Kooperativer Bibliotheksverbund

In: Cancer Medicine, Wiley, Vol. 10, No. 5 ( 2021-03), p. 1726-1737

Abstract: Intermittent treatment with TKIs is an option for the great majority (70%–80%) of CML patients who do not achieve a stable deep molecular response and are not eligible for treatment discontinuation. For these patients, the only alternative is to assume TKI continuously, lifelong. Methods The Italian phase III multicentric randomized OPTkIMA study started in 2015, with the aim to evaluate if a progressive de‐escalation of TKIs (imatinib, nilotinib, and dasatinib) is able to maintain the molecular response (MR 3.0 ) and to improve Health Related Quality of Life (HRQoL). Results Up to December 2018, 166/185 (90%) elderly CML patients in stable MR 3.0 /MR 4.0 completed the first year of any TKI intermittent schedule 1 month ON and 1 month OFF. The first year probability of maintaining the MR 3.0 was 81% and 23.5% of the patients who lost the molecular response regained the MR 3.0 after resuming TKI continuously. Patients’ HRQoL at baseline was better than that of matched peers from healthy population. Women was the only factor independently associated with worse baseline HRQoL ( p   〉  0.0001). Overall, global HRQoL worsened at 6 ( p   〈  0.001) but returned to the baseline value at 12 months and it was statistically significantly worse in women ( p  = 0.001). Conclusions De‐escalation of any TKI by 1 month ON/OFF schedule maintains the MR 3.0 /MR 4.0 in 81% of the patients during the first 12–24 months. No patients progressed to accelerated/blastic phase, all the patients (23.5%) losing MR 3.0 regained the MR 3.0 and none suffered from TKI withdrawn syndrome. The study firstly report on HRQoL in elderly CML patients moving from a continuous daily therapy to a de‐escalated intermittent treatment.

Type of Medium: Online Resource

ISSN: 2045-7634 , 2045-7634

URL: Issue

URL: Article

DOI: 10.1002/cam4.v10.5

DOI: 10.1002/cam4.3778

Language: English

Publisher: Wiley

Publication Date: 2021

detail.hit.zdb_id: 2659751-2

In: New England Journal of Medicine, Massachusetts Medical Society, Vol. 368, No. 1 ( 2013-01-03), p. 22-33

Type of Medium: Online Resource

ISSN: 0028-4793 , 1533-4406

URL: Article

DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1208500

Language: English

Publisher: Massachusetts Medical Society

Publication Date: 2013

detail.hit.zdb_id: 1468837-2

In: Blood, American Society of Hematology, Vol. 120, No. 21 ( 2012-11-16), p. 4-4

Abstract: Abstract 4 Introduction Current treatment recommendations in polycythemia vera (PV) have emphasized to maintain the hematocrit (HCT) values 〈 0.45 based on hemorrheological notions, results of a few small observational retrospective studies and consensus of experts. However, post-hoc analysis of two large randomized clinical trials (namely PVSG-1 and ECLAP) failed to show a different incidence of major thrombosis when HCT levels were kept in the range between 0.40 and 0.50. So far, no randomized clinical trial has provided evidence-based data assessing the usefulness of tight HCT control in reducing thrombosis. Thus, uncertainty of the optimal HCT target exists in clinical practice. Aim In a large scale randomized clinical trial (Cyto-PV) we prospectively determined the efficacy and safety of maintaining the recommended HCT target versus HCT levels in the range of 0.45–0.50 to prevent thrombotic events in PV patients. Methods Patients were eligible if they met WHO-2008 diagnostic criteria for PV. Both cases with newly diagnosed disease and previous treatment were centrally randomized to Arm A (HCT 〈 0.45) ) or to Arm B (HCT 0.45–0.50). The composite primary end points from randomization were major thrombosis (stroke, acute coronary syndrome, transient ischemic cerebral attack, peripheral arterial thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, abdominal thrombosis, deep vein thrombosis), and cardiovascular death. Secondary end points were the incidences of hematological transformation to myelofibrosis and acute leukemia. From February 2008 to May 2012, 21 Italian hematological centers enrolled 365 patients. The trial was closed in May 2012 because the research network had reached its maximal recruitment potential and the effect of the two treatment strategies were evaluated as to efficacy and safety. Results Arm A and Arm B included 182 and 183 patients respectively. At randomization, there were no significant differences between the two groups with respect to age, gender, years from diagnosis to recruitment, previous history of major thrombosis, bleeding, concomitant cardiovascular risk factors, and hematological presentation. Treatments were equally distributed with regard to phlebotomy, antiplatelet drugs, warfarin and hydroxyurea or their combination. After randomization, median HCT levels in arm A and Arm B during follow-up (median 31.0 months) were 0.44 and 0.48 respectively. A quarter of patients of arm A and Arm B failed to maintain the assigned HCT levels during the study period. Noticeable was that leukocyte levels remained higher in arm B than Arm A while no difference was revealed concerning the platelet count. Additionally, no difference in the safety profile was recognizable. As compared with arm B, the more intensive treatment aimed at maintaining the HCT 〈 45% reduced the risk of the primary combined endpoint ( 1.1% versus 4.4% /patients per year; HR =3.90, p=0.007). Seven patients developed overt myelofibrosis (6 in Arm A and 1 in Arm B; p=0.10). There was no difference concerning frequencies of acute leukemia that occurred in 3 and 1 patients of Arm A and B respectively. Conclusion In this randomized clinical trial, the incidence of major cardiovascular events was 4 fold higher in patients who maintained HCT levels 〉 0.45. Therefore, an HCT level 〈 0.45 is significantly associated with a prevention of thrombotic complications and is confirmed to be the target of therapy in PV. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Type of Medium: Online Resource

ISSN: 0006-4971 , 1528-0020

URL: Article

DOI: 10.1182/blood.V120.21.4.4

Language: English

Publisher: American Society of Hematology

Publication Date: 2012

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. 496-496

Abstract: Background and Rationale. Bosutinib (BOS), dasatinib (DAS) and nilotinib (NIL) are 2nd generation TKIs with similar second-line efficacy. The use of DAS and NIL may be burdened by pulmonary, infectious, cardiovascular and metabolic complications; these complications are more frequent and more clinically relevant in the elderly. BOS could represent an important therapeutic option in elderly patients intolerant to or failing a first-line TKI, but the dose of 500 mg OAD may be higher than necessary. Aims. All TKIs have been tested at a fixed initial dose, with dose adjustment in case of toxicity or treatment failure. On the contrary, the aim of our study was to evaluate in elderly CML patients if second-line BOS was effective and better tolerated at doses lower than 500 mg OAD, beginning with 200 mg OAD, then increasing the dose to 300 OAD or 400 mg OAD according to the molecular response, to find the minimum effective dose. Methods. A prospective phase 2 single-arm multicenter study has been designed by the GIMEMA CML Working Party (NCT02810990). Study design: all patients started with 200 mg OAD for 2 weeks ("run-in" period), then the dose was increased to 300 mg OAD; after 3 months, patients with BCR-ABLIS transcript ≤ 1% continued 300 mg OAD, while in patients with transcript & gt; 1% the dose is furtherly increased to 400 mg OAD. In responsive patients, BOS dose was maintained, 300 mg or 400 mg OAD. Key inclusion criteria: & gt; 60 yrs old, chronic phase CML, intolerance or failure of any first-line TKI (2013 ELN criteria), absence of T315I or V299L mutation. Sixty-three patients have been enrolled. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients in MR3 at 1 year. Definitions: MR3, BCR-ABLIS & lt; 0.1%; MR4, BCR-ABLIS & lt; 0.01% with & gt; 10.000 copies; MR4.5, BCR-ABLIS & lt; 0.0032% with & gt; 32.000 copies. Results. Median age: 73 yrs (range 60-90). Age distribution: 60-69 yrs, 18 pts (29%); 70-79 yrs, 31 pts (49%); & gt; 80 yrs, 14 pts (22%). Sokal score at diagnosis: low 19%, intermediate 49%, high 32%. Reasons for switching to BOS: intolerance 63%, resistance 37%. First-line TKI: imatinib 83%, DAS 11%, NIL 6% (same TKI distribution in intolerant and resistant patients). Median follow-up: 9 mos (range 1-30). Overall, 10/63 patients had a dose-increase to 400 mg OAD, 49/63 to 300 mg OAD, while 4/63 continued on BOS 200 mg OAD without any dose increase. At baseline, 13 patients were already in MR3. The MR3 rates by 3 and 6 months were 43% and 56%, respectively. The cumulative rate of patients achieving or maintaining a MR3 by 12 months was 60% (65% in intolerant and 52% in resistant patients, p = 0.31). Interestingly, only 21% of patients & gt; 80 yrs old achieved or maintained a MR3 (p & lt; 0.001, compared to younger patients). Patients achieving MR4 or MR4.5 were 38% and 19%, respectively. Overall, 22%, 27% and 11% of patients had 1 log, 2 logs or & gt; 3 logs reduction from baseline BCR-ABLIS transcript level. Selected adverse events: cardiac ischemia, 2 patients; pericardial effusion, 2 patients; no pleural effusions. Events leading to permanent treatment discontinuation: 2 unrelated deaths, 7 adverse events (3 hypertransaminasemia, 1 nephrotoxicity, 1 diarrhea, 1 skin rash, 1 myalgia/fatigue), 3 unsatisfactory responses (without progressions). Fifty-one out of 63 patients are still on BOS at the last contact: 6 on 400 mg OAD, 34 on 300 mg OAD, 11 on 200 mg OAD. Conclusions. A gradual dose increase, based on prospective molecular monitoring, allowed the great majority of enrolled patients (approximately 70%) to remain on treatment with BOS 300 mg OAD or less, achieving a major molecular response (MR3) in 60% of the cases. These results trial showed that, in elderly patients intolerant to or failing a first-line TKI, BOS may be highly effective and better tolerated at a dose lower than 500 mg OAD, namely at 300 mg OAD. Disclosures Castagnetti: Pfizer: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; Incyte: Honoraria; Bristol Myers Squiib: Consultancy, Honoraria. Gugliotta:Pfizer: Honoraria; Incyte: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria. Bocchia:Novartis: Honoraria; Incyte: Honoraria; BMS: Honoraria. Trawinska:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria. Bonifacio:Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; Amgen: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria; Incyte: Honoraria. Crugnola:Novartis: Honoraria; Incyte: Honoraria. Elena:Novartis: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy. Lucchesi:Novartis: Honoraria; Incyte: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria. Albano:Incyte: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Lunghi:Novartis: Honoraria; Incyte: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria. Stagno:BMS: Honoraria; Incyte: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria. Pregno:Pfizer: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; Bristol Myers Squibb: Honoraria; Incyte: Consultancy, Honoraria. Iurlo:Novartis: Honoraria; BMS: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria; Incyte: Honoraria. Ferrero:Novartis: Honoraria. Cavo:janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: travel accommodations, Speakers Bureau; novartis: Honoraria; takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; bms: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; sanofi: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; AbbVie: 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 accommodations, Speakers Bureau. Saglio:BMS: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Ariad: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Jansen: Consultancy; Incyte: Consultancy. Pane:Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: research founding; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; GSK: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Baccarani:Novartis: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Consultancy. Rosti:BMS: Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. OffLabel Disclosure: Bosutinib is a second generation TKI already registered for the treatment of adult patients with chronic phase CML with resistance or intolerance to prior therapy. In the present study the initial dose is 200 mg instead of 500 mg OAD. A dose increase to 300 or 400 mg is scheduled according to molecular response and tolerabiliy

Type of Medium: Online Resource

ISSN: 0006-4971 , 1528-0020

URL: Article

DOI: 10.1182/blood-2019-127514

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. 132, No. Supplement 1 ( 2018-11-29), p. 4251-4251

Abstract: Therapy with Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors (TKIs) changed the fate of Philadelphia-positive Chronic Myeloid Leukemia (CML). At present, the therapeutic strategy aims to improve the management of the disease and the quality of life of the patients. In July 2015, we started a prospective multicentric randomized trial with the aim to validate the policy of the intermittent de-escalation treatment and to explore the impact of this strategy on the Quality of Life. To this purpose, CML patients older than 60 years in stable (≥2 years) MR3.0 or MR4.0 molecular response were randomized to receive a FIXED intermittent TKIs regimen (one month ON and one month OFF), as previously published (Russo D, Blood 2013; Russo D, BCJ 2015), versus a PROGRESSIVE intermittent TKIs regimen (one month ON and one month OFF for the 1st year; one month ON and two months OFF for the 2nd year; one month ON and three months OFF from the 3rd year) (OPTkIMA study, ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02326311). Molecular monitoring was performed according to the 2015 ELN guidelines, every 3 months by RT-PCR on peripheral blood (Baccarani M,Blood 2013). In case of MR3.0 (MMR) loss, checked in two monthly consecutive RT-PCR analysis, patients were planned to exit the study and to resume TKIs daily. This first interim report have been focused on the patients who, by intention to treat, have completed the first year of the study for an historical comparison with the previous INTERIM trial (Russo D, Blood 2013; Russo D, BCJ 2015). During the first year, both the patients randomized in the FIXED and in the PROGRESSIVE arms were given the TKIs treatment one month ON and one month OFF. Up to June 2018, 177 patients have been enrolled by 26 Italian Hematological Centers (first patient randomized in July 2015) and 121/177 patients (68%) completed the first year of OPTkIMA study. The median age was 71 years (range 60-89) and 64% of the patients were belonging to the Sokal intermediate/high risk goup. 96/121 (79%), 14/121 (12%) and 11/121 (9%) patients were receiving imatinib (IMA), nilotinib (NILO) and dasatinib (DAS), at the time of enrollment. Overall, 59/121 (49%) and 62/121 (51%) patients have been randomized in the FIXED and PROGRESSIVE arm, respectively. 41/62 patients (66%) randomly assigned to the PROGRESSIVE arm have entered the second year of therapy. 34/121 patients (28%) went out of the study during the first year. The reasons for protocol discontinuation were: informed consent withdrawn (2 cases), second cancer (4 cases), loss of MR3.0 (28 cases). (Table 1). Among the 28 patients who lost the MMR, 17 and 11 were in MR4.0 and MR3.0, respectively, when they were enrolled into the study. Thus the probability of loosing the MR3.0 while on OPTkIMA was 21,7% at one year (Figure 1). All the 28 patients resumed TKIs continuously and all obtained at least the MR3.0 response, within 6 months and are currently included in the study follow up. The intermittent treatment was well tolerated, with 4 serious adverse events (1 appendicitis, 1 atrial fibrillation, 1 cardiac failure, 1 hip fracture) and 3 adverse events (1 diarrohea, 1 pruritus and 1 fever), none of which have been considered treatement-related. None of the patients experienced the TKI withdrawn syndrome. According to this first interim report, we found that a policy of intermittent TKIs administration in elderly patients is safe and well tolerated. Analysis of patient-reported QoL outcomes is ongoing and will further add information on the overall treatment effectivness of the new PROGRESSIVE intermittent TKI administration. After the 1st year, 28/121 patients (23%) lost MR3.0 and all of them re-gained the major molecular response within 6 months from resumption of continuous treatment. The probability of MR3.0 loss while on OPTkIMA at 1 year was 21,7% and this is quite comparable with the 20% MR3.0 loss observed in the previous INTERIM trial (Russo D, Blood 2013; Russo D, BCJ 2015). Disclosures Efficace: Bristol Meyers Squibb: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Lundbeck: Research Funding; TEVA: Research Funding; AMGEN: Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; TEVA: Consultancy; Orsenix: Consultancy. Abruzzese:Novartis: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy; Ariad: Consultancy. Bonifacio:Incyte: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Novartis: Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy. Castagnetti:Incyte: Consultancy, Honoraria; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bristol Meyers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria. Giai:Novartis: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy.

Type of Medium: Online Resource

ISSN: 0006-4971 , 1528-0020

URL: Article

DOI: 10.1182/blood-2018-99-110250

Language: English

Publisher: American Society of Hematology

Publication Date: 2018

detail.hit.zdb_id: 1468538-3

detail.hit.zdb_id: 80069-7

In: Blood, American Society of Hematology, Vol. 120, No. 21 ( 2012-11-16), p. 1748-1748

Abstract: Abstract 1748 Introduction: Polycythemia vera (PV) is a chronic myeloproliferative neoplasms characterized by erythrocytosis, vasomotor disturbances, pruritus, risk of disease progression into acute myeloid leukemia or myelofibrosis and cardiovascular events, the last representing the main cause of morbidity and mortality. Since 2005 the V617F point mutation in Janus Kinase 2 (JAK2) gene gained a dominant role in determining the molecular basis and the diagnosis of PV. We compared the clinical epidemiology of the 1638 patients included in the ECLAP trial in the years 1997 to 2001, with that of a “modern” cohort of 365 PV, JAK2-positive patients included in the Italian CYTO-PV randomized clinical trial and followed from the year 2008 to 2012. Methods: Patients were eligible in CYTO-PV trial and in ECLAP study if they met WHO-2008 diagnostic criteria and the criteria established by the PVSG or Pearson/Messinezy respectively. Clinical characteristics have been compared. The incidence of major cardiovascular events (CV death plus major thrombosis [stroke, acute coronary syndrome, transient ischemic cerebral attack, peripheral arterial thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, abdominal thrombosis, deep vein thrombosis) and total CV events incidence has been evaluated. The median follow up was 31.0 months (range 0– 48.13 months) and 33.1 months (range 0–63.6) for patients included CYTO-PV and in ECLAP respectively. Results: In CYTO-PV 49.3% patients with recent PV diagnosis were included (within 2 years prior inclusion) while in ECLAP the proportion was 35.5%. Mean age at recruitment was similar for patients in CYTO-PV (64.5 yrs) and ECLAP (65.4 yrs). History of thrombosis was reported in 28.9 % vs 38.6% patients in the CYTO-PV and in ECLAP, respectively (p 〈 0.05). Consistently higher proportions of arterial and venous thrombotic events were found in ECLAP as compared to CYTO-PV. History of major bleeding was reported in 1.7% vs 4.8% of the patients in CYTO and ECLAP, respectively. Medical treatment at recruitment was more intensive in CYTO-PV vs. ECLAP: phlebotomy 72.3% vs 63.5% (ns), hydroxyurea (HU) 54.2 vs 48.4, antiplatelet drugs 84.9% vs 58.3% (p 〈 0.05), aspirin 77.0% vs 50.2% (p 〈 0.05), anti-hypertensive and hypocholesterolemic medications were administered respectively in 48.5% and 13% of CYTO–PV patients vs. 39% and 3.5% of ECLAP population (p 〈 0.05) As compared with ECLAP, the incidence of risk of major thombosis in CYTO-PV was 2.7 vs 4.4 and of total CV events was 3.4 vs 5.5 per 100 person/years, respectively. The incidence of total CV events in CYTO-PV for the subgroups of patients with age 〈 65 and no previous thrombosis (PT), age 〉 65 and no PT, age 〈 65 and PT, age 〉 65 and PT at randomization was 2.2, 4.8, 3.5 and 3.4 per 100 person/years, respectively. Conclusions: The comparison of these two cohorts of PV patients followed 10 years apart suggests that JAK-2 PV patients are currently better managed for the control of classical CV risk factors, are more frequently administered aspirin, and HU with better control of their disease, and eventually have a risk of thrombosis approximately half than in the past. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Type of Medium: Online Resource

ISSN: 0006-4971 , 1528-0020

URL: Article

DOI: 10.1182/blood.V120.21.1748.1748

Language: English

Publisher: American Society of Hematology

Publication Date: 2012

detail.hit.zdb_id: 1468538-3

detail.hit.zdb_id: 80069-7

In: HemaSphere, Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health), Vol. 7, No. S3 ( 2023-08), p. e8949080-

Type of Medium: Online Resource

ISSN: 2572-9241

URL: Article

DOI: 10.1097/01.HS9.0000969556.89490.80

Language: English

Publisher: Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)

Publication Date: 2023

detail.hit.zdb_id: 2922183-3

In: Blood Advances, American Society of Hematology, Vol. 3, No. 24 ( 2019-12-23), p. 4280-4290

Abstract: Several papers authored by international experts have proposed recommendations on the management of BCR-ABL1+ chronic myeloid leukemia (CML). Following these recommendations, survival of CML patients has become very close to normal. The next, ambitious, step is to bring as many patients as possible into a condition of treatment-free remission (TFR). The Gruppo Italiano Malattie EMatologiche dell’Adulto (GIMEMA; Italian Group for Hematologic Diseases of the Adult) CML Working Party (WP) has developed a project aimed at selecting the treatment policies that may increase the probability of TFR, taking into account 4 variables: the need for TFR, the tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs), the characteristics of leukemia, and the patient. A Delphi-like method was used to reach a consensus among the representatives of 50 centers of the CML WP. A consensus was reached on the assessment of disease risk (EUTOS Long Term Survival [ELTS] score), on the definition of the most appropriate age boundaries for the choice of first-line treatment, on the choice of the TKI for first-line treatment, and on the definition of the responses that do not require a change of the TKI (BCR-ABL1 ≤10% at 3 months, ≤1% at 6 months, ≤0.1% at 12 months, ≤0.01% at 24 months), and of the responses that require a change of the TKI, when the goal is TFR (BCR-ABL1 & gt;10% at 3 and 6 months, & gt;1% at 12 months, and & gt;0.1% at 24 months). These suggestions may help optimize the treatment strategy for TFR.

Type of Medium: Online Resource

ISSN: 2473-9529 , 2473-9537

URL: Article

DOI: 10.1182/bloodadvances.2019000865

Language: English

Publisher: American Society of Hematology

Publication Date: 2019

detail.hit.zdb_id: 2876449-3

In: Blood, American Society of Hematology, Vol. 138, No. Supplement 1 ( 2021-11-05), p. 3408-3408

Abstract: Blinatumomab (Blina) and inotuzumab (InO) have improved the outcome of relapsed/refractory B-lymphoblastic leukemia (R/R B-ALL). However, many patients (pts) relapse after these treatments and little is known on their outcomes after recurrence and re-treatment with subsequent immunotherapy. We hereby describe the clinical characteristics and outcome of 71 pts with R/R B-ALL treated with both Blina and InO in any sequence - Blina/InO or InO/Blina - at different disease recurrences. At diagnosis, the median age was 34 years (15-64) and the male/female ratio was 1.6. Sixteen pts (22%) were Ph+ ALL, 3 (4%) were t(4;11)+ and 9 (13%) carried a complex karyotypes. ECOG PS was 0-1 in 66 pts (93%). At the time of the first immunotherapy, pts had received a median of 2 previous lines of treatment (1-8). All Ph- pts received intensive chemotherapy front-line; Ph+ pts received TKIs and steroids in 13 cases and intensive chemotherapy plus TKIs in 3 cases. Blina was the first salvage treatment (Blino/InO sequence) in 57 pts (80%) and InO (InO/Blina sequence) in 14 (20%). Twenty-seven pts (38%) had underwent a previous allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT). At the start of Blina as first immunotherapy, the median bone marrow (BM) blast count was 40% (0-100%); at the start of InO as first immunotherapy, the median BM blast count was 64% (2-90%). An extramedullary involvement was present in 5 patients (9%) in the Blina/InO group and in 1 patients (7%) in the InO/Blina group. During immunotherapy, the median number of lumbar punctures was 2 (0-9). A median of 2 cycles were administered for both Blina (range 1-9) and Ino (range 1-4). In the Blina/InO group, after Blina a G3/4 toxicity occurred in 15 cases (26%): non-hematologic in 12 cases (21%), neurologic in 6 (8%). Infections occurred in 17 pts (30%). In the InO/Blina group, after InO a G3/4 toxicity occurred in 3 pts (21%), with extra-hematologic toxicity in 2 cases (14%, liver toxicity 1 case). Infections occurred in 4 cases (28%). In the Blina/InO group, after Blina 36 pts (63%) achieved a complete remission (CR), with a negative minimal residual disease (MRD) in 24 (42%) pts; after InO, a CR was re-achieved in 47 pts (82.4%), with 34 (59.6%) being MRD-. In the InO/Blina group, after InO a CR was reached in 13 cases (93%), with 6 pts (42.8%) being MRD-; after Blina, a CR was re-achieved in 6 pts (42.8%), with 3 (21.4%) being MRD-. This salvage immunotherapy strategy represented a bridge to alloHSCT for 26 pts (37%). From the first immunotherapy, in the Blina/InO group, the median overall survival (OS) was 19 months and after InO 6.3 months (OS in MRD- vs MRD+, p ns). Disease free survival (DFS) after Blina was 7.4 months (11.6 vs 2.7 months in MRD- vs MRD+ pts, p .03) and after InO it was 5.4 months (MRD- vs MRD+ pts, p ns). In the InO/Blina group, the median OS was 9.4 months and after Blina 4.6 months (7.5 vs 2.8 months in MRD- vs MRD+ pts, p .02). DFS after InO was 5.1 months (MRD- vs MRD+ pts, p ns) and after Blina it was 1.5 months (8.7 vs 2.5 gg in MRD- vs MRD+ pts, p .02). OS and DFS in MRD- pts after Blina was significantly better, both in the Blina/InO and the InO/Blina groups. With a median follow-up of 16.5 months from the start of immunotherapy and 33.8 months from initial diagnosis, 24 pts (34%) are alive and 16 (22%) are alive in CR. Four patients (6%) died in CR due to veno-occlusive disease during HSCT after InO treatment. Interestingly, OS and DFS from the first immunotherapy was better in pts with a previous alloHSCT (median survival 24.2 vs 13 months, p=.0135). AlloHSCT after second immunotherapy was associated with a better OS and DFS (OS 9.8 and DFS 7.2 months vs 7.8 and 4.4 months, p ns). Our real-life study in R/R B-cell ALL pts with multiple previous lines of treatment demonstrates the feasibility and efficacy of a sequential immunotherapy strategy in terms of MRD response, DFS and OS, and as a bridge to HSCT. SM and PC: equal contributors Disclosures Papayannidis: Janssen: Honoraria; Astellas: Honoraria; AbbVie: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria. Curti: Jazz Pharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Chiaretti: amgen: Consultancy; pfizer: Consultancy; novartis: Consultancy; Incyte: Consultancy. Forghieri: Jannsen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Speakers Bureau; Jazz: Honoraria. Bonifacio: Bristol Myers Squibb: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria. Cerrano: Janssen: Honoraria; Insight: Honoraria; Jazz: Honoraria. Fracchiolla: Gilead: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau.

Type of Medium: Online Resource

ISSN: 0006-4971 , 1528-0020

URL: Article

DOI: 10.1182/blood-2021-147325

Language: English

Publisher: American Society of Hematology

Publication Date: 2021

detail.hit.zdb_id: 1468538-3

detail.hit.zdb_id: 80069-7

In: Blood, American Society of Hematology, Vol. 124, No. 21 ( 2014-12-06), p. 1794-1794

Abstract: BACKGROUND: The INTERIM study (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT 00858806) showed that in elderly ( 〉 65 years) Ph+ CML patients selected for a stable complete cytogenetic response (CCgR) lasting 〉 2 years, the policy of intermittent imatinib treatment (one month on/one month off) may affect the markers of residual disease (CCgR and major molecular response, MMR or MR3.0), but not the clinical outcomes (overall survival and progression-free survival) (Russo D et al, Blood 2013; 121(26):5138-44). AIMS: To update the results of the INTERIM Study, with a follow up ≥ 5 years. METHODS: After 4 years of follow up, patients continouing INTERIM treatment were monitored with peripheral blood RT-Q-PCR every 3 months according to the ELN-2013 guidelines. RESULTS: At 48thmonth, out of 76 patients enrolled in the INTERIM study, 13 (17%) had lost CCgR and MMR, 14 (18%) had lost MMR only and 50 patients (75%) continued INTERIM. The patients who had lost CCgR and/or MMR resumed imatinib continuously and all of them regained the CCgR and the MMR, within 3 to 12 months. No patient progressed to accelerated or blastic phase, or developed clonal chromosomal abnormalities in Ph+ cells, or BCR-ABL mutations. No patient complained of new or more severe side effects during the months “on”. After a follow up ≥ 5 years, 45/76 (59%) enrolled patients are on INTERIM, with a probability of maintaining intermittent administration of 59% (95% CI: 46-69). No patient lost the CCgR and only 9 additional patients lost the MMR while on intermittent treatment. All these patients resumed continuous imatinib treatment and regained the MMR. Thus, at ≥ 5 years, the probability of maintaing CCgR is 80% (95% CI 68-87) and the probability of maintaining the MMR is 61% (95% CI: 48-71). From start of INTERIM, 6 patients died but no deaths were related to CML progression (3 cases of other non haematological neoplasms, 1 stroke, 1 myocardial infarction, 1 chronic obstructive pulmonary disease).The PFS at ≥ 5 years is 94% (95% CI: 89-100) CONCLUSIONS: In summary, with a follow up ≥ 5 years, intermittent imatinib administration (INTERIM) confirmed to be safe, to produce a reversible increase of residual molecular disease in about one third of patients, but not to affect the long-term outcome. Aknowledgments: This work was supported in part by EuropeanLeukemiaNet (contract LSHC-CT-2004-503216) through the European Treatment and Outcome Study (EUTOS), supported by Novartis Oncology Europe, and COFIN 2009 Disclosures Russo: Celgene: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy. Martinelli:Novartis: Speakers Bureau; Bristol-Meyers and Squibb: Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Speakers Bureau. Soverini:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bristol-Meyers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria; Ariad: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Turri:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bristol-Meyers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria. Castagnetti:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bristol-Meyers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria. Breccia:novartis: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy. Abruzzese:Novartis: Consultancy. Tiribelli:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bristol-Meyers and Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria. Rosti:Consultant: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Bristol-Meiers Squibb: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Ariad: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau.

Type of Medium: Online Resource

ISSN: 0006-4971 , 1528-0020

URL: Article

DOI: 10.1182/blood.V124.21.1794.1794

Language: English

Publisher: American Society of Hematology

Publication Date: 2014

detail.hit.zdb_id: 1468538-3

detail.hit.zdb_id: 80069-7