Preliminary results of the FILO phase 2 trial for untreated fit patients with intermediate risk chronic lymphocytic leukemia comparing ibrutinib plus venetoclax (IV) vs. FCR

With the emergence of targeted therapies, defining the best strategy for the treatment of previously untreated CLL patients remains challenging. The aim of this phase 2 study was to compare the efficacy of an association with ibrutinib and venetoclax (IV) to the standard FCR regimen in fit patients with intermediate-risk CLL defined by either unmutated IGHV status, 11q deletion, or complex karyotype in the absence of TP53 abnormality. Patients were randomized 1:1 between two treatment arms, i.e. FCR 6 cycles or IV. After a lead-in phase of ibrutinib as a single agent from the month (M)1 to M3, the total duration of treatment with IV was based on the response achieved at M9;if bone marrow (BM) MRD was <0.01% using flow cytometry, the treatment was continued for 6 additional months until M15 and then stopped;if BM MRD at M9 was ≥0.01%, the treatment with IV was continued for 18 additional months until M27. The primary endpoint was the percentage of patients with BM MRD <0.01% at M27 in both arms. We present here the preliminary results on the first evaluation done at M9 including CT-scan, BM biopsy, and MRD assessment in PB and BM after the inclusion of all the 120 patients as initially planned. One hundred and twenty patients were enrolled from September 2019 to February 2021. The median age was 59 [34-72] and 61 [34-74] years in the FCR and IV arms, respectively. The characteristics of the patients were well-balanced between the 2 arms in terms of gender (male 72% FCR, 74% IV), PS ECOG 0-1 (59% FCR, 68% IV), and Binet stage (A, B, and C 15, 64, 21% for FCR;8.5, 59, and 32% for IV). No major difference in terms of cytogenetic features was noted, all patients but one had unmutated IGHV. At the time of data cut-off for this interim analysis, the median follow-up for all cohort was 12.7 [4.5.9-21.4] months. The frequency of patients presenting all grades adverse events (AE) so far was 90% (grade ≥3: 45%) in the FCR arm and 80% (grade ≥3: 45%) in the IV arm. The rate of infusion-related reactions (IRR) in the FCR arm was 35% on cycle 1-day 1 (14% grade 3-4);for the IV arm, 5% of patients experienced tumor lysis syndrome (TLS) (grade 3 for 1 patient). Ibrutinib doses were reduced for seven patients (four permanently stopped and three resumed at a lower dose because of toxicities (digestive, hepatic, or hematological). Venetoclax was permanently discontinued before M9 in four patients (digestive toxicities and grade 4 neutropenia). Fifty-two serious adverse events were reported of which 22 were in the IV arm (among them one sudden death, one ischemic stroke, one acute coronary syndrome, two atrial fibrillations, two TLS, two acute renal failures, one hepatitis, one neutropenia, two COVID pneumonitis, and one osteoporotic fracture) and 30 in the FCR arm (among them five febrile neutropenia, one hemolytic anemia, one thrombocytopenia, three IRR, three TLS, three COVID pneumonitis, one acute myeloid leukemia, one myelodysplasic syndrome). All patients with COVID pneumonitis had a favorable evolution with the need for intensive care and convalescent plasma for three of them. The first 85 patients included in the study have reached M9 and among them, nine prematurely discontinued the study, (one active hemolysis, one ischemic stroke, one TLS, one hepatitis, and one sudden death in the IV arm;three hematologic toxicities and one early progression in the FCR arm). In the evaluated patients (n=74), 69% of patients in the FCR arm and 43% of patients in the IV arm achieved bone BM MRD <0.01%. The complete (CR, CRi) and partial response rates were 56 and 44% in the FCR arm and 74 and 26% in the IV arm, respectively. In conclusion, preliminary results show a lower BM MRD rate in the IV arm compared to the FCR arm at M9, with toxicity that remains significant and relatively similar between the two arms. However, BM MRD rate may improve after longer exposure to the IV combination and the analysis of the primary endpoint at M27 will be decisive in determining the best therapeutic strategy.

Preliminary Results of the Filo Phase 2 Trial for Untreated Fit Patients with Intermediate Risk Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia Comparing Ibrutinib Plus Venetoclax (IV) Versus FCR

With the emergence of targeted therapies, defining the best strategy for the treatment of previously untreated CLL patients remains challenging. The aim of this phase 2 study was to compare the efficacy of an association with ibrutinib and venetoclax (IV) to the standard FCR regimen in fit patients with intermediate risk CLL defined by either unmutated IGHV status, 11q deletion or complex karyotype in the absence of TP53 abnormality. Patients were randomized 1:1 between two treatment arms, ie FCR 6 cycles or IV. After a lead-in phase of ibrutinib as a single agent from month (M)1 to M3, the total duration of treatment with IV was based on the response achieved at M9;if bone marrow (BM) MRD was < 0.01% using flow cytometry, the treatment was continued for 6 additional months until M15 and then stopped;if BM MRD at M9 was ≥ 0.01%, the treatment with IV was continued for 18 additional months until M27. The primary endpoint was the percentage of patients with BM MRD < 0.01% at M27 in both arms. We present here the preliminary results on the first evaluation done at M9 including CT-scan, BM biopsy and MRD assessment in PB and BM after the inclusion of all the 120 patients as initially planned. One hundred and twenty patients were enrolled from September 2019 to February 2021. The median age was 59 [34-72] and 61 [34-74] years in the FCR and IV arms, respectively. The characteristics of the patients were well balanced between the 2 arms in terms of gender (male 72% FCR, 74% IV), PS ECOG 0-1 (59% FCR, 68% IV) and Binet stage (A, B and C 15%, 64%, 21% for FCR;8.5%, 59% and 32% for IV). No major difference in terms of cytogenetic features was noted, all patients but one had unmutated IGHV. At the time of data cut-off for this interim analysis, the median follow-up for the all cohort was 11 [2.9 - 19.8] months. The frequency of all grades adverse events (AE) observed so far was 53% (grade 3-4, 24%) in the FCR arm and 47% (grade 3-4, 17%) in the IV arm. The rate of infusion-related reactions (IRR) in the FCR arm was 35% on cycle 1-day 1 (14% grade 3-4);for the IV arm, 6% of patients experienced tumor lysis syndrome (TLS) (grade 4 for 4 patients). ibrutinib doses were reduced for 7 patients (4 permanently stopped and 3 resumed at a lower dose because of toxicities (digestive, hepatic or haematological)). Venetoclax was permanently discontinued before M9 in 4 patients (digestive toxicities and grade 4 neutropenia). Forty serious adverse events were reported of which 15 in the IV arm (1 sudden death, 1 ischemic stroke, 2 atrial fibrillations, 2 clinical TLS, 1 hepatitis, 1 neutropenia, 4 COVID pneumonitis and one osteoporotic fracture) and 25 in the FCR arm (2 neutropenias, 1 anemia, 1 thrombocytopenia, 1 autoimmune haemolytic anemia, 3 IRR, 4 TLS, 2 COVID pneumonitis, 4 fever episodes of undetermined origin, 1 community-acquired pneumonia, 1 gastrointestinal toxicity, 1 confusion, 2 chest pains, 1 acute myeloid leukemia, 1 myelodysplasic syndrome). The patients with COVID pneumonitis had a favorable evolution with the need for intensive care and convalescent plasma for 3 of them. The first 60 patients included in the study have reached M9 and among them, 6 prematurely discontinued the study, 3 in each arm (active hemolysis, ischemic stroke and sudden death in the IV arm;2 grade 4 hematologic toxicities and 1 early progression in the FCR arm). In the evaluated patients (n=54), 71% of patients in the FCR arm and 48% of patients in the IV arm achieved bone BM MRD < 0.01%. The complete (CR, CRi) and partial response rates were 54% and 46% in the FCR arm and 76% and 24% in the IV arm respectively. In conclusion, the preliminary results show a lower BM MRD rate in the IV arm compared to the FCR arm at M9, with a toxicity that remains significant and relatively similar between the two arms. However, BM MRD rate should improve after longer exposure to the IV combination and the analysis of the primary endpoint at M27 will be decisive in determining the best therapeutic strategy. Disclosures: Quinquenel: Abbvie: Honoraria;Jansse : Honoraria;AstraZeneca: Honoraria. Laribi: Le Mans Hospital: Research Funding;Novartis: Other: Personal Fees, Research Funding;Takeda: Other: Personal Fees, Research Funding;BeiGene: Other: Personal Fees;IQONE: Other: Personal Fees;AbbVie: Other: Personal Fees, Research Funding;Astellas Phama, Inc.: Other: Personal Fees;AstraZeneca: Other: Personal Fees;Jansen: Research Funding. Cymbalista: Lilly-LOXO: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees;Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees;ASTRA ZENECA: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees;Abbvie: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees;Roche: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Leblond: AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees;Lilly: Consultancy;AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel Support;Roche: Honoraria;Amgen: Honoraria;Beigene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees;Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Dartigeas: Astra-Zeneca: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: travel grants/Congress;Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: travel grants/Congress;Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: travel grants/Congress. Ferrant: Janssen: Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses;AbbVie: Honoraria, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses;AstraZeneca: Honoraria. de Guibert: Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria;AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria;Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria. Feugier: Astrazeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria;Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria;Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria;Amgen: Honoraria;Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria. Cartron: Roche, Celgene-BMS: Consultancy;Danofi, Gilead, Novartis, Jansen, Roche, Celgene-BMS, Abbvie, Takeda: Honoraria. Ysebaert: Abbvie, AstraZeneca, Janssen, Roche: Other: Advisory Board, Research Funding.

Resistance to fibrinolysis in critically ill patients with COVID-19 can be overcome by n-acetylcysteine in vitro

Background : Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is associated with a significant risk of thrombosis. A resistance to fibrinolysis has been highlighted in COVID-19 patients but its clinical relevance has not been established yet. In experimental stroke models, Nacetylcysteine (NAC) promoted lysis of tPA-resistant thrombi by reducing large von Willebrand factor (vWF) multimers. Aims : To better characterize the clinical relevance of fibrinolysis resistance in COVID-19 patients and to evaluate the capacity of NAC to restore fibrinolysis in vitro . Methods : 28 critically ill patients with COVID-19 and 28 healthy controls were included in this single-center observational study. A modified thromboelastography assay (ROTEM ® Delta) using EXTEM ® reagent and 150 ng mL -1 t-PA (Actilyse ® ) was performed in the presence of 10 mM NAC or buffer. Residual percentage of clot firmness 30 min after coagulation (LI30) and time required to complete lysis (LT) assessed the efficiency of t-PA-triggered fibrinolysis. Results : Blood clots from COVID-19 patients were resistant to fibrinolysis as indicated by increased LI30 (median 94% [35-100] versus 1% [0-45], P = 0.0007) and prolonged LT (2609 s [1855-3043] versus 1560 s [1376-1994], P = 0.0003) compared to healthy controls. LI30 and LT were positively correlated with vWF levels ( r = 0.6, P = 0.009 and r = 0.5, P = 0.04, respectively), suggesting a role for vWF in fibrinolysis resistance. Resistance to tPA-induced fibrinolysis was delayed in patients with thrombosis ( n = 10) compared to patients without thrombosis, as indicated by higher LI30 (100% [97-100] versus 82.5% [0.5-97];P = 0.002) and prolonged LT (3189 s [2706-3772] versus 2217 s [1583 2840];P = 0.008). Both LI30 and LT were correlated with SOFA ( r = 0.7, P = 0.0003 and r = 0.5, P = 0.01, respectively) and Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS) II scores ( r = 0.7, P = 0.0004 and r = 0.7, P = 0.0009, respectively). In vitro, NAC efficiently restored fibrinolysis in COVID-19 patient blood. Conclusions : Resistance to fibrinolysis in critically ill COVID-19 patients is associated with thrombosis and clinical severity. NAC could represent a new adjunct therapy to promote endogenous fibrinolysis in severe COVID-19 patients.