Search

In the MYF2001 trial, treatment of Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitor-relapsed/refractory intermediate-2 or high-risk myelofibrosis (MF) with imetelstat 9.4 mg/kg every 3 weeks demonstrated encouraging median overall survival of 29.9 months. To provide historical context, external real-world data (RWD) were collected from a study of 96 patients who had discontinued ruxolitinib and were subsequently treated with best available therapy (BAT) at Moffitt Cancer Center. A closely matched cohort was identified using the MYF2001 eligibility criteria, including patients with MF who had discontinued ruxolitinib due to lack or loss of response. Overall survival was measured from time of JAK inhibitor discontinuation to death or censored at last follow-up. To improve comparability, propensity score weighting approaches using average treatment effect for overlap population (ATO) and stabilized inverse probability treatment weighting (sIPTW) were used for 10 critical baseline covariates. Fifty-seven patients treated with imetelstat 9.4 mg/kg from MYF2001 and 38 patients treated with BAT from RWD were analyzed with improved balanced baseline covariates after propensity score adjustment, showing significantly lower risk of death with imetelstat compared with BAT (hazard ratio: 0.35; p = 0.0019). With sIPTW, results were similar. Results of sensitivity analyses were consistent with the primary analysis. In conclusion, treatment with imetelstat was associated with longer overall survival compared to BAT (30 vs 12 months, respectively) in closely matched patients with MF after JAK inhibitor failure, warranting further evaluation of imetelstat in this poor-prognosis patient population.

PURPOSE Patients with myelofibrosis who are relapsed or refractory (R/R) to Janus-associated kinase inhibitors (JAKis) have poor clinical outcomes including dismal overall survival (OS) that ranges between 13 and 16 months. Imetelstat, a telomerase inhibitor, was evaluated in patients with intermediate-2 or high-risk myelofibrosis R/R to JAKi in a phase II multicenter study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02426086 ). PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients were randomly assigned to receive either imetelstat 9.4 mg/kg or 4.7 mg/kg intravenous once every 3 weeks. Spleen response (≥ 35% spleen volume reduction) and symptom response (≥ 50% reduction in total symptom score) rates at week 24 were coprimary end points. Secondary end points included OS and safety. RESULTS Study enrollment was closed early, and patients treated with 4.7 mg/kg were permitted to continue treatment with 9.4 mg/kg. At week 24, spleen and symptom response rates were 10.2% and 32.2% in the 9.4-mg/kg arm and 0% and 6.3% in the 4.7-mg/kg arm. Treatment with imetelstat 9.4 mg/kg led to a median OS of 29.9 months and bone marrow fibrosis improvement in 40.5% and variant allele frequency reduction of driver mutations in 42.1% of evaluable patients. Fibrosis improvement and variant allele frequency reduction correlated with OS. Target inhibition was demonstrated by reduction of telomerase activity and human telomerase reverse transcriptase level and correlated with spleen response, symptom response, and OS. Most common adverse events on both arms were grade 3 or 4 reversible cytopenias. CONCLUSION In this phase II study of two imetelstat doses, 9.4 mg/kg once every 3 weeks demonstrated clinical benefits in symptom response rate, with an acceptable safety profile for this poor-risk JAKi R/R population. Biomarker and bone marrow fibrosis assessments suggested selective effects on the malignant clone. A confirmatory phase III study is currently underway.

PURPOSE Patients with lower-risk (LR) myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) who are RBC transfusion dependent and have experienced relapse after or are refractory to erythropoiesis-stimulating agent (ESA) have limited treatment options. High telomerase activity and human telomerase reverse-transcription expression in clonal hematopoietic cells have been reported in patients with MDS. Imetelstat, a first-in-class competitive inhibitor of telomerase enzymatic activity, targets cells with active telomerase. We report efficacy, safety, and biomarker data for patients with LR MDS who are RBC transfusion dependent and who were relapsed/refractory to ESAs. PATIENTS AND METHODS In this two-part phase II/III study (MDS3001), the primary end point was 8-week RBC transfusion independence (TI) rate, with key secondary end points of 24-week RBC TI rate, TI duration, and hematologic improvement-erythroid. RESULTS Data from the phase II part of the study are reported. Of 57 patients enrolled and treated (overall population), 38 were non-del(5q) and hypomethylating agent and lenalidomide naïve (subset population). The 8- and 24-week RBC TI rates in the overall population were 37% and 23%, respectively, with a median TI duration of 65 weeks. In the subset population, 8- and 24-week RBC TI rates were 42% and 29%, respectively, with a median TI duration of 86 weeks. Eight-week TI rate was observed across all subgroups evaluated. Cytogenetic and mutational data revealed a reduction of the malignant clones, suggesting disease modification activity. The most common adverse events were cytopenias, typically reversible within 4 weeks. CONCLUSION Imetelstat treatment results in a meaningful, durable TI rate across a broad range of heavily transfused patients with LR MDS who are ineligible for or relapsed/refractory to ESAs. Biomarker analyses indicated effects on the mutant malignant clone.

This phase 2 study evaluated whether substituting bortezomib for vincristine in frontline rituximab plus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (R-CHOP) therapy could improve efficacy in non-germinal center B-cell-like diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (non-GCB DLBCL), centrally confirmed by immunohistochemistry (Hans method). In total, 164 patients were randomized 1:1 to receive six 21-day cycles of rituximab 375 mg/m(2), cyclophosphamide 750 mg/m(2), and doxorubicin 50 mg/m(2), all IV day 1, prednisone 100 mg/m(2) orally days 1-5, plus either bortezomib 1.3 mg/m(2) IV days 1, 4, 8, 11 (rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and prednisone with bortezomib [VR-CAP]; n = 84) or vincristine 1.4 mg/m(2) (maximum 2 mg) IV day 1 (R-CHOP; n = 80). There were no significant differences between VR-CAP and R-CHOP in complete response rate (64.5%, 66.2%; odds ratio [OR], 0.91; P = .80), overall response rate (93.4%, 98.6%; OR, 0.21; P = .11), progression-free survival (hazard ratio [HR], 1.12; P = .76), or overall survival (HR, 0.89; P = .75). Rates of grade ≥3 adverse events (AEs; 88%, 89%), serious AEs (38%, 34%), discontinuations due to AEs (7%, 3%), and deaths due to AEs (2%, 5%) were similar with VR-CAP and R-CHOP. Grade ≥3 peripheral neuropathy rates were 6% and 3%, respectively. VR-CAP did not improve efficacy vs R-CHOP in non-GCB DLBCL. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT01040871.

Mantle-cell lymphoma is an aggressive B-cell lymphoma with a poor prognosis. Both ibrutinib and temsirolimus have shown single-agent activity in patients with relapsed or refractory mantle-cell lymphoma. We undertook a phase 3 study to assess the efficacy and safety of ibrutinib versus temsirolimus in relapsed or refractory mantle-cell lymphoma.This randomised, open-label, multicentre, phase 3 clinical trial enrolled patients with relapsed or refractory mantle-cell lymphoma confirmed by central pathology in 21 countries who had received one or more rituximab-containing treatments. Patients were stratified by previous therapy and simplified mantle-cell lymphoma international prognostic index score, and were randomly assigned with a computer-generated randomisation schedule to receive daily oral ibrutinib 560 mg or intravenous temsirolimus (175 mg on days 1, 8, and 15 of cycle 1; 75 mg on days 1, 8, and 15 of subsequent 21-day cycles). Randomisation was balanced by using randomly permuted blocks. The primary efficacy endpoint was progression-free survival assessed by a masked independent review committee with the primary hypothesis that ibrutinib compared with temsirolimus significantly improves progression-free survival. The analysis followed the intention-to-treat principle. The trial is ongoing and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (number NCT01646021) and with the EU Clinical Trials Register, EudraCT (number 2012-000601-74).Between Dec 10, 2012, and Nov 26, 2013, 280 patients were randomised to ibrutinib (n=139) or temsirolimus (n=141). Primary efficacy analysis showed significant improvement in progression-free survival (p0·0001) for patients treated with ibrutinib versus temsirolimus (hazard ratio 0·43 [95% CI 0·32-0·58]; median progression-free survival 14·6 months [95% CI 10·4-not estimable] vs 6·2 months [4·2-7·9], respectively). Ibrutinib was better tolerated than temsirolimus, with grade 3 or higher treatment-emergent adverse events reported for 94 (68%) versus 121 (87%) patients, and fewer discontinuations of study medication due to adverse events for ibrutinib versus temsirolimus (9 [6%] vs 36 [26%]).Ibrutinib treatment resulted in significant improvement in progression-free survival and better tolerability versus temsirolimus in patients with relapsed or refractory mantle-cell lymphoma. These data lend further support to the positive benefit-risk ratio for ibrutinib in relapsed or refractory mantle-cell lymphoma.Janssen ResearchDevelopment, LLC.