Explore the vast range of titles available.

Venetoclax plus obinutuzumab has been established as a fixed-duration treatment regimen for patients with chronic lymphocytic leukaemia. We compared the long-term efficacy after treatment cessation of the combination of venetoclax plus obinutuzumab with chlorambucil plus obinutuzumab in patients with previously untreated chronic lymphocytic leukaemia. CLL14 is a multicentre, randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial done at 196 sites in 21 countries. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older, had untreated chronic lymphocytic leukaemia, and coexisting conditions with a cumulative illness rating scale greater than 6, a creatinine clearance of 30–69 mL/min, or both. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) via a web and voicemail system with allocation concealment and based on a computer-generated randomisation schedule with a block size of six and stratified by Binet stage and geographical region. Patients received either venetoclax plus obinutuzumab (oral venetoclax initiated on day 22 of cycle 1 [28-day cycles], with a 5-week dose ramp-up [20 mg, 50 mg, 100 mg, and 200 mg, then 400 mg daily for 1 week], thereafter continuing at 400 mg daily until completion of cycle 12; combined with intravenous obinutuzumab for six cycles starting with 100 mg on day 1 and 900 mg on day 2 [or 1000 mg on day 1], 1000 mg on days 8 and day 15 of cycle 1, and subsequently 1000 mg on day 1 of cycles 2 through 6) or chlorambucil plus obinutuzumab (oral chlorambucil at 0·5 mg/kg bodyweight on days 1 and 15 of each cycle for 12 cycles combined with the same obinutuzumab regimen). The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of study treatment. Patient enrolment is complete, and the study is registered with ClinicalTrails.gov, NCT02242942. Between Aug 7, 2015, and Aug 4, 2016, 432 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive either venetoclax plus obinutuzumab (n=216) or chlorambucil plus obinutuzumab (n=216). All patients had been off treatment for at least 24 months at data collection. At a median follow-up of 39·6 months (IQR 36·8–43·0), patients given venetoclax plus obinutuzumab had a significantly longer progression-free survival than did patients given chlorambucil plus obinutuzumab (HR 0·31, 95% CI 0·22–0·44; p<0·0001). Median progression-free survival was not reached (95% CI not estimable to not estimable) in the venetoclax plus obinutuzumab group vs 35·6 months (33·7–40·7) in the chlorambucil plus obinutuzumab group. The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse event in both groups was neutropenia (112 [53%] of 212 patients in the venetoclax plus obinutuzumab group versus 102 [48%] of 214 patients in the chlorambucil plus obinutuzumab group). Serious adverse events occurred in 115 (54%) of 212 patients in the venetoclax plus obinutuzumab group and 95 (44%) of 214 patients in the chlorambucil plus obinutuzumab group. Venetoclax or chlorambucil treatment-related deaths were reported in one (1%) of 212 patients in the venetoclax plus obinutuzumab group (n=1 sepsis) and two (1%) of 214 patients in the chlorambucil plus obinutuzumab group (n=1 septic shock, n=1 metastatic skin squamous carcinoma). 2 years after treatment cessation, venetoclax plus obinutuzumab continues to significantly improve progression-survival compared with chlorambucil plus obinutuzumab, thereby providing a limited duration treatment option for patients with previously untreated chronic lymphocytic leukaemia. F Hoffmann-La Roche and AbbVie.

In patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma who were ineligible for stem-cell transplantation, the addition of daratumumab to bortezomib, melphalan, and prednisone increased progression-free survival and the response rate at the cost of an increase in infections.

The combination of the BCL2 inhibitor venetoclax plus obinutuzumab was more effective in the treatment of older medically ill patients with untreated chronic lymphocytic leukemia than was chlorambucil plus obinutuzumab. Progression-free survival at 2 years was 88% with venetoclax and 64% with chlorambucil.

Selinexor combined with dexamethasone has shown activity in patients with heavily pre-treated multiple myeloma. In a phase 1b/2 study, the combination of oral selinexor with bortezomib (a proteasome inhibitor) and dexamethasone induced high response rates with low rates of peripheral neuropathy, the main dose-limiting toxicity of bortezomib. We aimed to evaluate the clinical benefit of weekly selinexor, bortezomib, and dexamethasone versus standard bortezomib and dexamethasone in patients with previously treated multiple myeloma. This phase 3, randomised, open-label trial was done at 123 sites in 21 countries. Patients aged 18 years or older, who had multiple myeloma, and who had previously been treated with one to three lines of therapy, including proteasome inhibitors, were randomly allocated (1:1) to receive selinexor (100 mg once per week), bortezomib (1·3 mg/m2 once per week), and dexamethasone (20 mg twice per week), or bortezomib (1·3 mg/m2 twice per week for the first 24 weeks and once per week thereafter) and dexamethasone (20 mg four times per week for the first 24 weeks and twice per week thereafter). Randomisation was done using interactive response technology and stratified by previous proteasome inhibitor therapy, lines of treatment, and multiple myeloma stage. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population. Patients who received at least one dose of study treatment were included in the safety population. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03110562. The trial is ongoing, with 55 patients remaining on randomised therapy as of Feb 20, 2020. Of 457 patients screened for eligibility, 402 were randomly allocated—195 (49%) to the selinexor, bortezomib, and dexamethasone group and 207 (51%) to the bortezomib and dexamethasone group—and the first dose of study medication was given between June 6, 2017, and Feb 5, 2019. Median follow-up durations were 13·2 months [IQR 6·2–19·8] for the selinexor, bortezomib, and dexamethasone group and 16·5 months [9·4–19·8] for the bortezomib and dexamethasone group. Median progression-free survival was 13·93 months (95% CI 11·73–not evaluable) with selinexor, bortezomib, and dexamethasone and 9·46 months (8·11–10·78) with bortezomib and dexamethasone (hazard ratio 0·70 [95% CI 0·53–0·93], p=0·0075). The most frequent grade 3–4 adverse events were thrombocytopenia (77 [39%] of 195 patients in the selinexor, bortezomib, and dexamethasone group vs 35 [17%] of 204 in the bortezomib and dexamethasone group), fatigue (26 [13%] vs two [1%]), anaemia (31 [16%] vs 20 [10%]), and pneumonia (22 [11%] vs 22 [11%]). Peripheral neuropathy of grade 2 or above was less frequent with selinexor, bortezomib, and dexamethasone (41 [21%] patients) than with bortezomib and dexamethasone (70 [34%] patients; odds ratio 0·50 [95% CI 0·32–0·79], p=0·0013). 47 (24%) patients in the selinexor, bortezomib, and dexamethasone group and 62 (30%) in the bortezomib and dexamethasone group died. A once-per-week regimen of selinexor, bortezomib, and dexamethasone is a novel, effective, and convenient treatment option for patients with multiple myeloma who have received one to three previous lines of therapy. Karyopharm Therapeutics.

High-dose melphalan plus autologous stem-cell transplantation (ASCT) is the standard approach in transplant-eligible patients with newly diagnosed myeloma. Our aims were to compare consolidation with high-dose melphalan plus ASCT versus chemotherapy (cyclophosphamide and dexamethasone) plus lenalidomide, and maintenance with lenalidomide plus prednisone versus lenalidomide alone. We did an open-label, randomised, multicentre, phase 3 study at 59 centres in Australia, Czech Republic, and Italy. We enrolled transplant-eligible patients with newly diagnosed myeloma aged 65 years or younger. Patients received a common induction with four 28-day cycles of lenalidomide (25 mg, days 1–21) and dexamethasone (40 mg, days 1, 8, 15, and 22) and subsequent chemotherapy with cyclophosphamide (3 g/m2) followed by granulocyte colony-stimulating factor for stem-cell mobilisation and collection. Using a 2 × 2 partial factorial design, we randomised patients to consolidation with either chemotherapy plus lenalidomide (six cycles of cyclophosphamide [300 mg/m2, days 1, 8, and 15], dexamethasone [40 mg, days 1, 8, 15, and 22], and lenalidomide [25 mg, days 1–21]) or two courses of high-dose melphalan (200 mg/m2) and ASCT. We also randomised patients to maintenance with lenalidomide (10 mg, days 1–21) plus prednisone (50 mg, every other day) or lenalidomide alone. A simple randomisation sequence was used to assign patients at enrolment into one of the four groups (1:1:1:1 ratio), but the treatment allocation was disclosed only when the patient reached the end of the induction and confirmed their eligibility for consolidation. Both the patient and the treating clinician did not know the consolidation and maintenance arm until that time. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival assessed by intention-to-treat. The trial is ongoing and some patients are still receiving maintenance. This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01091831. 389 patients were enrolled between July 6, 2009, and May 6, 2011, with 256 eligible for consolidation (127 high-dose melphalan and ASCT and 129 chemotherapy plus lenalidomide) and 223 eligible for maintenance (117 lenalidomide plus prednisone and 106 lenalidomide alone). Median follow-up was 52·0 months (IQR 30·4–57·6). Progression-free survival during consolidation was significantly shorter with chemotherapy plus lenalidomide compared with high-dose melphalan and ASCT (median 28·6 months [95% CI 20·6–36·7] vs 43·3 months [33·2–52·2]; hazard ratio [HR] for the first 24 months 2·51, 95% CI 1·60–3·94; p<0·0001). Progression-free survival did not differ between maintenance treatments (median 37·5 months [95% CI 27·8–not evaluable] with lenalidomide plus prednisone vs 28·5 months [22·5–46·5] with lenalidomide alone; HR 0·84, 95% CI 0·59–1·20; p=0·34). Fewer grade 3 or 4 adverse events were recorded with chemotherapy plus lenalidomide than with high-dose melphalan and ASCT; the most frequent were haematological (34 [26%] of 129 patients vs 107 [84%] of 127 patients), gastrointestinal (six [5%] vs 25 [20%]), and infection (seven [5%] vs 24 [19%]). Haematological serious adverse events were reported in two (2%) patients assigned chemotherapy plus lenalidomide and no patients allocated high-dose melphalan and ASCT. Non-haematological serious adverse events were reported in 13 (10%) patients assigned chemotherapy plus lenalidomide and nine (7%) allocated high-dose melphalan and ASCT. During maintenance, adverse events did not differ between groups. The most frequent grade 3 or 4 adverse events were neutropenia (nine [8%] of 117 patients assigned lenalidomide plus prednisone vs 14 [13%] of 106 allocated lenalidomide alone), infection (eight [8%] vs five [5%]), and systemic toxicities (seven [6%] vs two [2%]). Non-haematological serious adverse events were reported in 13 (11%) patients assigned lenalidomide plus prednisone versus ten (9%) allocated lenalidomide alone. Four patients died because of adverse events, three from infections (two during induction and one during consolidation) and one because of cardiac toxic effects. Consolidation with high-dose melphalan and ASCT remains the preferred option in transplant-eligible patients with multiple myeloma, despite a better toxicity profile with chemotherapy plus lenalidomide. Celgene.

Patients with relapsed or refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma who are ineligible for autologous stem-cell transplantation have poor outcomes and few treatment options. Tafasitamab (MOR208) is an Fc-enhanced, humanised, anti-CD19 monoclonal antibody that has shown preclinical and single-agent activity in patients with relapsed or refractory B-cell malignancies. Preclinical data suggested that tafasitamab might act synergistically with lenalidomide. We aimed to assess the antitumour activity and safety of tafasitamab plus lenalidomide in patients with relapsed or refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma who were ineligible for autologous stem-cell transplantation. In this multicentre, open-label, single-arm, phase 2 study (L-MIND), patients older than 18 years with histologically confirmed diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, who relapsed or had refractory disease after previous treatment with one to three systemic regimens (with at least one anti-CD20 therapy), were not candidates for high-dose chemotherapy and subsequent autologous stem-cell transplantation, had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0–2, and had measurable disease at baseline were recruited from 35 academic and community hospitals in ten countries. Patients received coadministered intravenous tafasitamab (12 mg/kg) and oral lenalidomide (25 mg/day) for up to 12 cycles (28 days each), followed by tafasitamab monotherapy (in patients with stable disease or better) until disease progression. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with an objective response (centrally assessed), defined as a complete or partial response according to the 2007 International Working Group response criteria for malignant lymphoma. Antitumour activity analyses are based on all patients who received at least one dose of both tafasitamab and lenalidomide; safety analyses are based on all patients who received at least one dose of either study medication. Recruitment is complete, and the trial is in follow-up. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02399085. Between Jan 18, 2016, and Nov 15, 2017, 156 patients were screened: 81 were enrolled and received at least one dose of either study medication, and 80 received at least one dose of both tafasitamab and lenalidomide. Median follow-up was 13·2 months (IQR 7·3–20·4) as of data cutoff on Nov 30, 2018. 48 (60%; 95% CI 48–71) of 80 patients who received tafasitamab plus lenalidomide had an objective response: 34 (43%; 32–54) had a complete response and 14 (18%; 10–28) had a partial response. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events of grade 3 or worse were neutropenia (39 [48%] of 81 patients), thrombocytopenia (14 [17%]), and febrile neutropenia (ten [12%]). Serious adverse events occurred in 41 (51%) of 81 patients. The most frequently reported serious adverse events (in two or more patients) were pneumonia (five [6%]), febrile neutropenia (five [6%]), pulmonary embolism (three [4%]), bronchitis (two [2%]), atrial fibrillation (two [2%]), and congestive cardiac failure (two [2%]). Tafasitamab in combination with lenalidomide was well tolerated and resulted in a high proportion of patients with relapsed or refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma ineligible for autologous stem-cell transplantation having a complete response, and might represent a new therapeutic option in this setting. MorphoSys.

Standard-of-care treatment for patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma includes combination therapies for patients who are not eligible for autologous stem-cell transplantation. At the primary analysis for progression-free survival of the phase 3 ALCYONE trial, progression-free survival was significantly longer with daratumumab in combination with bortezomib, melphalan, and prednisone (D-VMP) versus bortezomib, melphalan, and prednisone (VMP) alone in patients with transplant-ineligible, newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. Here we report updated efficacy and safety results from a prespecified, interim, overall survival analysis of ALCYONE with more than 36 months of follow-up. ALCYONE was a multicentre, randomised, open-label, active-controlled, phase 3 trial that enrolled patients between Feb 9, 2015, and July 14, 2016, at 162 sites in 25 countries across North America, South America, Europe, and the Asia-Pacific region. Patients were eligible for inclusion if they had newly diagnosed multiple myeloma and were ineligible for high-dose chemotherapy with autologous stem-cell transplantation, because of their age (≥65 years) or because of substantial comorbidities. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio and by permuted block randomisation to receive D-VMP or VMP. An interactive web-based randomisation system was used. Randomisation was stratified by International Staging System disease stage, geographical region, and age. There was no masking to treatment assignments. All patients received up to nine 6-week cycles of subcutaneous bortezomib (1·3 mg/m2 of body surface area on days 1, 4, 8, 11, 22, 25, 29, and 32 of cycle one and on days 1, 8, 22, and 29 of cycles two through nine), oral melphalan (9 mg/m2 once daily on days 1 through 4 of each cycle), and oral prednisone (60 mg/m2 once daily on days 1 through 4 of each cycle). Patients in the D-VMP group also received intravenous daratumumab (16 mg/kg of bodyweight, once weekly during cycle one, once every 3 weeks in cycles two through nine, and once every 4 weeks thereafter as maintenance therapy until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity). The primary endpoint was progression-free survival, which has been reported previously. Results presented are from a prespecified interim analysis for overall survival. The primary analysis population (including for overall survival) was the intention-to-treat population of all patients who were randomly assigned to treatment. The safety population included patients who received any dose of study treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02195479. 706 patients were randomly assigned to treatment groups (350 to the D-VMP group, 356 to the VMP group). At a median follow-up of 40·1 months (IQR 37·4–43·1), a significant benefit in overall survival was observed for the D-VMP group. The hazard ratio (HR) for death in the D-VMP group compared with the VMP group was 0·60 (95% CI 0·46–0·80; p=0·0003). The Kaplan-Meier estimate of the 36-month rate of overall survival was 78·0% (95% CI 73·2–82·0) in the D-VMP group and 67·9% (62·6–72·6) in the VMP group. Progression-free survival, the primary endpoint, remained significantly improved for the D-VMP group (HR 0·42 [0·34–0·51]; p<0·0001). The most frequent adverse events during maintenance daratumumab monotherapy in patients in the D-VMP group were respiratory infections (54 [19%] of 278 patients had upper respiratory tract infections; 42 [15%] had bronchitis, 34 [12%] had viral upper respiratory tract infections), cough (34 [12%]), and diarrhoea (28 [10%]). D-VMP prolonged overall survival in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma who were ineligible for stem-cell transplantation. With more than 3 years of follow-up, the D-VMP group continued to show significant improvement in progression-free survival, with no new safety concerns. Janssen Research & Development.

Up to 40% of elderly patients with untreated diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) given a regimen of rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisolone every 21 days (R-CHOP21) relapse or develop refractory disease. Lenalidomide has high activity in relapsed or refractory aggressive B-cell lymphomas. In phase 2 of the REAL07 trial, we aimed to establish the safety and efficacy of the combination of lenalidomide and R-CHOP21 in elderly patients with untreated DLBCL. REAL07 was an open-label, multicentre trial that was done in 13 centres in Italy and one in Germany. Eligible patients were aged 60–80 years; had newly diagnosed, untreated, CD20-positive, Ann Arbor stage II–IV DLBCL or grade 3b follicular lymphoma; had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0–2; had an International Prognostic Index (IPI) risk of low-intermediate, intermediate-high, or high; and were fit according to comprehensive geriatric assessment. Participants were to receive 15 mg oral lenalidomide on days 1–14 of six 21-day cycles, and standard doses of R-CHOP21 chemotherapy (375 mg/m2 intravenous rituximab, 750 mg/m2 intravenous cyclophosphamide, 50 mg/m2 intravenous doxorubicin, and 1·4 mg/m2 intravenous vincristine on day 1, and 40 mg/m2 oral prednisone on days 1–5). The primary endpoint was frequency of overall response (complete response [CR] and partial response [PR]), which was assessed by 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (18F-FDG) PET at the end of the treatment. Analyses were by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00907348. 49 patients were included in phase 2: nine had been enrolled into phase 1 between Oct 23, 2008, and June 4, 2009, and had received the maximum tolerated dose of 15 mg lenalidomide; and 40 were enrolled into phase 2 between April 28, 2010, and June 3, 2011. 45 patients (92%, 95% CI 81–97) achieved a response (42 [86%] CR; three [6%] PR). Three patients (6%) did not respond and one (2%) died for reasons unrelated to treatment or disease. 277 (94%) of 294 planned cycles of lenalidomide and R-CHOP21 were completed. Grade 3–4 neutropenia was reported in 87 cycles (31%), grade 3–4 leukopenia in 77 (28%), and grade 3–4 thrombocytopenia in 35 (13%). No grade 4 non-haematological adverse events were reported. No patients died during the study as a result of toxic effects. Lenalidomide with R-CHOP21 is effective and safe in elderly patients with untreated DLBCL. Fondazione Italiana Linfomi and Celgene.

The randomized, phase 3 ICARIA-MM study investigated isatuximab (Isa) with pomalidomide and dexamethasone (Pd) versus Pd in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma and ≥2 prior lines. This prespecified subgroup analysis examined efficacy in patients with renal impairment (RI; estimated glomerular filtration rate <60 mL/min/1.73 m²). Isa 10 mg/kg was given intravenously once weekly in cycle 1, and every 2 weeks in subsequent 28-day cycles. Patients received standard doses of Pd. Median progression-free survival (PFS) for patients with RI was 9.5 months with Isa-Pd ( n  = 55) and 3.7 months with Pd ( n  = 49; hazard ratio [HR] 0.50; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.30–0.85). Without RI, median PFS was 12.7 months with Isa-Pd ( n  = 87) and 7.9 months with Pd ( n  = 96; HR 0.58; 95% CI, 0.38–0.88). The overall response rate (ORR) with and without RI was higher with Isa-Pd (56 and 68%) than Pd (25 and 43%). Complete renal response rates were 71.9% (23/32) with Isa-Pd and 38.1% (8/21) with Pd; these lasted ≥60 days in 31.3% (10/32) and 19.0% (4/21) of patients, respectively. Isa pharmacokinetics were comparable between the subgroups, suggesting no need for dose adjustment in patients with RI. In summary, the addition of Isa to Pd improved PFS, ORR and renal response rates.