Goede V et al. Proc ASCO 2013;Abstract 7004.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Palumbo A et al. Proc ASH 2013;Abstract 536.
Advertisements

Brown JR et al. Proc ASH 2013;Abstract 523.
Paz-Ares LG et al. Proc ASCO 2011;Abstract CRA7510.
Phase 1/2 Study of Weekly MLN9708, an Investigational Oral Proteasome Inhibitor, in Combination with Lenalidomide and Dexamethasone in Patients with Previously.
Facon T et al. Proc ASH 2013;Abstract 2.
Efficacy and Safety of Three Bortezomib-Based Combinations in Elderly, Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma Patients: Results from All Randomized Patients.
Palumbo A et al. Proc ASH 2012;Abstract 446.
LaCasce A et al. Proc ASH 2014;Abstract 293.
Roberts AW et al. Proc ASH 2014;Abstract 325.
Lymphoma & Myeloma 2014 October 24, 2014 Obinutuzumab: Analysis of it’s Pivotal Data Myron S. Czuczman, MD Chief, Lymphoma/Myeloma Section Head, Lymphoma.
Efficacy of Denileukin Diftitox Retreatment in Patients with Cutaneous T-Cell Lymphoma Who Relapsed After Initial Response 1 Identification of an Active,
Bosch F et al. Proc ASH 2014;Abstract 3345.
Effect of Age on Efficacy and Safety Outcomes in Patients (Pts) with Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma (NDMM) Receiving Lenalidomide and Low-Dose Dexamethasone.
Treatment with Bendamustine- Bortezomib-Dexamethasone in Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma Shows Significant Activity and Is Well Tolerated Ludwig H.
Interim Results of an International, Multicenter, Phase 2 Study of Bruton’s Tyrosine Kinase (BTK) Inhibitor, Ibrutinib (PCI-32765), in Relapsed or Refractory.
A Phase 2 Study of Elotuzumab in Combination with Lenalidomide and Low-Dose Dexamethasone in Patients with Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma: Updated.
Result of Interim Analysis of Overall Survival in the GCIG ICON7 Phase III Randomized Trial of Bevacizumab in Women with Newly Diagnosed Ovarian Cancer.
A Phase Ib Dose Escalation Trial of SAR (Anti-CD-38 mAb) in Combination with Lenalidomide and Dexamethasone in Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma.
Phase III Trial of Pazopanib in Locally Advanced and/or Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Sternberg CN et al. ASCO 2009; Abstract (Oral Presentation)
Cetuximab + Cisplatin in Estrogen Receptor-Negative, Progesterone Receptor-Negative, HER2-Negative (Triple-Negative) Metastatic Breast Cancer: Results.
NHL13: A Multicenter, Randomized Phase III Study of Rituximab as Maintenance Treatment versus Observation Alone in Patients with Aggressive B ‐ Cell Lymphoma.
Randomized Phase III Trial Comparing FOLFIRINOX (F: 5FU/Leucovorin [LV], Irinotecan [I], and Oxaliplatin [O]) versus Gemcitabine (G) as First-Line Treatment.
Should Chlorambucil Be Used with Obinutuzumab in Untreated CLL? Answer: YES! Myron S. Czuczman, MD Chief, Lymphoma/Myeloma Section Head, Lymphoma Translational.
Ibrutinib in Combination with Bendamustine and Rituximab Is Active and Tolerable in Patients with Relapsed/Refractory CLL/SLL: Final Results of a Phase.
A Randomized Phase II Study Comparing Consolidation with a Single Dose of 90 Y Ibritumomab Tiuxetan (Zevalin ® ) (Z) vs Maintenance with Rituximab (R)
Final Analysis of Overall Survival for the Phase III CONFIRM Trial: Fulvestrant 500 mg versus 250 mg Di Leo A et al. Proc SABCS 2012;Abstract S1-4.
Ruan J et al. Proc ASH 2013;Abstract 247.
Improved Survival in Patients with First Relapsed or Refractory Acute Myeloid Leukemia (AML) Treated with Vosaroxin plus Cytarabine versus Placebo plus.
Dyer MJS et al. Proc ASH 2014;Abstract 1743.
Final Efficacy Results from OAM4558g, a Randomized Phase II Study Evaluating MetMAb or Placebo in Combination with Erlotinib in Advanced NSCLC Spigel DR.
Head-to-Head Comparison of Obinutuzumab (GA101) plus Chlorambucil (Clb) versus Rituximab plus Clb in Patients with Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia (CLL) and.
A Phase 3 Study Evaluating the Efficacy and Safety of Lenalidomide Combined with Melphalan and Prednisone Followed by Continuous Lenalidomide Maintenance.
Rituximab plus Lenalidomide Improves the Complete Remission Rate in Comparison with Rituximab Monotherapy in Untreated Follicular Lymphoma Patients in.
Cortés J et al. ASCO 2009; Abstract (Poster Discussion)
Locatelli F et al. Proc ASH 2013;Abstract 4378.
A Phase 2 Study of Elotuzumab in Combination with Lenalidomide and Low-Dose Dexamethasone in Patients with Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma Lonial.
1 Flinn I et al. Proc ICML 2013;Abstract 084.
Results of a Randomized Phase 2 Study of PD , a Cyclin ‐ Dependent Kinase (CDK) 4/6 Inhibitor, in Combination with Letrozole vs Letrozole Alone.
Maintenance Therapy with Bortezomib plus Thalidomide (VT) or Bortezomib plus Prednisone (VP) in Elderly Myeloma Patients Included in the GEM2005MAS65 Spanish.
Frontline Chemoimmunotherapy with Fludarabine (F), Cyclophosphamide (C), and Rituximab (R) (FCR) Shows Superior Efficacy in Comparison to Bendamustine.
Gemcitabine With or Without Cisplatin in Patients with Advanced or Metastatic Biliary Tract Cancer (ABC): Results of a Multicentre, Randomized Phase III.
Continued Overall Survival Benefit After 5 Years’ Follow-Up with Bortezomib-Melphalan-Prednisone (VMP) versus Melphalan-Prednisone (MP) in Patients with.
CALYPSO Trial: Carboplatin & Pegylated Liposomal Doxorubicin (PLD) versus Carboplatin & Paclitaxel in Relapsed, Platinum- Sensitive Ovarian Cancer Pujade-Lauraine.
An Open-Label, Randomized Study of Bendamustine and Rituximab (BR) Compared with Rituximab, Cyclophosphamide, Vincristine, and Prednisone (R-CVP) or Rituximab,
Second Interim Analysis of a Phase 3 Study of Idelalisib Plus Rituximab (R) for Relapsed Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia (CLL): Efficacy Analysis in Patient.
Ibrutinib in Combination with Rituximab (iR) Is Well Tolerated and Induces a High Rate of Durable Remissions in Patients with High- Risk Chronic Lymphocytic.
Moskowitz CH et al. Proc ASH 2014;Abstract 673.
Chemoimmunotherapy with Fludarabine (F), Cyclophosphamide (C), and Rituximab (R) (FCR) versus Bendamustine and Rituximab (BR) in Previously Untreated and.
Phase II Trial of R-CHOP plus Bortezomib Induction Therapy Followed by Bortezomib Maintenance for Previously Untreated Mantle Cell Lymphoma: SWOG 0601.
Rituximab Maintenance After Chemoimmunotherapy Induction in 1 st and 2 nd Line Improves Progression Free Survival: Planned Interim Analysis of the International.
A Phase 3, Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Study Evaluating the Efficacy and Safety of Idelalisib and Rituximab for Previously Treated Patients.
A Phase III, Open-Label, Randomized, Multicenter Study of Eribulin Mesylate versus Capecitabine in Patients with Locally Advanced or Metastatic Breast.
Phase II Multicenter Study of Single-Agent Lenalidomide in Subjects with Mantle Cell Lymphoma Who Relapsed or Progressed After or Were Refractory to Bortezomib:
Brentuximab Vedotin in Combination with RCHOP as Front-Line Therapy in Patients with DLBCL: Interim Results from a Phase 2 Study Yasenchak CA et al. Proc.
Results of a Phase 2, Multicenter, Single-Arm Study of Eribulin Mesylate as First-Line Therapy for Locally Recurrent or Metastatic HER2-Negative Breast.
MM-005: A Phase 1, Multicenter, Open-Label, Dose-Escalation Study to Determine the Maximum Tolerated Dose for the Combination of Pomalidomide, Bortezomib,
Romidepsin in Association with CHOP in Patients with Peripheral T-Cell Lymphoma: Final Results of the Phase Ib/II Ro-CHOP Study Dupuis J et al. Proc ASH.
Final Results for the 1703 Phase 1b/2 Study of Elotuzumab in Combination with Lenalidomide and Dexamethasone in Patients with Relapsed/Refractory Multiple.
Pomalidomide + Low-Dose Dexamethasone (POM + LoDex) vs High-Dose Dexamethasone (HiDex) in Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma (RRMM): MM-003 Analysis.
Geisler C et al. Proc ASH 2011;Abstract 290.
Palumbo A et al. Proc ASH 2012;Abstract 200.
Attal M et al. Proc ASH 2010;Abstract 310.
Randomized, Open-Label Phase 1/2 Study of Pomalidomide Alone or in Combination with Low-Dose Dexamethasone in Patients with Relapsed and Refractory Multiple.
San Miguel JF et al. 1 Proc EHA 2013;Abstract S1151.
Goede V et al. Proc ASH 2014;Abstract 3327.
Ferrajoli A et al. Proc ASH 2010;Abstract 1395.
Coiffier B et al. Proc ASH 2010;Abstract 857.
Vitolo U et al. Proc ASH 2011;Abstract 777.
LBA-4 A Randomized Phase III Study of Ibrutinib (PCI-32765)-Based Therapy Vs. Standard Fludarabine, Cyclophosphamide, and Rituximab (FCR) Chemoimmunotherapy.
Presentation transcript:

Goede V et al. Proc ASCO 2013;Abstract 7004. Obinutuzumab (GA101) + Chlorambucil (Clb) or Rituximab (R) + Clb versus Clb Alone in Patients with Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia (CLL) and Co-Existing Medical Conditions (Comorbidities): Final Stage I Results of the CLL11 (BO21004) Phase 3 Trial Goede V et al. Proc ASCO 2013;Abstract 7004.

Background A high number of elderly patients have CLL and coexisting medical conditions. In this patient population: There is no conclusive evidence that currently available treatments are superior to chlorambucil (Clb) monotherapy. Encouraging early data exist for the development of combinations of Clb with anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) and for the evaluation of chemoimmunotherapy with the novel Type II anti-CD20 mAb obinutuzumab (Proc ASH 2011;Abstract 294; Leukemia 2013;27(5):1172). Specific study aims: To demonstrate the superiority of Clb + an anti-CD20 mAb (rituximab or obinutuzumab) to Clb alone (Stage I of study). An analysis of obinutuzumab + Clb versus rituximab + Clb is planned for Stage II of the study. Goede V et al. Proc ASCO 2013;Abstract 7004.

Obinutuzumab (GA101) Mechanisms of Action Increased Direct Cell Death Type II versus Type I antibody Enhanced ADCC Glycoengineering for increased affinity to FcyRIIIa Effector cell B cell GA101 Complement Lower CDC Type II versus Type I antibody CD20 FcyRIIIa ADCC = antibody-dependent cell-mediated cytotoxicity CDC = complement-dependent cytotoxicity With permission from Goede V et al. Proc ASCO 2013;Abstract 7004.

CLL11 (BO21004) Trial Design: Stage I Chlorambucil x 6 Eligibility Previously untreated CLL with comorbidities Total CIRS* score >6 and/or creatinine clearance <70 mL/min (N = 590) Stage Ia G-Clb vs Clb Stage Ib R-Clb vs Clb R GA101 + chlorambucil x 6 (1:2:2) Rituximab + chlorambucil x 6 * Cumulative Illness Rating Scale GA101: 1,000 mg d 1, 8, 15 cycle 1; d 1 cycles 2-6, q28d Rituximab: 375 mg/m2 d 1 cycle 1, 500 mg/m2 d 1 cycles 2-6, q28d Clb: 0.5 mg/kg d 1, 15 cycles 1-6, q28d An additional 190 patients are enrolled in the Stage II portion of the study Goede V et al. Proc ASCO 2013;Abstract 7004.

End-of-Treatment Response Rates (RR) Stage Ia Stage Ib Clb (n = 106) G-Clb (n = 212) (n = 110) R-Clb (n = 217) ORR 30.2% 75.5% 30.0% 65.9% CR* 0% 22.2% 8.3% PR† 53.3% 57.6% SD 21.7% 4.7% 20.9% 13.4% PD 25.5% 3.8% 28.2% 11.5% ORR = overall response rate; CR = complete response; PR = partial response; SD = stable disease; PD = progressive disease * Includes CR with incomplete hematologic recovery; † Includes nodular PR Goede V et al. Proc ASCO 2013;Abstract 7004.

Investigator-Assessed Progression-Free Survival (PFS) Stage Ia Stage Ib G-Clb: Median 23.0 mo 1-year PFS 84% R-Clb: Median 15.7 mo 1-year PFS 63% Progression-free survival Clb: Median 10.9 mo 1-year PFS 27% Clb: Median 10.8 mo 1-year PFS 27% Stratified HR: 0.14 95% CI: 0.09-0.21 p < 0.0001 (log-rank) Stratified HR: 0.32 95% CI: 0.24-0.44 p < 0.0001 (log-rank) On the G-Clb arm, <10% of patients had reached the median at cutoff. In contrast to the Clb arm, the G-Clb median PFS could not be reliably estimated due to the few patients at risk at time of median. Independent Review Committee-assessed PFS was consistent with investigator-assessed PFS. With permission from Goede V et al. Proc ASCO 2013;Abstract 7004.

Stage Ia: Progression-Free Survival Subgroup Analysis With permission from Goede V et al. Proc ASCO 2013;Abstract 7004.

Stage Ib: Progression-Free Survival Subgroup Analysis With permission from Goede V et al. Proc ASCO 2013;Abstract 7004.

Overall Survival Stage Ib Stage Ia Median follow-up 15.2 months G-Clb R-Clb Clb Clb Stage Ib Median follow-up 15.2 months Overall survival Stage Ia Median follow-up 14.2 months Deaths at cutoff: G-Clb 5.5% Clb 7.6% Deaths at cutoff: R-Clb 7.7% Clb 10.2% Time (months) Time (months) Overall survival data are immature. With permission from Goede V et al. Proc ASCO 2013;Abstract 7004.

Relevant Adverse Events (AEs) During Treatment Stage Ia Stage Ib Clb (n = 116) G-Clb (n = 240)* R-Clb (n = 225) Any AE Grade ≥3 41.4% 66.7% 45.8% Infusion-related reactions n/a 21.3% 4.0% Neutropenia 14.7% 34.2% 25.3% New malignancy 0.9% 2.5% 2.7% * Safety population for G-Clb includes 4 patients randomly assigned to R-Clb who received 1 infusion of GA101 in error. Goede V et al. Proc ASCO 2013;Abstract 7004.

Stage Ia: Infusion-Related Reactions (IRRs) by Cycle in G-Clb Study Arm Patients, % Cycle 1 Subsequent cycles With permission from Goede V et al. Proc ASCO 2013;Abstract 7004.

Author Conclusions This is the first large, pivotal, Phase III trial reporting on an elderly patient population with CLL and coexisting medical conditions. It is the first direct comparison of Clb to Clb with an anti-CD20 mAb demonstrating that the addition of GA101 or rituximab is beneficial to these patients. Safety profile for G-Clb (and R-Clb) is acceptable; infusion-related reactions and neutropenia were the most significant adverse events. Final analysis of G-Clb versus R-Clb will occur in Stage II of the study as specified by the protocol. Goede V et al. Proc ASCO 2013;Abstract 7004.

Investigator Commentary: Obinutuzumab/Chlorambucil (Clb) or Rituximab/Clb versus Clb Alone for Patients with CLL and Coexisting Medical Conditions Obinutuzumab is a promising Type II anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody that has demonstrated enhanced antibody-dependent cell-mediated cytotoxicity, increased direct cell death and lower complement activation in comparison to the Type I antibody rituximab. The results of this study show that the addition of rituximab or obinutuzumab to Clb was superior to Clb alone with respect to the overall response rate, complete response rate and PFS. The data presented at ASCO this year also hinted at the possibility that obinutuzumab is gaining an advantage over rituximab. The overall response rate was about 75% versus 66% and the complete response rate was 22% versus 8% with obinutuzumab versus rituximab. An approximate 7-month PFS advantage was reported in favor of the obinutuzumab arm. Not long after ASCO, it was announced in a press release that the second stage of the study directly comparing the obinutuzumab and rituximab arms met its final PFS endpoint. However, we will need to wait until this year’s ASH meeting to see these data presented. The trial was designed so that the obinutuzumab arm would have to have a hazard ratio of 0.74 to be superior to rituximab in terms of PFS. If that can be demonstrated without a significant alteration in the toxicity profile, this would be a significant therapeutic advance for patients. Interview with Brad S Kahl, MD, September 10, 2013