integration of novel therapies in wm and cll when and how to use them n.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Integration of Novel Therapies in WM and CLL : When and How to Use Them PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Integration of Novel Therapies in WM and CLL : When and How to Use Them

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 55

Integration of Novel Therapies in WM and CLL : When and How to Use Them - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 107 Views
  • Uploaded on

Integration of Novel Therapies in WM and CLL : When and How to Use Them. Neil E Kay, M.D. October 2014. Mayo Team. Deb Bowen Tim Call Michael Conte Wei Ding Tait Shanafelt Steve Ansell. Learning Objectives. Review “standard therapies” of WM and CLL

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Integration of Novel Therapies in WM and CLL : When and How to Use Them' - eric-perry


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
integration of novel therapies in wm and cll when and how to use them

Integration of Novel Therapies in WM and CLL : When and How to Use Them

Neil E Kay, M.D.

October 2014

mayo team
Mayo Team
  • Deb Bowen
  • Tim Call
  • Michael Conte
  • Wei Ding
  • Tait Shanafelt
  • Steve Ansell
learning objectives
Learning Objectives
  • Review “standard therapies” of WM and CLL
  • Can we still consider standard therapies in WM and CLL?
  • What novel therapies are available for us in clinical practice?
slide4

Waldenström’s Macroglobulinemia“A disease with two problems”

Lymphoplasmacytic infiltrate

Monoclonal IgM protein

Gertz et al. The Oncologist 2000;5:63-67

slide5

Patient

  • 67 year old man
  • Severe fatigue, nausea, visual difficulties, increasing confusion and sleepiness, gums bleed easily.
  • Anemic (Hgb 8.8g/dl). Platelets decreased to 96,000.
  • Ulcers have developed on his ankles
  • Monoclonal IgM – 6.6 g/dl. Viscosity – 5.8
  • Bone marrow biopsy – 85% involvement by lymphoplasmacytic lymphoma
  • CT scan – enlarged liver and spleen and multiple bulky lymph nodes in the abdomen
what c linical f indings suggest that t reatment s hould b e s tarted
What Clinical Findings Suggest That Treatment Should Be Started?
  • Fever, night sweats, or weight loss.
  • Lymphadenopathy or splenomegaly.
  • Hemoglobin ≤ 10 g/dL or a platelet count < 100 x 10(9)/L due to marrow infiltration.
  • Complications such as hyperviscosity syndrome, symptomatic sensorimotor peripheral neuropathy, systemic amyloidosis, renal insufficiency, or symptomatic cryoglobulinemia.

Kyle et al. SeminOncol. 2003 Apr;30(2):116-20

Dimopouloset al, Blood prepublished online,July 15,2014

indications for initiation of t herapy in wm
Indications For Initiation of Therapy in WM
  • Clinical indications for initiation of therapy:
  • Recurrent fever, night sweats, weight loss, fatigue
  • • Lymphadenopathy which is either symptomatic or bulky (≥5cm in maximum diameter)
  • • Symptomatic hepatomegaly and/or splenomegaly
  • • Symptomatic organomegaly and/or organ or tissue infiltration
  • Nephropathy related to WM
  • Amyloidosis related to WM

Dimopoulos Blood. 2014 Aug 28;124(9):1404-1411

indications for initiation of t herapy in wm1
Indications For Initiation of Therapy in WM
  • Laboratory indications for initiation of therapy:
  • Hyperviscosity
        • Symptomatic cryoglobulinemia
  • Cold agglutinin anemia
  • Immune hemolytic anemia and/or thrombocytopenia
  • Hemoglobin ≤10g/dL or Platelet count <100x109/L

Dimopoulos Blood. 2014 Aug 28;124(9):1404-1411

ipss for wm
IPSS For WM
  • Five adverse covariates were identified:
    • advanced age (>65 years),
    • hemoglobin less than or equal to 11.5 g/dL
    • platelet count less than or equal to 100 x 10(9)/L,
    • beta2-microglobulin more than 3 mg/L
    • serum monoclonal protein concentration more than 7.0 g/dl
  • Three risk groups
    • Low, Intermediate, high risk
    • 5 year survival rates of 87, 68 and 36 %

Morel,Blood. 2009 Apr 30;113(18):4163-70.

many t reatment o ptions
Many Treatment Options
  • Watch and wait
  • Single agent rituximab
  • Chemoimmunotherapy combinations
  • Plasmapheresis
  • Clinical trials with new agents
  • Stem cell transplantation
  • Which approach is best?
common treatments used for initial therapy
Common Treatments used For Initial Therapy
  • Purine analogue based combinations:
    • FCR/FR
  • Alkylating agent based combinations :
    • R-CHOP
    • DRC
    • R-Bendamustine
  • Bortezomib based combinations
    • BDR
  • Rituximab alone

BDR =bortezomib/dexamethasone

(DRC)-Rituximab combinations with cyclophosphamide/dexamethasone

slide12

Mayo Clinic (mSMART) Consensus for Management of Newly Diagnosed WM

#Bendamustine + rituximab is an alternative

Ansell et al. Mayo Clin Proc. 2010;85:824-833

slide13

Mayo Clinic (mSMART) Consensus for Management of Newly Diagnosed WM

#Bendamustine + rituximab is an alternative

Ansell et al. Mayo Clin Proc. 2010;85:824-833

slide14

Mayo Clinic (mSMART) Consensus for Management of Newly Diagnosed WM

#

#Bendamustine + rituximab is an alternative

Ansell et al. Mayo Clin Proc. 2010;85:824-833

slide15

Mayo Clinic (mSMART) Consensus for Management of Relapsed Waldenström Macroglobulinemia.

Ansell et al. Mayo Clin Proc. 2010;85:824-833

slide16

New Drugs with Promise

  • BTK inhibitors - ibrutinib
  • Bendamustine
  • mTOR inhibitors - RAD001 (Everolimus)
  • New anti-CD20 antibodies
  • Anti-bcl2 agents - Obatoclax
  • New HDAC inhibitors - LBH589
  • New proteosome inhibitors – MLN9708
  • New Imids - Pomalidomide (CC-4047)
  • Other agents – Enzastaurin, perifosine, imatinib, Simvastatin, sildenafil citrate
slide17

Phase II Study of Ibrutinib

in Relapsed/Refractory WM

Screening

Informed Consent and Registration

Ibrutinib

420 mg po daily

Progressive Disease or Unacceptable Toxicity

SD or Response

Continue x 26 cycles

Stop Ibrutinib

Event Monitoring

Event Monitoring

Opened May 2012

DFCI, MSKCC, STANFORD

N=35; expanded to 63

Treon et al, Blood 2013; 122(21): Abstract 251

slide18

Extramedullary Disease following Ibrutinib

For patients with baseline and Cycle 6 CT scans

Adenopathy > 1.5 cm

Splenomegaly > 15 cm

Data Lock November 8, 2013

(based on local review)

Treon et al, Blood 2013; 122(21): Abstract 251

summary of other results
Summary of Other Results
  • The BTK inhibitor ibrutinib is associated with rapid reduction of serum IgMand improved HCT
    • ORR of 83%,
    • major RR of 65% in relapsed/refractory patients.
  • Responses are durable with 87% of patients continuing on treatment at a median of 9 cycles.
  • Ibrutinib is well tolerated, with good safety profile.

Treon et al, Blood 2013; 122(21): Abstract 251

take home message
Take Home Message
  • “Traditional therapies” are still valuable in the management of WM
  • Novel therapies such as BTK inhibitors can be considered for at least relapsed/refractory WM and are the subject of clinical trial evaluation
novel therapy integration in cll
Novel Therapy Integration in CLL
  • Review where we have been
  • New options
  • Application to separate cohorts of CLL
    • Early stage (high risk)
    • Upfront
      • Young vs. “Elderly”
    • Relapsed/refractory
    • Transplant
chemoimmunotherapy cit 2014
Chemoimmunotherapy (CIT)2014
  • Now over a decade of testing CIT in various forms:
    • FCR (Fludarabine)
    • FR
    • PCR (Pentostatin)
    • BR (Bendamustine)
  • Current Data suggest that high OR with approximately 45-50% CRs in upfront setting but:
    • High RISK FISH and IGVH unmutated do not do well
    • Can see significant cytopenias
    • A subset of patient can have very durable remissions
slide23

Long term Remissions After FCR

  • CLL 8 Design

Patients with untreated active CLL & good physical fitness*

Randomization

Fludarabine

Cyclophosphamide

Fludarabine

Cyclophosphamide

Rituximab

Sixcoursesoftherapy

Follow-upphase

*CIRS ≤ 6, Creatinine Clearance ≥ 70 ml/min

slide24

Long Term Remissions After FCR

  • Overall survival (OS)

Median observation time

5.9 years

FCR69.4% alive

Median not reached

FC 62.3% alive

Median 86 months

HR 0.68,

95% CI 0.535 - 0.858

p=0.001

Fischer K et al. iwCLL2013

slide25

Long Term Remissions After FCR

  • Overall survival (OS) in IGHVmutated / unmutated patients

Median observation time

5.9 years

IGVH Mutated

Median OS FCR IGHV mutated

Not reached

FC IGHVmutated

Not reached

FCR IGHV unmutated

86 months

FC IGHVunmutated

75 months

FC vs.FCR

HR 1.63,

95% CI 0.908 - 2.916

Fischer K et al. iwCLL2013

slide26

Long Term Remissions After FCR

  • Progression freesurvival (PFS) in IGHVmutated / unmutated patients

Median observation time

5.9 years

IGVH Mutated

Median PFS FCR IGHV mutated

Not reached

FC IGHVmutated

42 months

FCR IGHV unmutated

42 months

FC IGHVunmutated

29 months

FC vs.FCR

HR 2.12,

95% CI 1.464 - 3.063

Fischer K et al. iwCLL2013

long t erm remissions a fter fcr take home message
Long Term Remissions After FCRTake Home Message
  • Results on progression-free survival, overall survival, confirm superiority of the FCR regimen
  • FCR induced long term remissions in IGHV mutated patients
  • Historical comparison supports the observed benefit of FCR in IGHV mutated patients
so where do we go from here
So Where Do We Go From Here?
  • Ideally need regimens that are effective in:
    • Early stage (high risk)
    • Progressive CLL (upfront)
      • Including the elderly
    • Relapsed / Refractory
  • Non toxic in terms of
    • Immune suppression
    • Bone marrow suppression
slide29

Selected “New” and Emerging Therapies

*Withdrawn from commercial sale in 2012; only available by special program

** Also known as Gazyva

***Also known as Zydelig

****Also known as GDC-0199

response levels for novel agents relapsed refractory na ve
Response Levels for Novel Agents(Relapsed/Refractory/Naïve )

* Note that 81.5% achieved a nodal response

** Estimated at 26 months

*** Estimated at 30 months

  • Byrd J, N Engl J Med. 2013 Jul 4;369(1):32-42.
  • O’Brien , ASCO, 2014.
  • Brown J, Blood. 2014 May 29;123(22):3390-7.
  • Furman, N Engl J Med 2014; 370:997-1007
more information
More Information
  • Alemtuzumab no longer routinely available
  • Ibrutinib as compared with ofatumumab, significantly improved PFS, OS and RR in previously treated CLL 1
  • Responses improve over time !
    • Prolonged use may be needed 2
      • Median time to first response-1.9 months
      • Best response seen at 7.3 months

1. Byrd, N Engl J Med 2014; 371:213-223

2. O’Brien , ASCO, 2014

some information
Some Information
  • Good news - Bad news
  • Responses are seen in all risk categories
    • IGVH unmutated ,del 17p, p53 mutated
  • BUT
    • Earliest relapses are seen in the high risk categories as well
  • Byrd J, N Engl J Med. 2013 Jul 4;369(1):32-42.
  • O’Brien , ASCO, 2014.
  • Brown J, Blood. 2014 May 29;123(22):3390-7.
h igh risk fish in novel trials
High Risk FISH in Novel Trials

O’Brien , ASCO, 2014.

fda expands approved use of ibrutinib for cll
FDA expands approved use of ibrutinib for CLL

More Good News!

July 2014

FDA approved Ibrutinib as first-line therapy for the subset of CLL patients with deletion 17p. 

If you do not have an alternative trial specifically for 17p- patients that could be an option.

at what price new agents
At What Price New Agents ?
  • Two considerations
    • New toxicity profiles
    • Cost of these agents
  • Average Whole Sale cost1 (current pricing)
    • Chlorambucil-~$3,500 for 6 cycles of treatment
    • CIT- ~$60,000 for standard treatment course
    • Ofatumumab-$120,000/treatment course
    • Ibrutinib~$118,000/year.

1. Shanafelt et al, manuscript submitted

signal inhibitor toxicity profile
Signal Inhibitor Toxicity Profile
  • Side effects associated with Signal Inhibitors
    • Quoted in most articles as “modest with the most frequent”
        • nausea (24%), diarrhea (19%), vomiting (12%) and liver function abnormalities (35%)., rash, arthralgia , pneumonitis, bruising and infections
        • CYP3A inhibitors/inducers (Cytochrome P450 3A4)
          • Avoid co-administration with strong or moderate CYP3A inhibitors or CYP3A inducers
  • Issue of difficulties in using anticoagulants with novel agents
        • BTK experience (20% grade 1 ecchymoses)
        • Association with bleeding events and defective platelet aggregation in response to collagen 1-2
        • Hold drug for surgical/dental procedure ?

1.Levade Blood. 2014 Oct 10

2.Kamel, S, Leukemia. 2014

mayo approach
Mayo Approach
  • Early stage (high risk)
slide38

Early Stage Asymptomatic

  • Autoimmune cytopenias
  • ITP
  • AIHA
  • High risk
  • 17p-/p53 mutated
  • IGHV UM

Non-high risk

  • Steroids/IVIG
  • Rituximab
  • Chlorambucil-Obinituzumab
  • R-CP
  • Splenectomy
  • Observe
  • increased frequency FU

Observe

Clinical Trial

(Novel Agents)

  • Clinical Trial
  • low toxicity agents
  • Vitamin D/ EGCG

* Purine nucleoside analogues (e.g. fludarabine, pentostatin) are contra-indicated in patients with active autoimmune hemolytic anemia or ITP

e arly s tage high risk
Early Stage (High Risk)
  • Can be defined by Prognostic Score
  • PFS and OS is much worse for these patients vs. Low Risk
    • 5-year OS ranging from 18.7% to 95.2%
  • Need unique approaches to deal with high risk

Phlug, Blood. 2014 Jul 3;124(1):49-62.

slide40

Integrating Multiple Markers: CLL Prognostic Index

  • Challenge integrating multiple molecular biomarkers
  • Pooled analysis 3 trials ~1950 patients (1223 all markers)
  • MV analysis: 8 factors independently associated survival
    • stage not independent predictor OS
slide41

Integrating Multiple Markers: CLL Prognostic Index

  • Created weighted model:

Phlug, Blood. 2014 Jul 3;124(1):49-62.

slide42

Integrating Multiple Markers: CLL Prognostic Index

All patients

Binet A

--- Low Risk (N = 249)

Low Risk (N=300)

Intermediate risk (N=460)

--- Intermediate Risk (N = 196)

High risk (N=410)

--- High Risk (N = 76)

Very high risk (N=53)

--- Very High Risk (N = 9)

)

Phlug, Blood. 2014 Jul 3;124(1):49-62

cll 12 gcllsg trial
CLL 12:GCLLSG trial
  • Primary Objectives
    • To demonstrate superiority of ibrutinib over placebo in prolonging EFS for subjects with treatment-naïve CLL stage A and intermediate or (very) high risk of disease progression.
    • Trial is now activated in GCLLSG but also will be done at Mayo clinic and at Ohio State University
      • Rai 0
mayo approach1
Mayo Approach
  • Progressive CLL (upfront)
    • Including the elderly
  • Relapsed / Refractory
  • Transplant
upfront treatment indicated patient fit
Upfront Treatment Indicated (Patient Fit)
  • More traditional treatment options
    • Clinical trial
    • Chemoimmunotherapy options:
      • PCR (pentostatin, cyclophosphamide, rituximab)
      • FR (fludarabine, rituximab)
      • FCR (fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, rituximab)
  • More traditional (avoid alkylating agents)
    • Methylprednisolone-rituximab 2
    • Alemtuzumab based treatment 3
      • Weekly CMV monitoring by PCR
  • If del (17p13) and/ or P53 mutation, then treatment options include:
    • Referral for transplant evaluation in 1st remission
    • Clinical trial
    • Ibrutinib 1
    • Idelalisib (+/-Rituximab)

1. Byrd, N Engl J Med 2014; 371:213-223

2. Castro, Leukemia. Oct 2009; 23(10): 1779–1789.

3. ASH Education Book December 10, 2011 no. 1 119-120

upfront treatment indicated patient unfit
Upfront Treatment Indicated (Patient Unfit)
  • More traditional Treatment options
    • R-CP (rituximab*/cyclophosphamide/prednisone)
    • Methylprednisolone/rituximab* 3
    • Bendamustine * +/- rituximab* 4
  • Supportive care only
  • Treatment options
    • Clinical trial
    • Chlorambucil +/- rituximab or obinutuzumab* 1,2

* If using rituximab or Obinutuzumab, order hepatitis B and C testing prior to treatment

1,Goede, V, N Engl J Med. 2014 Mar 20;370(12):1101-10

2. Hillmen, JCO Sep 20, 2014:3039-3047

3. Castro, Leukemia. Oct 2009; 23(10): 1779–1789.

4. Fischer, J Clin Oncol. 2011 Sep 10; 29(26):3559-66

* FDA approved

recurrent refractory patient fit
Recurrent/Refractory(Patient Fit)
  • Asymptomatic patients (a clinical trial or observed)
  • Symptomatic patients managed according to performance status.
  • Options for Good Performance Status:
    • Clinical trial
    • Ibrutinib * 1
    • Idelalisib *-rituximab 2
    • Ofatumumab3
  • More traditional
    • Chemoimmunotherapy(PCR, FCR, BR, CFAR)
    • Alemtuzumab +/- rituximab
    • Methylprednisolone/rituximab 4
    • Consider transplant

* FDA approved

1. Byrd, N Engl J Med 2014; 371:213-223

2. Furman,NEngl J Med 2014; 370:997-1007

3. Wierda , J CO28: 1749-1755,2010

4. Castro, Leukemia. Oct 2009; 23(10): 1779–1789.

recurrent refractory patient fit1
Recurrent/Refractory(Patient Fit)
  • If del (17p13) or P53 deletion
  • Options include:
    • Clinical trial
    • Ibrutinib 1
    • Idelalisib-rituximab 2
  • More traditional
    • Methylprednisolone-rituximab 3
    • Alemtuzumab based treatment
      • Weekly CMV monitoring by PCR
      • Pneumocystis and herpes zoster prophylaxis

1.Byrd, N Engl J Med 2014; 371:213-223

2. Furman,NEngl J Med 2014; 370:997-1007

3. Castro, Leukemia.23: 1779–1789.2009

recurrent refractory patient unfit
Recurrent/Refractory(Patient Unfit)
  • Poor Performance Options include:
    • Clinical trial
    • Ibrutinib 1
    • Idelalisib-rituximab 2
  • More traditional
    • Chlorambucil+/- rituximab 3
    • Methylprednisolone/rituximab 4
    • Supportive care only

1.Byrd, N Engl J Med 2014; 371:213-223

2. Furman,NEngl J Med 2014; 370:997-1007

3. Goede, V, N Engl J Med. 2014 20:1101-10

4. Castro, Leukemia.23: 1779–1789.2009

elderly therapy chlorambucil and obinutuzumab
Elderly Therapy (Chlorambucil And Obinutuzumab)
  • For Fit elderly –Can still use CIT
  • Obinutuzumabvs. rituximab, each combined with chlorambucil
    • Patients with previously untreated CLL and coexisting conditions.
    • The primary end point was investigator-assessed progression-free survival.
  • N=781 patients with previously untreated CLL
    • score higher than 6 on the Cumulative Illness Rating Scale (CIRS) or an estimated creatinine clearance of 30 to 69 ml
    • Median CIRS was 8
    • Median age was 73

Goede, V, N Engl J Med. 2014 Mar 20;370(12):1101-10

elderly therapy chlorambucil and obinutuzumab1
Elderly Therapy (Chlorambucil And Obinutuzumab)
  • Results
      • Median PFS, 26.7 months with obinutuzumab-chlorambucil vs.16.3 months with rituximab-chlorambucil
      • Higher rates of complete response (20.7% vs. 7.0%)
      • Toxicities
        • Infusion-related reactions and neutropenia were more common with obinutuzumab-chlorambucilvs. rituximab-chlorambucil, but risk of infection was not increased.
  • Bottom line
    • Combining an anti-CD20 antibody with chemotherapy improved outcomes in patients with CLL and coexisting conditions.

Goede, V, N Engl J Med. 2014 Mar 20;370(12):1101-10

do novel agents help us in high risk cll heading for bmt
Do Novel Agents Help us in High Risk CLL heading For BMT?
  • Some Scenarios where could use Novel inhibitors( BTK / PI3kinase):
    • Younger, fit patient with TP53 disruption (via mutation or loss) who is previously untreated but in need of therapy
    • Relapsed patient (previously treated) meeting current EBMT criteria
summary take home message
Summary(Take Home Message)
  • CIT can and should still be used for upfront therapy
    • Young patients with IGVH mutated status
  • Novel agents have clinical activity
    • Signal inhibitors are ideal agents in terms of lack of obvious marrow toxicity and induction of high OR
      • Even in high risk
    • Newer monoclonal agents show promise alone or in combination
  • Negative issues
    • Cost / coverage
    • Different types of adverse reactions/toxicities
    • Long range outcome still not clear