Validation of a survival-risk score (SRS) in relapsed/refractory CLL patients treated with idelalisib-rituximab.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Gentile M
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7494850 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Sep
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Validation of a survival-risk score (SRS) in relapsed/refractory CLL patients treated with idelalisib-rituximab.
Gentile Massimo M Martino Enrica Antonia EA Visentin Andrea A Coscia Marta M Reda Gianluigi G Sportoletti Paolo P Mauro Francesca Romana FR Laurenti Luca L Varettoni Marzia M Murru Roberta R Chiarenza Annalisa A Vigna Ernesto E Mendicino Francesco F Lucia Eugenio E Bossio Sabrina S Recchia Anna Grazia AG Moia Riccardo R Pietrasanta Daniela D Loseto Giacomo G Consoli Ugo U Scortechini Ilaria I Rossi Francesca Maria FM Zucchetto Antonella A Al-Janazreh Hamdi H Vitale Candida C Tripepi Giovanni G D'Arrigo Graziella G Angeletti Ilaria I Bomben Riccardo R Neri Antonino A Cutrona Giovanna G Fronza Gilberto G Di Raimondo Francesco F Gaidano Gianluca G Cuneo Antonio A Foà Robin R Ferrarini Manlio M Trentin Livio L Gattei Valter V Morabito Fortunato F
Blood cancer journal 20200916 9
Similar Datasets
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC5161005 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPatients with relapsed chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) who have clinically significant coexisting medical conditions are less able to undergo standard chemotherapy. Effective therapies with acceptable side-effect profiles are needed for this patient population.MethodsIn this multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study, we assessed the efficacy and safety of idelalisib, an oral inhibitor of the delta isoform of phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase, in combination with rituximab versus rituximab plus placebo. We randomly assigned 220 patients with decreased renal function, previous therapy-induced myelosuppression, or major coexisting illnesses to receive rituximab and either idelalisib (at a dose of 150 mg) or placebo twice daily. The primary end point was progression-free survival. At the first prespecified interim analysis, the study was stopped early on the recommendation of the data and safety monitoring board owing to overwhelming efficacy.ResultsThe median progression-free survival was 5.5 months in the placebo group and was not reached in the idelalisib group (hazard ratio for progression or death in the idelalisib group, 0.15; P<0.001). Patients receiving idelalisib versus those receiving placebo had improved rates of overall response (81% vs. 13%; odds ratio, 29.92; P<0.001) and overall survival at 12 months (92% vs. 80%; hazard ratio for death, 0.28; P=0.02). Serious adverse events occurred in 40% of the patients receiving idelalisib and rituximab and in 35% of those receiving placebo and rituximab.ConclusionsThe combination of idelalisib and rituximab, as compared with placebo and rituximab, significantly improved progression-free survival, response rate, and overall survival among patients with relapsed CLL who were less able to undergo chemotherapy. (Funded by Gilead; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01539512.).
| S-EPMC4161365 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Although agents targeting B-cell receptor signaling have provided practice-changing results in relapsed chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) and non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL), they require prolonged administration and provide incomplete responses. Given synergistic preclinical activity with phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase δ and spleen tyrosine kinase inhibition, this phase 2 study evaluated the safety and efficacy of the combination of idelalisib and entospletinib. Eligible patients with relapsed or refractory CLL or NHL underwent intrapatient dose escalation with each agent. With a median treatment exposure of 10 weeks, 60% and 36% of patients with CLL or follicular lymphoma, respectively, achieved objective responses. However, the study was terminated early because of treatment-emergent pneumonitis in 18% of patients (severe in 11 of 12 cases). Although most patients recovered with supportive measures and systemic steroids, 2 fatalities occurred and were attributed to treatment-emergent pneumonitis. Increases of interferon-γ and interleukins 6, 7, and 8 occurred over time in patients who developed pneumonitis. Future studies of novel combinations should employ conservative designs that incorporate pharmacodynamics/biomarker monitoring. These investigations should also prospectively evaluate plasma cytokine/chemokine levels in an attempt to validate biomarkers predictive of response and toxicity. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT01796470.
| S-EPMC4874222 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The CLL-IPI is a risk-weighted prognostic model for previously untreated patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), but has not been evaluated in patients with relapsed CLL or on novel therapies. We evaluated the CLL-IPI in 897 patients with relapsed/refractory CLL in 3 randomized trials testing idelalisib (PI3Kδ inhibitor). The CLL-IPI identified patients as low (2.2%), intermediate (12.8%), high (48.7%), and very high (36.2%) risk and was prognostic for survival (log-rank p < .0001; C-statistic 0.706). Of CLL-IPI factors, age >65, β2-microglobulin >3.5mg/L, unmutated immunoglobulin heavy chain variable region gene, and deletion 17p/TP53 mutation were independently prognostic, but Rai I-IV or Binet B/C was not. The CLL-IPI is prognostic for survival in relapsed CLL and with idelalisib therapy. However, low/intermediate risk is uncommon, and regression parameters of individual factors in this risk-weighted model appear different in relapsed CLL. Reassessment of the weighting of the individual variables might optimize the model in this setting.
| S-EPMC6545166 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Because the efficacy of new drugs reported in trials may not translate into similar results when used in the real-life, we analyzed the efficacy of idelalisib and rituximab (IR) in 149 patients with relapsed/refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia treated at 34 GIMEMA centers. Median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival were 22.9 and 44.5 months, respectively; performance status (PS) ≥2 and ≥3 previous lines of therapy were associated with shorter PFS and overall survival (OS). 48% of patients were on treatment at 12 months; the experience of the centers (≥5 treated patients) and PS 0-1 were associated with a significantly longer treatment duration (p = 0.015 and p = 0.002, respectively). TP53 disruption had no prognostic significance. The overall response rate to subsequent treatment was 49.2%, with median OS of 15.5 months and not reached in patients who discontinued, respectively, for progression and for toxicity (p < 0.01). Treatment breaks ≥14 days were recorded in 96% of patients and adverse events mirrored those reported in trials. In conclusion, this real-life analysis showed that IR treatment duration was longer at experienced centers, that the ECOG PS and ≥3 lines of previous therapy are strong prognostic factor and that the overall outcome with this regimen was superimposable to that reported in a randomized trial.
| S-EPMC8451799 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC7214265 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase-delta (PI3Kδ) signaling is critical for proliferation, survival, homing, and tissue retention of malignant B cells. Idelalisib, a selective oral inhibitor of PI3Kδ, has shown considerable single-agent activity in patients with heavily pretreated chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). This study evaluated the safety and clinical activity of idelalisib in combination with bendamustine (IB) or rituximab (IR) or both (IBR) in patients with relapsed or refractory (R/R) CLL. Idelalisib was given continuously at 100 or 150 mg twice daily in combination with rituximab (375 mg/m2 weekly × 8 doses), bendamustine (70 or 90 mg/m2, days 1 and 2 every 4 weeks × 6 cycles) or BR (rituximab, 375 mg/m2 every 4 weeks and bendamustine, 70 mg/m2, days 1 and 2 every 4 weeks × 6 cycles). The primary endpoint was safety; secondary endpoints included overall response rate (ORR), duration of response (DOR), and progression-free survival (PFS). Fifty-two patients (median age 64 years) with a median of 3 prior therapies were enrolled. ORR was 84.6% (89.5% IR group, 77.8% IB group, and 86.7% IBR group). The overall median PFS was 25.6 months, and median DOR was 26.6 months. The most common grade ≥3 adverse events (≥10% of patients) were pneumonia (19.2%), diarrhea (13.5%), and febrile neutropenia (17.3%). Idelalisib-based combination therapy with bendamustine and/or rituximab was highly active, resulting in durable tumor control in patients with heavily pretreated R/R CLL. However, its tolerability profile suggests that these regimens should be used cautiously in this patient population. ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT01088048.
| S-EPMC6745995 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The MURANO trial (A Study to Evaluate the Benefit of Venetoclax Plus Rituximab Compared With Bendamustine Plus Rituximab in Participants With Relapsed or Refractory Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia [CLL]; ClinicalTrials.gov identifier #NCT02005471) reported superior progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) with venetoclax-rituximab (VenR) vs bendamustine-rituximab (BR) in relapsed/refractory (R/R) CLL. Patients were randomized to 2 years of VenR (n = 194; rituximab for the first 6 months) or 6 months of BR (n = 195). Although undetectable minimal residual disease (uMRD) was achieved more often with VenR, the long-term implications of uMRD with this fixed-duration, chemotherapy-free regimen have not been explored. We report MRD kinetics and updated outcomes with 5 years' follow-up. Survival benefits with VenR vs BR were sustained (median PFS [95% confidence interval]: 53.6 [48.4, 57.0] vs 17.0 [15.5, 21.7] months, respectively, P < .0001; 5-year OS [95% confidence interval]: 82.1% [76.4, 87.8] vs 62.2% [54.8, 69.6], P < .0001). VenR was superior to BR, regardless of cytogenetic category. VenR-treated patients with uMRD at end of treatment (EOT; n = 83) had superior OS vs those with high-MRD+ (n = 12): 3-year post-EOT survival rates were 95.3% vs 72.9% (P = .039). In those with uMRD at EOT, median time to MRD conversion was 19.4 months. Of 47 patients with documented MRD conversion, 19 developed progressive disease (PD); median time from conversion to PD was 25.2 months. A population-based logistic growth model indicated slower MRD median doubling time post-EOT with VenR (93 days) vs BR (53 days; P = 1.2 × 10-7). No new safety signals were identified. Sustained survival, uMRD benefits, and durable responses support 2-year fixed-duration VenR treatment in R/R CLL.
| S-EPMC9412011 | biostudies-literature
Project description:For the treatment of mature B cell malignancies including chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), the last 5 years has brought major advances in the application of targeted therapies. Whilst monoclonal anti-CD20 agents such as rituximab have a central role in combination with traditional cytotoxic therapy, their combination with novel agents that target the B cell receptor signaling pathway and other intracellular mechanisms of B cell proliferation is a new approach to treatment. Venetoclax is a highly specific novel agent inhibiting the bcl-2 anti-apoptotic pathway and has potent activity in CLL. Its combination with rituximab results in deeper and more durable responses and this regimen is a valuable option in the treatment of relapsed or refractory CLL including adverse prognostic variants such as cases that are fludarabine refractory or harbor the 17p chromosomal deletion. This review centers on the use of venetoclax and rituximab in relapsed or refractory CLL.
| S-EPMC6535706 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Purpose of reviewThere have been significant advances in the treatment of relapsed/refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) over the past two decades. However, the intention of treatment remains control of the disease and delay of progression rather than a cure which remains largely elusive. Considering that CLL is mostly seen in older patients, there are multiple factors that play a role in the selection of CLL beyond the frontline treatment. Here, we review the concept of relapsed CLL, factors that predispose to relapse, and therapeutic options available to this patient population. We also review investigational therapies and provide a framework for selection of therapies in this setting.Recent findingsTargeted therapies with continuous BTK inhibitors (BTKi) or fixed duration venetoclax plus anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody therapy have established superiority over chemoimmunotherapy in relapsed CLL and have become the preferred standard of care treatment. The second-generation more selective BTK inhibitors (acalabrutinib and zanubrutinib) have shown improved safety profile compared to ibrutinib. However, resistance to the covalent BTK inhibitors may emerge and is commonly associated with mutations in BTK or other downstream enzymes. The novel non-covalent BTK inhibitors such as pirtobrutinib (Loxo-305) and nemtabrutinib (ARQ 531) are showing promising activities for relapsed CLL refractory to prior covalent BTKi. Other novel therapies such as chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cell therapy have also shown significant activities for relapsed and refractory CLL. Measurable residual disease (MRD) assessment has a growing importance in venetoclax-based limited-duration therapy and there is mounting evidence that MRD negativity improves outcomes. However, it remains to be seen if this will become an established clinically significant endpoint. Further, the optimal sequence of various treatment options remains to be determined. Patients with relapsed CLL now have more options for the treatment of the disease. The choice of therapy is best individualized especially in the absence of direct comparisons of targeted therapies, and the coming years will bring more data on the best sequence of use of the therapeutic agents.
| S-EPMC10242240 | biostudies-literature