Kooperativer Bibliotheksverbund

In: Blood, American Society of Hematology, Vol. 134, No. Supplement_1 ( 2019-11-13), p. 841-841

Abstract: Introduction: Few treatment options are available to RBC transfusion-dependent pts with lower-risk MDS (LR-MDS) who are refractory/ineligible for erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs). Luspatercept is a first-in-class erythroid maturation agent that binds select TGF-β superfamily ligands to reduce aberrant Smad2/3 signaling and enhance late-stage erythropoiesis. In the phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled MEDALIST study (NCT02631070), luspatercept significantly reduced transfusion burden vs placebo. Longer-term efficacy analyses of the MEDALIST study (data cutoff Jan 7, 2019), including multiple responses, and safety are presented here. Methods: Eligible pts were ≥ 18 years of age with IPSS-R-defined Very low-, Low-, or Intermediate-risk MDS with RS (World Health Organization 2016 criteria); were refractory, intolerant, or unlikely to respond to ESAs (serum erythropoietin & gt; 200 U/L); and required regular RBC transfusions. Pts were randomized 2:1 to luspatercept (1.0 mg/kg titrated up to 1.75 mg/kg, if needed) or placebo, subcutaneously every 3 weeks (wks). This analysis assessed the achievement and number of individual response periods of RBC transfusion independence (RBC-TI) ≥ 8 wks. Clinical benefit, defined as achieving RBC-TI ≥ 8 wks and/or modified hematologic improvement-erythroid (HI-E) response per International Working Group 2006 criteria, was also assessed, along with total duration of clinical benefit (time from achieving clinical benefit to discontinuation due to loss of benefit, adverse events [AEs], or other reasons). Longer-term efficacy and safety were also evaluated. Results: Pts were assessed for RBC transfusion burden/8 wks in the 16 wks before randomization: 66 pts received 2 to & lt; 4 U RBCs (30.1% and 26.3% of pts receiving luspatercept and placebo, respectively), 64 received ≥ 4 to & lt; 6 U (26.8% and 30.2%, respectively), and 99 received ≥ 6 U (43.1% and 43.4%, respectively); both arms had a median baseline burden of 5 RBC U/8 wks. Compared with our previous analysis and earlier data cutoff of May 8, 2018 (Fenaux P, et al. Blood. 2018;132:1), we now report that as of Jan 7, 2019, 72 (47.1%) pts treated with luspatercept and 12 (15.8%) treated with placebo achieved RBC-TI ≥ 8 wks. Analysis of multiple response periods of RBC-TI ≥ 8 wks in the luspatercept responders (i.e. initial RBC-TI ≥ 8 wks, followed by transfusion, followed by another period of RBC-TI ≥ 8 wks) demonstrated that 48 (66.7%) pts had ≥ 2 separate response periods, 22 (30.6%) had ≥ 3, 12 (16.7%) had ≥ 4 , and 7 (9.7%) had ≥ 5. Of the 12 pts achieving RBC-TI ≥ 8 wks with placebo, 4 (33.3%) had ≥ 2 responses; none had & gt; 3. Overall, 48 (31.4%) pts receiving luspatercept and none receiving placebo remained on treatment as of the Jan 7, 2019 data cutoff. Median treatment duration was 50.9 (range 5.9-147.0) wks in pts receiving luspatercept vs 24.0 (range 7.4-103.0) wks in pts receiving placebo. Median duration of the longest period of RBC-TI ≥ 8 wks during Wks 1-48 was 30.6 (95% confidence interval [CI] 20.6-50.9) wks with luspatercept and 18.6 (95% CI 10.9-not evaluable) wks with placebo. Median total duration of clinical benefit was 83.6 and 26.8 wks for pts responding to luspatercept (n = 97) and placebo (n = 20), respective ly. Of the 97 luspatercept-treated pts evaluable for clinical benefit, median duration of clinical benefit in pts with baseline transfusion burden of 4 to & lt; 6 U/8 wks was 87.9 (range 13-125) wks, of & lt; 4 U/8 wks was 84.7 (range 21-147) wks, and of ≥ 6 U/8 wks was 64.9 (range 8-122) wks. Twelve luspatercept-treated pts did not require a transfusion after the first dose of luspatercept up to Wk 48 or until time of analysis; as of Jan 7, 2019 data cutoff, 3 (25%) of those pts maintained response. AEs occurring more frequently with luspatercept vs placebo (fatigue, diarrhea, asthenia, dizziness) occurred early (Cycles 1-4), were mainly grade 1 or 2, decreased over time, and were not associated with a higher dose level. Progression to acute myeloid leukemia was similar in pts receiving luspatercept (n = 3 [2.0%]) and those receiving placebo (n = 1 [1.3%] ). Conclusions: Most LR-MDS pts achieving RBC-TI and/or HI-E with luspatercept in the MEDALIST study had multiple responses with durable clinical benefit superior to that of pts receiving placebo, including those with a high baseline transfusion burden. AEs were mainly grade 1 or 2, decreased over time, and were not correlated with a higher dose level. Disclosures Fenaux: Aprea: Research Funding; Jazz: Honoraria, Research Funding; Astex: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene Corporation: Honoraria, Research Funding. Mufti:Cellectis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene Corporation: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Buckstein:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding. Santini:Celgene Corporation: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Johnson & Johnson: Honoraria; Acceleron: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Menarini: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Díez-Campelo:Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Finelli:Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Ilhan:Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Alexion: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Sekeres:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Syros: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Millenium: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Komrokji:DSI: Consultancy; JAZZ: Consultancy; celgene: Consultancy; Agios: Consultancy; pfizer: Consultancy; Novartis: Speakers Bureau; JAZZ: Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Consultancy. List:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Zeidan:Trovagene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; ADC Therapeutics: Research Funding; Jazz: Honoraria; Ariad: Honoraria; Agios: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; Astellas: Honoraria; Daiichi Sankyo: Honoraria; Cardinal Health: Honoraria; Seattle Genetics: Honoraria; BeyondSpring: Honoraria; Boehringer-Ingelheim: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Acceleron Pharma: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Medimmune/AstraZeneca: Research Funding; Otsuka: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Verma:Stelexis: Equity Ownership, Honoraria; Acceleron: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; BMS: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding. Laadem:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Ito:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Zhang:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Rampersad:Celgene Corp: Employment, Equity Ownership. Sinsimer:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Linde:Acceleron Pharma: Employment, Equity Ownership; Fibrogen, Inc.: Equity Ownership; Abbott Laboratories, Inc.: Equity Ownership. Garcia-Manero:Amphivena: Consultancy, Research Funding; Helsinn: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Astex: Consultancy, Research Funding; Onconova: Research Funding; H3 Biomedicine: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding. Platzbecker:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria. OffLabel Disclosure: Luspatercept is an investigational therapy that is not approved for any use in any country. Luspatercept is currently being evaluated for potential use in patients with anemia due to myelodysplastic syndromes, beta-thalassemia, or myelofibrosis.

Type of Medium: Online Resource

ISSN: 0006-4971 , 1528-0020

URL: Article

DOI: 10.1182/blood-2019-123064

Language: English

Publisher: American Society of Hematology

Publication Date: 2019

detail.hit.zdb_id: 1468538-3

detail.hit.zdb_id: 80069-7

In: Blood, American Society of Hematology, Vol. 128, No. 22 ( 2016-12-02), p. 2818-2818

Abstract: Background: Patients (pts) aged 〉 65 years (yrs) with AML have a median overall survival (OS) of ~3 months (mos), with worsening OS as age increases: median OS for pts ages 66-75 yrs is ~6 mos, but is only ~2.5 mos for pts ages 76-89 yrs (Walter, Leukemia, 2015). Treatment (Tx) options are limited for these pts, who often have disease features associated with Tx resistance, such as prior hematologic disorders, and a greater risk of Tx-related mortality. With current Tx options, in this setting many physicians or pts do not pursue active AML Tx. The phase 3, randomized AZA-AML-001 study compared AZA and CCR in older pts with AML (Dombret, Blood, 2015). Aims: Assess outcomes with AZA vs CCR in elderly pts (age ≥75 yrs) with AML in the AZA-AML-001 study overall and in the subset of pts with myelodysplasia-related changes (AML-MRC), and descriptively compare them with outcomes for pts aged 65-74 yrs. Methods: Pts aged ≥65 yrs with newly diagnosed AML ( 〉 30% bone marrow blasts), ECOG performance status ≤2, intermediate- or poor-risk cytogenetics, and WBC counts ≤15x109/L were eligible. Pts were randomized to receive AZA (75 mg/m2/day [d] x7d/28d) or CCR: low-dose ara-C (20mg SC BID x10d/28d), intensive chemotherapy (7+3), or best supportive care only. These analyses evaluated outcomes in pts aged 65-74 yrs (" 〈 75 yrs") and pts aged ≥75 yrs. WHO-defined AML-MRC was centrally confirmed. OS was estimated using Kaplan-Meier (KM) methods, with hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (95%CI) from an unstratified Cox proportional hazards model and P values from log-rank test. Survival at 3, 6, 9, and 12 mos was estimated using KM methods. Overall response rate (ORR) included complete remission (CR) and CR with incomplete hematologic recovery (CRi). Incidence rates (IRs; ie, rate normalized for Tx exposure) of grade 3-4 Tx-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) and infections leading to death per 100 pt-years of Tx exposure are reported for safety-evaluable pts (those who received ≥1 dose of study drug [at randomization for BSC only] and had ≥1 safety assessment post-dose). Results: In all, 223 pts were aged 〈 75 yrs (AZA n=103; CCR n=120) and 265 were aged ≥75 yrs (AZA n=138; CCR n=127), including 27 pts aged 〉 85 yrs (AZA n=14; CCR n=13). Median age in the 〈 75 yrs cohort was 71 yrs, and in the ≥75 yrs cohort was 78 and 79 yrs for the AZA and CCR groups, respectively (Table 1). Median OS was meaningfully prolonged with AZA vs CCR in pts aged 〈 75 yrs (14.2 vs 9.6 mos; HR 0.73, 95%CI 0.54, 0.99; P=0.0420). OS was also prolonged with AZA in pts aged ≥75 yrs vs CCR, but was not statistically different (median 7.0 vs 4.9 mos; HR 0.91, 95%CI 0.69, 1.2; P=0.46). Higher proportions of AZA-treated pts were alive at each 3-mo landmark in both age cohorts (Table 2). ORR was similar with AZA and CCR in pts ages 〈 75 yrs (32% and 30% respectively) and ≥75 yrs (25% and 21%), with a trend for a higher rate of CRi in AZA-treated pts aged ≥75 yrs (8% vs 2%; P=0.054). In the AML-MRC subgroup (n=262), median OS in pts aged 〈 75 yrs was meaningfully prolonged with AZA (n=52) vs CCR (n=64) (14.2 vs 7.3 mos, respectively; HR 0.64, 95%CI 0.42, 0.97) and nominally so with AZA (n=77) vs CCR (n=69) in pts ≥75 yrs (5.9 vs 3.8 mos; HR 0.77, 95%CI 0.54, 1.09). IRs of the most frequent grade 3-4 hematological TEAEs were lower with AZA vs CCR in the both age cohorts (Table 3), except the IR for grade 3-4 pneumonia in pts aged ≥75 yrs was higher with AZA. IRs of infections leading to death in the AZA and CCR groups were 14.9 and 38.2 per 100 pt-yrs, respectively, for pts aged 〈 75 yrs, and 33.3 and 28.0 per 100 pt-yrs in pts aged ≥75 yrs. Conclusions: As expected, OS and response rates were lower in elderly pts in both Tx arms than in younger pts. Median OS was meaningfully prolonged with AZA (+4.6 mos) vs CCR in pts aged 65-74 yrs. Higher proportions of AZA-treated pts remained alive at each 3-month landmark than CCR-treated pts, mainly in the younger age group, although 1-year survival was also higher in pts aged ≥75 yrs. Given the higher IR of infections, prophylactic use of antimicrobials or growth factors might be considered for elderly pts treated with AZA. Pts with AML-MRC retained the relative OS benefits of AZA vs CCR. While OS for AML-MRC pts aged ≥75 yrs was longer with AZA (+2.1 mos) vs CCR, pts with AML-MRC aged ≥75 yrs in both treatment groups had decreased OS compared with the median OS for all pts aged ≥75 yrs, consistent with reports that AML-MRC is more difficult to treat than AML not otherwise specified (Weinberg, Blood, 2009). Disclosures Seymour: Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Genentech: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel support, Speakers Bureau; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel support, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Buckstein:Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria. Santini:Astex: Consultancy; Onconova: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Stone:Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Jansen: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; ONO: Consultancy; Agios: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Merck: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy; Juno Therapeutics: Consultancy; Xenetic Biosciences: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Karyopharm: Consultancy; Roche: Consultancy; Sunesis Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Celator: Consultancy. Songer:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership. Weaver:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Beach:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Dombret:Agios: Honoraria; Sunesis: Honoraria; Ambit (Daiichi Sankyo): Honoraria; Karyopharm: Honoraria; Kite Pharma.: Honoraria, Research Funding; Menarini: Honoraria; Menarini: Honoraria; Astellas: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Servier: Honoraria; Seattle Genetics: Honoraria; Roche/Genentech: Honoraria, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Pfizer: Honoraria; Ariad: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Jazz Pharma: Honoraria, Research Funding.

Type of Medium: Online Resource

ISSN: 0006-4971 , 1528-0020

URL: Article

DOI: 10.1182/blood.V128.22.2818.2818

Language: English

Publisher: American Society of Hematology

Publication Date: 2016

detail.hit.zdb_id: 1468538-3

detail.hit.zdb_id: 80069-7

In: Blood, American Society of Hematology, Vol. 134, No. Supplement_1 ( 2019-11-13), p. 2999-2999

Abstract: Background: Luspatercept is a first-in-class erythroid maturation agent that binds TGF-β superfamily ligands to reduce aberrant Smad2/3 signaling and enhance late-stage erythropoiesis. The phase 3 MEDALIST trial evaluated luspatercept in pts with RBC transfusion-dependent, IPSS-R-defined very low-, low-, and intermediate-risk MDS with ring sideroblasts (RS+) who were refractory, intolerant, or ineligible to receive erythropoiesis-stimulating agents. This study explored associations of gene mutations, as analyzed by next-generation sequencing (NGS), with response to luspatercept, as well as dynamics of gene mutations on therapy in MEDALIST pts. Methods: DNA was isolated from bone marrow (BM) mononuclear cells from 222 of 229 pts enrolled in the study (148 luspatercept, 74 placebo) at screening and, when available, following treatment. NGS of 23 MDS-relevant genes was performed at screening and every 24 weeks; mean coverage was 1,000-fold and the variant allele frequency (VAF) cutoff was ≥ 1%. BM cell populations were analyzed by cytomorphology. Response criterion of RBC transfusion independence (RBC-TI) of ≥ 8 weeks within the first 24 weeks of treatment was used for correlative analyses. Results: Mutations in SF3B1 were found in 91.0% of pts analyzed at screening (median VAF 42%, range 6-71%), consistent with the study population being RS+. Overall, a median of 2 (range 0-5) of the 23 MDS-relevant genes analyzed were mutated per pt. In addition to SF3B1, the most frequently mutated genes were TET2 (41.9%), DNMT3A (18.9%), ASXL1 (13.1%), and SRSF2 (8.1%). Mutation profiles were similar to those found in previous studies of refractory anemia with RS (RARS; Malcovati L, et al. Blood. 2015;126:233-41) and balanced between luspatercept and placebo arms. Numbers of mutated genes at baseline were distributed similarly in luspatercept responders (R) and non-responders (NR) (Figure A), and comparable response rates were achieved irrespective of number of mutations, with response rates of 36.4%, 34.9%, 42.4%, and 33.3% for pts with 1 mutation, 2 mutations, 3 mutations, and 4 or 5 mutations in the 23 MDS-relevant genes analyzed, respectively. Response to luspatercept was independent of the presence of mutations in any of the genes analyzed individually (Figure B) or when grouped by functional categories (e.g. spliceosome, epigenetic regulation, transcription factor, etc.) (Figure C). Circos plots of co-occurring mutations showed similar mutation profiles in R and NR (Figure D). Response rates were also similar regardless of baseline SF3B1 allelic burden (R: 43%, NR: 42%; P = 0.11). At baseline, BM erythroid precursors were higher in R (R: 32.8%, NR: 26%; P = 0.008; while R and NR had similar levels of RS+ cells [R: 80%, NR: 84%; P = 0.25], Figure E), consistent with the postulated activity of luspatercept on the erythroid lineage. When comparing the frequency of mutation changes in luspatercept- vs placebo-treated pts at week 24 of the study, no statistically significant differences were observed in the frequency of newly acquired mutations (13/126 [10.3%] pts in luspatercept vs 8/64 [12.5%] pts in placebo, P = 0.63) or mutation losses (4/126 [3.2%] in luspatercept vs 5/64 [7.8%] in placebo, P = 0.17). Evaluation of changes in allele burden (median VAF at week 24 vs baseline) for mutations in genes associated with adverse prognosis (ASXL1, SRSF2, U2AF1, NRAS, IDH2, GATA2, TP53, RUNX1, and EZH2; Bejar R. Curr Opin Hematol. 2017;24:73-8) showed no change between luspatercept- or placebo-treated pts (1.01-fold, n = 58 and 0.95-fold, n = 19, respectively, P = 0.69). Conclusions: Pts enrolled in the MEDALIST study had mutations consistent with RS+, lower-risk MDS with a preponderance of SF3B1 mutations; genes associated with poor prognosis (and other genes) were balanced between study arms. RBC-TI responses with luspatercept were achieved regardless of SF3B1 allelic burden, number of baseline mutations, and presence of individual mutations, including adverse mutations, or co-mutations. Disclosures Platzbecker: Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Dunshee:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Komrokji:DSI: Consultancy; pfizer: Consultancy; Agios: Consultancy; JAZZ: Consultancy; Novartis: Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Consultancy; celgene: Consultancy; JAZZ: Speakers Bureau. Mufti:Cellectis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene Corporation: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Garcia-Manero:Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Astex: Consultancy, Research Funding; Onconova: Research Funding; H3 Biomedicine: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Amphivena: Consultancy, Research Funding; Helsinn: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding. Buckstein:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding. Santini:Celgene Corporation: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Johnson & Johnson: Honoraria; Acceleron: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Menarini: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Díez-Campelo:Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Sekeres:Millenium: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Syros: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. See:Celgene Corporation: Other: Contractor. Tsai:Celgene Corporation: Employment. Risueño:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership, Patents & Royalties: Named in Celgene patent filings related to predictive patient response biomarkers in hematological malignancies. Ma:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Schwickart:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Rampersad:Celgene Corp: Employment, Equity Ownership. Zhang:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Laadem:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Menezes:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. MacBeth:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Linde:Acceleron Pharma: Employment, Equity Ownership; Abbott Laboratories, Inc.: Equity Ownership; Fibrogen, Inc.: Equity Ownership. Reynolds:Acceleron Pharma: Employment, Equity Ownership. List:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Fenaux:Celgene Corporation: Honoraria, Research Funding; Astex: Honoraria, Research Funding; Jazz: Honoraria, Research Funding; Aprea: Research Funding. OffLabel Disclosure: Luspatercept is an investigational therapy that is not approved for any use in any country. Luspatercept is currently being evaluated for potential use in patients with anemia due to myelodysplastic syndromes, beta-thalassemia, or myelofibrosis.

Type of Medium: Online Resource

ISSN: 0006-4971 , 1528-0020

URL: Article

DOI: 10.1182/blood-2019-123655

Language: English

Publisher: American Society of Hematology

Publication Date: 2019

detail.hit.zdb_id: 1468538-3

detail.hit.zdb_id: 80069-7

In: American Journal of Hematology, Wiley, Vol. 92, No. 10 ( 2017-10), p. 1037-1046

Abstract: In ‘real‐life’, the Nordic score guides Erythropoietic stimulating agent (ESA) use in lower‐risk myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) with predicted response rates of 25% or 74%. As new treatments emerge, a more discriminating score is needed. Objectives To validate existing ESA predictive scores and develop a new score that identifies non‐responders. Methods ESA‐treated patients were identified in 3 MDS registries in Italy and Canada (FISM 555, GROM 233, and MDS‐CAN 208). Clinical and disease‐related variables were captured. Nordic, MDS‐CAN, and IPSS‐R‐based ESA scores were calculated and documented ESA responses compared. Results 996 ESA‐treated patients were identified. Overall response rate (ORR) was 59%. The database was randomly divided into balanced derivation (n = 463) and validation (n = 462) cohorts. By multivariate analysis, transfusion independence, erythropoietin (EPO) level 〈 100 IU/L, and IPSS low‐risk were independently predictive of response. Assigning a score of 1 to each resulted in a scoring system of 0‐3 with response rates of 23%, 43%, 67%, and 85%. ORR was concordant in the validation cohort. The ‘ITACA’ score had the highest discriminating power of response. Conclusion ITACA is an internally‐validated predictive SS of ESA response in real‐life ‘good risk’ MDS patients derived from a large international dataset that surpasses others. The incorporation of biologic markers to better identify non‐responders is still needed.

Type of Medium: Online Resource

ISSN: 0361-8609 , 1096-8652

URL: Issue

URL: Article

DOI: 10.1002/ajh.v92.10

DOI: 10.1002/ajh.24842

Language: English

Publisher: Wiley

Publication Date: 2017

detail.hit.zdb_id: 1492749-4

In: Blood, American Society of Hematology, Vol. 132, No. Supplement 1 ( 2018-11-29), p. 1-1

Abstract: Introduction: MDS is associated with an erythroid maturation defect, characterized by ineffective erythropoiesis leading to anemia and RBC transfusion dependence. Treatment of anemia in lower-risk MDS remains an unmet medical need. Luspatercept is a first-in-class erythroid maturation agent which binds to select TGFβ superfamily ligands to reduce aberrant Smad2/3 signaling and enhance late-stage erythropoiesis (Suragani RN, et al. Nat Med. 2014;20:408-14). Preliminary clinical studies have shown promising activity in MDS (Platzbecker U, et al. Lancet Oncol. 2017;10:1338-47). We report the results of a phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of luspatercept in patients with anemia due to Revised International Prognostic Scoring System (IPSS-R)-defined Very low-, Low-, or Intermediate-risk MDS with RS who require RBC transfusions. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02631070. Methods: Eligible patients were aged ≥ 18 years; had IPSS-R-defined Very low-, Low-, or Intermediate-risk MDS with RS according to the WHO 2016 criteria; were refractory, intolerant, or ineligible to receive erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs); and required RBC transfusions. Patients were randomized 2:1 to receive either luspatercept, at a starting dose level of 1.0 mg/kg with titration up to 1.75 mg/kg, if needed, or placebo, subcutaneously every 3 weeks for ≥ 24 weeks. The primary endpoint was RBC transfusion independence (RBC-TI) for ≥ 8 weeks between week 1 and week 24. A key secondary endpoint was RBC-TI for ≥ 12 weeks between week 1 and 24. Achievement of modified hematologic improvement-erythroid (mHI-E) response using IWG 2006 criteria was also assessed. Results: † A total of 229 patients were randomized and treated. Median age was 71 years (range 26-95), median time from diagnosis was 41.8 months (range 3-421), and 62.9% were male. Overall, patient baseline characteristics were balanced between the treatment groups. Patients received a median of 5 RBC units (range 1-20) transfused over 8 weeks during the 16 weeks prior to treatment (43.2% of patients had ≥ 6 RBC units/8 weeks, 27.9% had ≥ 4 to & lt; 6 RBC units/8 weeks, and 28.8% had & lt; 4 RBC units/8 weeks). At baseline, 138 (60.3%), 58 (25.3%), and 32 (14.0%) patients had serum erythropoietin levels & lt; 200 IU/L, 200-500 IU/L, and & gt; 500 IU/L, respectively. A total of 218 (95.2%) patients had previously received ESAs. Overall, 206 (90.0%) patients had an SF3B1 mutation. Of 153 patients receiving luspatercept, 58 (37.9%) achieved the primary endpoint of RBC-TI for ≥ 8 weeks compared with 10 of 76 patients (13.2%) receiving placebo (odds ratio [OR] 5.1, P & lt; 0.0001). Of those receiving luspatercept, 43 of 153 (28.1%) achieved the key secondary endpoint of RBC-TI for ≥ 12 weeks (weeks 1-24) compared with 6 of 76 (7.9%) receiving placebo (OR 5.1, P = 0.0002). Patients receiving luspatercept were more likely to achieve an mHI-E response, defined as a reduction in transfusion of ≥ 4 RBC units/8 weeks or a mean hemoglobin increase of ≥ 1.5 g/dL/8 weeks in the absence of transfusions, compared with patients receiving placebo (52.9% vs 11.8% during weeks 1-24; P & lt; 0.0001). The safety profile of luspatercept was consistent with that reported in the phase 2 PACE-MDS study (Platzbecker U, et al. Lancet Oncol. 2017;10:1338-47). Conclusions: Treatment with luspatercept resulted in a significantly reduced transfusion burden compared with placebo in patients with anemia due to IPSS-R-defined Very low-, Low-, or Intermediate-risk MDS with RS, who require RBC transfusions, and was generally well tolerated. P.F. and U.P. contributed equally to this abstract as lead co-authors. R.S.K. and A.F.L. contributed equally to this abstract as senior co-authors. † As of May 8, 2018, cutoff date. Disclosures Fenaux: Otsuka: Honoraria, Research Funding; Jazz: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding. Platzbecker:Celgene: Research Funding. Mufti:Celgene: Research Funding. Buckstein:Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Santini:Otsuka: Consultancy; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria; AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Díez-Campelo:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Finelli:Novartis: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Ilhan:Alexion: Speakers Bureau; BMS: Speakers Bureau; Roche: Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Speakers Bureau. Sekeres:Opsona: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Opsona: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Falantes:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria. Giai:Novartis: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy. Selleslag:Kiadis Pharma: Other: Financial support for study-related issues. Jurcic:Actinium Pharmaceuticals, Inc: Research Funding; Daiichi-Sankyo: Research Funding; Astellas: Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy, Research Funding; Kura Oncology: Research Funding; Genetech: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Forma Therapeutics: Research Funding; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Syros Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding. Germing:Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding. Götze:Takeda: Honoraria, Other: Travel aid ASH 2017; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria; JAZZ Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria. Quesnel:Celyad: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; Astellas: Honoraria; Sunesis: Honoraria. Beyne-Rauzy:Novartis: Research Funding. Cluzeau:Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Sanofi: Speakers Bureau; AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Jazz Pharma: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Menarini: Consultancy; Pfizer: Speakers Bureau. Voso:Celgene: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Zeidan:Otsuka: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Agios: Consultancy, Honoraria. Laadem:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership. Benzohra:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership. Zhang:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership. Rampersad:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership. Linde:AbbVie: Equity Ownership; Abbott Laboratories: Equity Ownership; Fibrogen: Equity Ownership; Acceleron Pharma: Employment, Equity Ownership. Sherman:Acceleron Pharma: Employment, Equity Ownership. Komrokji:Novartis: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding. List:Celgene: Research Funding.

Type of Medium: Online Resource

ISSN: 0006-4971 , 1528-0020

URL: Article

DOI: 10.1182/blood-2018-99-110805

Language: English

Publisher: American Society of Hematology

Publication Date: 2018

detail.hit.zdb_id: 1468538-3

detail.hit.zdb_id: 80069-7

In: Journal of Clinical Oncology, American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), Vol. 34, No. 25 ( 2016-09-01), p. 2988-2996

Abstract: This international phase III, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind study assessed the efficacy and safety of lenalidomide in RBC transfusion–dependent patients with International Prognostic Scoring System lower-risk non-del(5q) myelodysplastic syndromes ineligible for or refractory to erythropoiesis-stimulating agents. Patients and Methods In total, 239 patients were randomly assigned (2:1) to treatment with lenalidomide (n = 160) or placebo (n = 79) once per day (on 28-day cycles). The primary end point was the rate of RBC transfusion independence (TI) ≥ 8 weeks. Secondary end points were RBC-TI ≥ 24 weeks, duration of RBC-TI, erythroid response, health-related quality of life (HRQoL), and safety. Results RBC-TI ≥ 8 weeks was achieved in 26.9% and 2.5% of patients in the lenalidomide and placebo groups, respectively (P 〈 .001). Ninety percent of patients achieving RBC-TI responded within 16 weeks of treatment. Median duration of RBC-TI with lenalidomide was 30.9 weeks (95% CI, 20.7 to 59.1). Transfusion reduction of ≥ 4 units packed RBCs, on the basis of a 112-day assessment, was 21.8% in the lenalidomide group and 0% in the placebo group. Higher response rates were observed in patients with lower baseline endogenous erythropoietin ≤ 500 mU/mL (34.0% v 15.5% for 〉 500 mU/mL). At week 12, mean changes in HRQoL scores from baseline did not differ significantly between treatment groups, which suggests that lenalidomide did not adversely affect HRQoL. Achievement of RBC-TI ≥ 8 weeks was associated with significant improvements in HRQoL (P 〈 .01). The most common treatment-emergent adverse events were neutropenia and thrombocytopenia. Conclusion Lenalidomide yields sustained RBC-TI in 26.9% of RBC transfusion–dependent patients with lower-risk non-del(5q) myelodysplastic syndromes ineligible for or refractory to erythropoiesis-stimulating agents. Response to lenalidomide was associated with improved HRQoL. Treatment-emergent adverse event data were consistent with the known safety profile of lenalidomide.

Type of Medium: Online Resource

ISSN: 0732-183X , 1527-7755

URL: Article

DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2015.66.0118

Language: English

Publisher: American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)

Publication Date: 2016

detail.hit.zdb_id: 2005181-5

In: Clinical Lymphoma Myeloma and Leukemia, Elsevier BV, Vol. 18, No. 2 ( 2018-02), p. 136-144.e7

Type of Medium: Online Resource

ISSN: 2152-2650

URL: Article

DOI: 10.1016/j.clml.2017.12.004

Language: English

Publisher: Elsevier BV

Publication Date: 2018

detail.hit.zdb_id: 2540998-0

detail.hit.zdb_id: 2193618-3

In: Blood, American Society of Hematology, Vol. 134, No. Supplement_1 ( 2019-11-13), p. 4243-4243

Abstract: Introduction: Lower-risk MDS is characterized by anemia and ineffective erythropoiesis leading to RBC transfusion dependence. Effective treatment for anemia remains an unmet medical need. Patients with MDS may also experience additional cytopenias that may complicate treatment and contribute to infections and bleeding events. Here, we report hematologic improvement (HI) outcomes for patients in the MEDALIST trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02631070), a phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study evaluating the efficacy and safety of luspatercept, a first-in-class erythroid maturation agent that binds select TGF-β superfamily ligands to reduce aberrant Smad2/3 signaling and enhance late-stage erythropoiesis. Methods: Eligible patients in the MEDALIST trial were adults with anemia due to Very low-, Low-, or Intermediate-risk MDS with RS according to the Revised International Prognostic Scoring System; were refractory, intolerant, or ineligible to receive erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs); and required RBC transfusions. Patients received luspatercept (starting dose of 1.0 mg/kg and titration up to 1.75 mg/kg, if needed) or placebo subcutaneously every 3 weeks for ≥ 24 weeks. Platelet and neutrophil counts were assessed by the central laboratory. Secondary endpoints included HI-neutrophil (HI-N) and -platelet (HI-P) responses, using International Working Group 2006 criteria, over any consecutive 56-day period. Mean changes from baseline in platelets and neutrophils were also evaluated. Results*: A total of 94.8% patients in the luspatercept arm and 97.4% in the placebo arm had refractory cytopenia with multilineage dysplasia and RS at baseline. Mean neutrophil and platelet counts at baseline for patients in the luspatercept arm were 2.8 x 109/L and 259 x 109/L, respectively, and in the placebo arm were 2.7 x 109/L and 252 x 109/L, respectively. Neutropenia ( 〈 1 x 109/L) was confirmed at baseline in 15 (9.8%) and 10 (13.2%) patients in the luspatercept and placebo arms, respectively. Fifty-one (33.3%) patients in the luspatercept arm and 22 (28.9%) in the placebo arm received granulocyte colony-stimulating factor in combination with ESAs prior to randomization. A total of 8 (5.2%) and 6 (7.9%) patients receiving luspatercept and placebo, respectively, had baseline thrombocytopenia ( 〈 100 x 109/L); no patients received prior platelet transfusions. Fifteen (9.8%) and 10 (13.2%) patients in the luspatercept and placebo arms, respectively, were evaluable for HI-N (i.e. baseline neutrophils 〈 1 x 109/L); 3/15 (20%) of those receiving luspatercept and 1/10 (10%) of those receiving placebo achieved HI-N in Weeks 1-48. Among patients who were evaluable for HI-P (i.e. baseline platelets 〈 100 x 109/L), 5/8 (62.5%) of those receiving luspatercept and 2/6 (33%) of those receiving placebo achieved HI-P in Weeks 1-48 (Table). None of the luspatercept HI-P responders received platelet transfusions. Mean changes from baseline in neutrophils of 0.94 x 109/L with luspatercept and 0.04 x 109/L with placebo were observed at Week 15, with early increases reported for luspatercept by Day 8 (0.86 vs 0.08 x 109/L for placebo). Mean increases in neutrophils at Day 8 occurred in both luspatercept responders (by MEDALIST primary endpoint; 1.0 x 109/L) and non-responders (0.8 x 109/L). Mean changes from baseline in platelets of 29 x 109/L were observed with luspatercept and 0.9 x 109/L with placebo by Week 12, but early increases were observed with luspatercept by Day 8 (18 vs 3 x 109/L for placebo) and mean increases in platelets at Day 8 occurred in both luspatercept responders (21.4 x 109/L) and non-responders (16.5 x 109/L). No patients in either arm experienced grade 3 or 4 treatment-emergent thrombocytopenia. Treatment-related grade 3 or 4 neutropenia was reported in 1 (0.7%) patient receiving luspatercept and 1 (1.3%) patient receiving placebo. Conclusions: Although only a minority of patients were evaluable for HI-P/HI-N response based on entry criteria for the study, luspatercept treatment resulted in a mean increase from baseline in platelet and neutrophil counts in most patients overall vs placebo, regardless of response status. These improvements were observed early following treatment initiation and then stabilized. Luspatercept did not contribute to the worsening of cytopenias vs placebo. *Data cutoff: May 8, 2018. Disclosures Garcia-Manero: Amphivena: Consultancy, Research Funding; Helsinn: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Astex: Consultancy, Research Funding; Onconova: Research Funding; H3 Biomedicine: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding. Mufti:Celgene Corporation: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Cellectis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Fenaux:Celgene Corporation: Honoraria, Research Funding; Astex: Honoraria, Research Funding; Jazz: Honoraria, Research Funding; Aprea: Research Funding. Buckstein:Takeda: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Santini:Acceleron: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Menarini: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene Corporation: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Johnson & Johnson: Honoraria. Díez-Campelo:Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Finelli:Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Sekeres:Syros: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Millenium: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. List:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Laadem:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Ito:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Zhang:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Rampersad:Celgene Corp: Employment, Equity Ownership. Sinsimer:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Linde:Fibrogen, Inc.: Equity Ownership; Abbott Laboratories, Inc.: Equity Ownership; Acceleron Pharma: Employment, Equity Ownership. Platzbecker:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria. Komrokji:Alexion: Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Agios: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy; Jazz: Speakers Bureau; DSI: Consultancy; Novartis: Speakers Bureau. OffLabel Disclosure: Luspatercept is an investigational therapy that is not approved for any use in any country. Luspatercept is currently being evaluated for potential use in patients with anemia due to myelodysplastic syndromes, beta-thalassemia, or myelofibrosis.

Type of Medium: Online Resource

ISSN: 0006-4971 , 1528-0020

URL: Article

DOI: 10.1182/blood-2019-123048

Language: English

Publisher: American Society of Hematology

Publication Date: 2019

detail.hit.zdb_id: 1468538-3

detail.hit.zdb_id: 80069-7