6, 19 of 28 patients showed a response, yielding an overall response rate of 67·9% (95% CI 47·6-84·1). Treatment-emergent adverse events that were grade 3 or worse were reported in 17 (61%; 95% CI 40·6-78·5) of 28 patients, with neutropenia being the most frequent (11 [39%; 21·5-59·4] of 28 patients). Serious treatment-emergent adverse events were reported in eight (29%; 14·2-48·7) patients, which were most commonly infections (five [18%; 6·1-36·9] of 28 patients). There were two (7%) deaths attributable to adverse events during the study: one from sepsis and one from fungal pneumonia, which were not considered as directly treatment-related by the investigators. Six (21·4%) patients had immune-related adverse events, none of which led to discontinuation. No tumour lysis syndrome was observed. INTERPRETATION: The atezolizumab, venetoclax, and obinutuzumab triplet combination was shown to be active and safe, suggesting that this chemotherapy-free regimen could become a new first-line treatment approach in patients with DLBCL-RT. FUNDING: Roche.

Combination of dasatinib and venetoclax in newly diagnosed chronic phase chronic myeloid leukemia.

BACKGROUND: The dual inhibition of the BCR::ABL1 tyrosine kinase and BCL-2 could potentially deepen the response rates of chronic myeloid leukemia in chronic phase (CML-CP). This study evaluated the safety and efficacy of the combination of dasatinib and venetoclax. METHODS: In this phase 2 trial, patients with CML-CP or accelerated phase (clonal evolution) received dasatinib 50 mg/day for three courses; venetoclax was added in course 4 for 3 years. The initial venetoclax dose was 200 mg/day continuously but reduced later to 200 mg/day for 14 days, and to 100 mg/day for 7 days per course once a molecular response (MR)4.5 was achieved. After 3 years of combination, patients were maintained on single-agent dasatinib. The primary end point was the rate of major molecular response (MMR) by 12 months of combination. RESULTS: Sixty-five patients were treated. Their median age was 46 years (range, 23-73). By 12 months of combination, the MMR, MR4, and MR4.5 rates were 86%, 53%, and 45%, respectively. After a median follow-up of 42 months, the 4-year event-free and overall survival rates were 96% and 100%, respectively. Outcomes with the combination were comparable to historical outcomes with single-agent dasatinib (cumulative 12-months MMR rate of 79% with both strategies). The incidence of grade 3-4 neutropenia was 22% with the combination and 11% with single-agent dasatinib (p < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with dasatinib and venetoclax was safe and effective in CML-CP. The cumulative response rates with the combination were similar to those with single-agent dasatinib. Further follow-up is needed to evaluate the rates of durable deep molecular response and treatment-free remission.

Therapy with hypomethlyating agents/venetoclax in patients with newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukaemia requiring admission to the intensive care unit: Possible reduction in side effects with preserved efficacy.

Patients with newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukaemia and severe acute complications, such as respiratory failure or sepsis, suffer from a high mortality rate when induction chemotherapy is delivered in an ICU setting. The report by Liang et al. implies that less intensive therapy with hypomethylating agents/venetoclax results in a lower mortality and morbidity rate whereby preserving efficacy in this patient group. Commentary on: Liang et al. Venetoclax and hypomethylating agents in critically ill patients with newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia. Br J Haematol 2024;204:1219-1226.

Clinical outcomes of hypomethylating agents and venetoclax in newly diagnosed unfit and relapsed/refractory paediatric, adolescent and young adult acute myeloid leukaemia patients.

Venetoclax (VEN) combined with hypomethylating agents (HMA) decitabine or azacitidine is used for adult acute myeloid leukaemia (AML), but its application in paediatric, adolescent and young adult (AYA) AML lacks prospective studies. We performed a retrospective chart review of paediatric and AYA AML patients treated with HMA + VEN at Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Centre. Twenty-seven patients received 30 HMA + VEN treatment courses for relapsed/refractory (R/R, n = 21) or newly diagnosed (n = 9) AML due to ineligibility for intensive chemotherapy. The R/R cohort had high-risk cytomolecular genetic alterations and prior extensive treatments, with 50% (n = 9) of relapse patients (n = 18) having undergone haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT). Venetoclax treatment using the 400 mg adult exposure-equivelant dosing (AED) had a median duration of 21 days (range 7-30 days). Grade 3-4 toxicities included neutropenia (90%), anaemia (64%), thrombocytopenia (64%) and febrile neutropenia (44%). The overall complete remission (CR)/CR with incomplete blood count recovery (CRi) rate was 73% (77% minimal residual disease [MRD] negativity <0.1%), with 60% undergoing HSCT. Among newly diagnosed patients (n = 9), 89% achieved CR/CRi (78% MRD negativity) and 78% proceeded to HSCT. The R/R cohort (n = 21) showed a 67% CR/CRi rate (71% MRD negativity), with 52% undergoing HSCT. These findings support the safety and efficacy of HMA + VEN in paediatric/AYA AML, indicating it as a viable option for patients unfit for intensive chemotherapy. Further studies are necessary to determine optimal venetoclax dosing, chemotherapy combinations and pharmacokinetics in this population.

Abrocitinib versus Placebo or Dupilumab for Atopic Dermatitis.

BACKGROUND: The oral Janus kinase 1 (JAK1) inhibitor abrocitinib, which reduces interleukin-4 and interleukin-13 signaling, is being investigated for the treatment of atopic dermatitis. Data from trials comparing JAK1 inhibitors with monoclonal antibodies, such as dupilumab, that block interleukin-4 receptors are limited. METHODS: In a phase 3, double-blind trial, we randomly assigned patients with atopic dermatitis that was unresponsive to topical agents or that warranted systemic therapy (in a 2:2:2:1 ratio) to receive 200 mg or 100 mg of abrocitinib orally once daily, 300 mg of dupilumab subcutaneously every other week (after a loading dose of 600 mg), or placebo; all the patients received topical therapy. The primary end points were an Investigator's Global Assessment (IGA) response (defined as a score of 0 [clear] or 1 [almost clear] on the IGA [scores range from 0 to 4], with an improvement of ≥2 points from baseline) and an Eczema Area and Severity Index-75 (EASI-75) response (defined as ≥75% improvement from baseline in the score on the EASI [scores range from 0 to 72]) at week 12. The key secondary end points were itch response (defined as an improvement of ≥4 points in the score on the Peak Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale [scores range from 0 to 10]) at week 2 and IGA and EASI-75 responses at week 16. RESULTS: A total of 838 patients underwent randomization; 226 patients were assigned to the 200-mg abrocitinib group, 238 to the 100-mg abrocitinib group, 243 to the dupilumab group, and 131 to the placebo group. An IGA response at week 12 was observed in 48.4% of patients in the 200-mg abrocitinib group, 36.6% in the 100-mg abrocitinib group, 36.5% in the dupilumab group, and 14.0% in the placebo group (P<0.001 for both abrocitinib doses vs. placebo); an EASI-75 response at week 12 was observed in 70.3%, 58.7%, 58.1%, and 27.1%, respectively (P<0.001 for both abrocitinib doses vs. placebo). The 200-mg dose, but not the 100-mg dose, of abrocitinib was superior to dupilumab with respect to itch response at week 2. Neither abrocitinib dose differed significantly from dupilumab with respect to most other key secondary end-point comparisons at week 16. Nausea occurred in 11.1% of the patients in the 200-mg abrocitinib group and 4.2% of those in the 100-mg abrocitinib group, and acne occurred in 6.6% and 2.9%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In this trial, abrocitinib at a dose of either 200 mg or 100 mg once daily resulted in significantly greater reductions in signs and symptoms of moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis than placebo at weeks 12 and 16. The 200-mg dose, but not the 100-mg dose, of abrocitinib was superior to dupilumab with respect to itch response at week 2. Neither abrocitinib dose differed significantly from dupilumab with respect to most other key secondary end-point comparisons at week 16. (Funded by Pfizer; JADE COMPARE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03720470.).

A Randomized, Controlled Trial of the Pan-PPAR Agonist Lanifibranor in NASH.

BACKGROUND: Management of nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) is an unmet clinical need. Lanifibranor is a pan-PPAR (peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor) agonist that modulates key metabolic, inflammatory, and fibrogenic pathways in the pathogenesis of NASH. METHODS: In this phase 2b, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial, patients with noncirrhotic, highly active NASH were randomly assigned in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive 1200 mg or 800 mg of lanifibranor or placebo once daily for 24 weeks. The primary end point was a decrease of at least 2 points in the SAF-A score (the activity part of the Steatosis, Activity, Fibrosis [SAF] scoring system that incorporates scores for ballooning and inflammation) without worsening of fibrosis; SAF-A scores range from 0 to 4, with higher scores indicating more-severe disease activity. Secondary end points included resolution of NASH and regression of fibrosis. RESULTS: A total of 247 patients underwent randomization, of whom 103 (42%) had type 2 diabetes mellitus and 188 (76%) had significant (moderate) or advanced fibrosis. The percentage of patients who had a decrease of at least 2 points in the SAF-A score without worsening of fibrosis was significantly higher among those who received the 1200-mg dose, but not among those who received the 800-mg dose, of lanifibranor than among those who received placebo (1200-mg dose vs. placebo, 55% vs. 33%, P = 0.007; 800-mg dose vs. placebo, 48% vs. 33%, P = 0.07). The results favored both the 1200-mg and 800-mg doses of lanifibranor over placebo for resolution of NASH without worsening of fibrosis (49% and 39%, respectively, vs. 22%), improvement in fibrosis stage of at least 1 without worsening of NASH (48% and 34%, respectively, vs. 29%), and resolution of NASH plus improvement in fibrosis stage of at least 1 (35% and 25%, respectively, vs. 9%). Liver enzyme levels decreased and the levels of the majority of lipid, inflammatory, and fibrosis biomarkers improved in the lanifibranor groups. The dropout rate for adverse events was less than 5% and was similar across the trial groups. Diarrhea, nausea, peripheral edema, anemia, and weight gain occurred more frequently with lanifibranor than with placebo. CONCLUSIONS: In this phase 2b trial involving patients with active NASH, the percentage of patients who had a decrease of at least 2 points in the SAF-A score without worsening of fibrosis was significantly higher with the 1200-mg dose of lanifibranor than with placebo. These findings support further assessment of lanifibranor in phase 3 trials. (Funded by Inventiva Pharma; NATIVE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03008070.).

Baricitinib plus Remdesivir for Hospitalized Adults with Covid-19.

BACKGROUND: Severe coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) is associated with dysregulated inflammation. The effects of combination treatment with baricitinib, a Janus kinase inhibitor, plus remdesivir are not known. METHODS: We conducted a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial evaluating baricitinib plus remdesivir in hospitalized adults with Covid-19. All the patients received remdesivir (≤10 days) and either baricitinib (≤14 days) or placebo (control). The primary outcome was the time to recovery. The key secondary outcome was clinical status at day 15. RESULTS: A total of 1033 patients underwent randomization (with 515 assigned to combination treatment and 518 to control). Patients receiving baricitinib had a median time to recovery of 7 days (95% confidence interval [CI], 6 to 8), as compared with 8 days (95% CI, 7 to 9) with control (rate ratio for recovery, 1.16; 95% CI, 1.01 to 1.32; P = 0.03), and a 30% higher odds of improvement in clinical status at day 15 (odds ratio, 1.3; 95% CI, 1.0 to 1.6). Patients receiving high-flow oxygen or noninvasive ventilation at enrollment had a time to recovery of 10 days with combination treatment and 18 days with control (rate ratio for recovery, 1.51; 95% CI, 1.10 to 2.08). The 28-day mortality was 5.1% in the combination group and 7.8% in the control group (hazard ratio for death, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.39 to 1.09). Serious adverse events were less frequent in the combination group than in the control group (16.0% vs. 21.0%; difference, -5.0 percentage points; 95% CI, -9.8 to -0.3; P = 0.03), as were new infections (5.9% vs. 11.2%; difference, -5.3 percentage points; 95% CI, -8.7 to -1.9; P = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: Baricitinib plus remdesivir was superior to remdesivir alone in reducing recovery time and accelerating improvement in clinical status among patients with Covid-19, notably among those receiving high-flow oxygen or noninvasive ventilation. The combination was associated with fewer serious adverse events. (Funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04401579.).

Association Between Vonoprazan and the Risk of Gastric Cancer After Helicobacter pylori Eradication.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Potassium-competitive acid blockers (PCABs) have been increasingly used to treat upper gastrointestinal disorders, replacing proton pump inhibitors (PPIs). Whereas PPIs are associated with an increased risk of gastric cancer (GC) after Helicobacter pylori (Hp) eradication, it is uncertain whether PCABs carry the same risk. METHODS: Using a population-based claims database in Japan, we identified patients who were prescribed a clarithromycin-based first regimen of Hp eradication between 2015 and 2018. Patients who failed this regimen and those diagnosed with GC before or within 1 year after Hp eradication were excluded. We compared GC incidence between PCAB users and histamine type-2 receptor antagonist (H2RA) users, matching them on the basis of propensity scores calculated with considerations for age, sex, smoking, alcohol consumption, comorbidities, and co-administered medications. PCABs included only vonoprazan in this study. RESULTS: Among 54,055 patients, 568 (1.05%) developed GC during the follow-up period (mean, 3.65 years). The cumulative incidence of GC was 1.64% at 3 years, 2.02% at 4 years, and 2.36% at 5 years in PCAB users and 0.71% at 3 years, 1.04% at 4 years, and 1.22% at 5 years in H2RA users. The use of PCABs was associated with a higher GC risk (matched hazard ratio, 1.92; 95% confidence interval, 1.13-3.25; P = .016). Longer PCAB use and high-dose PCAB use were significantly associated with higher incidence of GC. Sensitivity analyses showed the risk of GC incidence among PCAB users was comparable with that of PPI users. CONCLUSIONS: The use of PCABs was associated with an increased risk of GC among Hp-eradicated patients, with duration/dose response effects.

Efficacy and Safety of Vonoprazan-Amoxicillin Dual Regimen With Varying Dose and Duration for Helicobacter pylori Eradication: A Multicenter, Prospective, Randomized Study.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Previous studies confirm vonoprazan-amoxicillin effectiveness for Helicobacter pylori. This study aims to investigate vonoprazan with varying amoxicillin dose and duration. METHODS: This multicenter, prospective, randomized controlled, noninferiority trial enrolled patients with treatment naive H pylori infection from 5 clinical centers. Eligible participants were randomly assigned to H-VA-10 (vonoprazan 20 mg twice a day (b.i.d.) + amoxicillin 750 mg 4 times a day, 10 days), L-VA-10 (vonoprazan 20 mg b.i.d. + amoxicillin 1000 mg b.i.d, 10 days), and H-VA-14 (vonoprazan 20 mg b.i.d + amoxicillin 750 mg 4 times a day, 14 days) in a 1:1:1 ratio. The eradication rate was assessed using the 13C-urea breath test at least 28 days after treatment. RESULTS: Of the 623 eligible patients, 516 patients were randomized. In both the intention-to-treat and per-protocol analyses, eradication rates were comparable between H-VA-10 and H-VA-14 groups (86.6% vs 89.5% and 90.9% vs 94.5%, P = .021 and .013 for noninferiority, respectively). However, eradication rates were significantly lower in the L-VA-10 group than the H-VA-14 group (79.7% vs 89.5% and 82.0% vs 94.5%, P = .488 and .759, respectively). Rates of study withdrawal, loss to follow-up, and adverse events were similar across study groups. CONCLUSIONS: H-VA-10 and H-VA-14 regimens provide satisfactory efficacy for H pylori infection, and the L-VA-10 regimen was inferior. CLINICALTRIALS: gov number: NCT05719831.

Phase 1 study of safety and tolerability of an oral contraceptive containing low-dose ethinyl oestradiol combined with glecaprevir/pibrentasvir treatment in healthy premenopausal women.

Glecaprevir/pibrentasvir (GLE/PIB) is an approved guideline-recommended chronic hepatitis C virus infection treatment. GLE/PIB coadministration with ethinyl oestradiol (EE) is not recommended in current labels owing to a Phase 1 study observing Grade ≥2 alanine aminotransferase (ALT) elevation in 2 out of 12 healthy women cotreated for 11 days with GLE/PIB and oral contraceptive (OC) containing 35 µg/250 µg EE/norgestimate. No Grade ≥2 elevation was observed with low-dose (20 µg) EE (n = 14). This Phase 1 study examined safety/tolerability of GLE/PIB coadministered with an OC containing low-dose EE using a larger sample size and longer treatment duration. Healthy premenopausal women were treated with EE/levonorgestrel alone (20/100 µg, Cycles 1-2), followed by coadministration with GLE/PIB (300/120 mg; Cycles 3-4). A safety criterion of special interest was a confirmed Grade ≥2 ALT elevation (>3× upper normal limit). Adverse events (AEs) and study drugs concentrations were examined. Of 85 enrolled women, 72 initiated combined GLE/PIB + EE/levonorgestrel treatment, 66 completed the study and 19 discontinued prematurely (non-safety reason, n = 16; AE [deemed unelated to GLE/PIB], n = 3). No participant met the safety criterion of special interest of confirmed Grade ≥2 ALT elevation. No serious/Grade ≥3 AEs were reported. Study drug concentrations were within the expected ranges. GLE/PIB in combination with an OC containing low-dose EE was generally well tolerated with no confirmed Grade ≥2 ALT elevation and no evidence of drug-induced liver injury. No pattern to the reported AEs and no new safety issues were identified. This was a Phase 1 study of healthy volunteers, not a registered clinical trial.

Venetoclax plus dose-adjusted R-EPOCH for Richter syndrome.

Richter syndrome (RS) of chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) is typically chemoresistant, with a poor prognosis. We hypothesized that the oral Bcl-2 inhibitor venetoclax could sensitize RS to chemoimmunotherapy and improve outcomes. We conducted a single-arm, investigator-sponsored, phase 2 trial of venetoclax plus dose-adjusted rituximab, etoposide, prednisone, vincristine, cyclophosphamide, and doxorubicin (VR-EPOCH) to determine the rate of complete response (CR). Patients received R-EPOCH for 1 cycle, then after count recovery, accelerated daily venetoclax ramp-up to 400 mg, then VR-EPOCH for up to 5 more 21-day cycles. Responders received venetoclax maintenance or cellular therapy off-study. Twenty-six patients were treated, and 13 of 26 (50%) achieved CR, with 11 achieving undetectable bone marrow minimal residual disease for CLL. Three additional patients achieved partial response (overall response rate, 62%). Median progression-free survival was 10.1 months, and median overall survival was 19.6 months. Hematologic toxicity included grade ≥3 neutropenia (65%) and thrombocytopenia (50%), with febrile neutropenia in 38%. No patients experienced tumor lysis syndrome with daily venetoclax ramp-up. VR-EPOCH is active in RS, with deeper, more durable responses than historical regimens. Toxicities from intensive chemoimmunotherapy and venetoclax were observed. Our data suggest that studies comparing venetoclax with chemoimmunotherapy to chemoimmunotherapy alone are warranted. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT03054896.