Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) decline with apalutamide therapy is associated with longer survival and improved outcomes in individuals with metastatic prostate cancer: a plain language summary of the TITAN study.

WHAT IS THIS SUMMARY ABOUT?: This summary describes the results from an additional (or post hoc) analysis of the TITAN study. The TITAN study looked at whether the prostate cancer treatment apalutamide could be used to treat individuals with metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (or mCSPC). A total of 1052 participants with mCSPC were included in the TITAN study. Treatment with apalutamide was compared with treatment with placebo. All participants received androgen deprivation therapy (or ADT), which is a type of hormone therapy that has been part of the main treatment for mCSPC for many years. The results showed that apalutamide plus ADT increased the length of time that participants remained alive compared with placebo plus ADT. Apalutamide plus ADT also controlled the growth of the cancer for a longer length of time compared with placebo plus ADT. Additionally, participants who received apalutamide plus ADT experienced a greater reduction in the blood levels of prostate-specific antigen (or PSA), called a deep PSA decline, compared with those who received placebo plus ADT. An additional (or post hoc) analysis was carried out to understand whether a decrease in blood PSA levels, in response to treatment, was associated with improved outcomes, including longer survival time. WHAT WERE THE RESULTS OF THE ADDITIONAL ANALYSIS?: In participants who received apalutamide plus ADT, a deep PSA decline in response to treatment was associated with longer survival time and improved outcomes. WHAT DO THESE RESULTS MEAN FOR INDIVIDUALS WITH MCSPC?: These results demonstrate that individuals with mCSPC can benefit from treatment with apalutamide plus ADT. The association seen between deep PSA decline and the longer survival time and improved outcomes highlights how PSA measurements can be used to help monitor cancer disease evolution in response to treatment. Monitoring PSA levels will assist doctors and other healthcare professionals to understand how effectively a treatment is working for a patient and to tailor their treatment approach to improve PSA decline.

Teclistamab versus real-world physician's choice of therapy in triple-class exposed relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma.

Aim: We compared the effectiveness of teclistamab versus real-world physician's choice of therapy (RWPC) in triple-class exposed relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma. Materials & methods: MajesTEC-1 eligibility criteria were applied to the RWPC cohort. Baseline covariate imbalances were adjusted using inverse probability of treatment weighting. Overall survival, progression-free survival and time to next treatment were compared. Results: After inverse probability of treatment weighting, baseline characteristics were similar between cohorts (teclistamab, n = 165; RWPC, n = 364 [766 observations]). Teclistamab treated patients had numerically better overall survival (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.82 [95% CI: 0.59-1.14]; p = 0.233) and significantly greater progression-free survival (HR: 0.43 [0.33-0.56]; p < 0.0001) and time to next treatment (HR: 0.36 [0.27-0.49]; p < 0.0001) versus the RWPC cohort. Conclusion: Teclistamab offered clinical benefit over RWPC in triple-class exposed relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma.

Comparative Efficacy of Teclistamab Versus Physician's Choice of Therapy in the Long-term Follow-up of APOLLO, POLLUX, CASTOR, and EQUULEUS Clinical Trials in Patients With Triple-class Exposed Relapsed or Refractory Multiple Myeloma.

BACKGROUND: The efficacy and safety of teclistamab in patients with RRMM who received ≥3 prior lines of therapy and were triple-class exposed (TCE) are being evaluated in the single-arm, multicohort, phase I/II MajesTEC-1 trial (NCT04557098). We evaluated the comparative effectiveness of teclistamab versus physician's choice (PC) of therapy in TCE RRMM patients. METHODS: Individual patient-level data from MajesTEC-1 patients who received teclistamab (1.5 mg/kg weekly; clinical cutoff March 16, 2022) were included. An external control arm was created from patients in long-term follow-up of 4 clinical trials of daratumumab who were treated with PC therapy after discontinuation of trial treatments. In the primary analysis, inverse probability of treatment weighting was used to adjust for imbalances in 9 baseline covariates. A fully adjusted model included 5 additional prognostic factors. Outcomes included overall response rate (ORR), very good partial response or better (≥VGPR) rate, overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and time to next treatment (TTNT). RESULTS: After adjustment, baseline characteristics were balanced between cohorts. In the primary analysis, outcomes were significantly improved with teclistamab versus PC: ORR (OR [95% CI] 4.81 [3.04-7.72]; P < .0001); ≥VGPR rate (OR, 12.07 [6.91-22.11]; P < .0001); OS (HR, 0.54 [0.40-0.73]; P < .0001); PFS (HR, 0.59 [0.46-0.78]; P = .0001); and TTNT (HR, 0.32 [0.24-0.42]; P < .0001). Results of the fully adjusted model were consistent with the primary analysis. CONCLUSION: Teclistamab showed significantly improved effectiveness versus PC on all outcomes, highlighting its clinical benefit in patients with TCE RRMM and limited treatment options.

Clinical characteristics associated with falls in patients with non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer treated with apalutamide.

BACKGROUND: The phase III SPARTAN study demonstrated that apalutamide significantly improves metastasis-free survival and overall survival vs. placebo in patients with non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC). However, patients receiving apalutamide experienced falls more frequently vs. those receiving placebo (15.6% vs. 9.0%). METHODS: 806 patients with nmCRPC randomized to apalutamide in SPARTAN and treated with apalutamide in addition to ongoing androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) were included in this post-hoc analysis investigating clinical variables associated with a subsequent fall. Time to a fall was assessed with Cox proportional-hazards models adjusted for baseline characteristics and time-varying factors. Statistical inference was based on final multivariable models. RESULTS: Falls were reported for 125/803 (15.6%) patients treated with apalutamide and ADT. Most falls were grade 1 or 2 and did not require hospitalization. Median time from randomization to first fall was 9.2 months (range 0.1-25.3 months). In the final multivariable model of both baseline and after-baseline covariates, baseline patient characteristics (older age, poor Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, history of neuropathy, and α-blocker use before study treatment) remained significantly associated with fall; after-baseline clinical characteristics significantly associated with time to fall were development of neuropathy, arthralgia, and weight loss before fall. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis identified risk factors for fall among nmCRPC patients treated with apalutamide. Clinical management can minimize these identified risks while enhancing patient outcomes. Preventive interventions should be considered when the identified baseline conditions and post-treatment neuropathy, arthralgia, or weight decrease are present, to reduce risk of fall. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01946204.

Comparative Clinical Outcomes Between EGFR Ex20ins and Wildtype NSCLC Treated with Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors.

INTRODUCTION: The activity of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in NSCLC harboring EGFR exon 20 insertion mutations (ex20ins) has not been closely examined due to the frequent exclusion of patients with EGFR mutations from large immunotherapy-based NSCLC trials. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A real-world, retrospective study was conducted to compare outcomes of ICI-treated patients with EGFR ex20ins and wildtype NSCLC (wt-NSCLC; defined as EGFR and ALK test negative). Patients with advanced NSCLC from the Flatiron Health database (2015-2020) were included in the analysis. Real-world time to next therapy (rwTTNT) and overall survival (rwOS), stratified by ICI initiation line of therapy, were the prespecified primary and secondary endpoints, respectively. RESULTS: Among 59 patients with EGFR ex20ins NSCLC and 5365 with wt-NSCLC, ICI treatment was received as first-line therapy in 25% and 39%, respectively. Patients with EGFR ex20ins had a 58% increased risk of shorter time to next-line therapy compared with wt-NSCLC (adjusted hazard ratio of 1.58 [95% confidence interval [CI], 1.2-2.1]; P = .0012). The median rwTTNT for first ICI line was 3.7 months (95% CI, 3.0-4.9) for EGFR ex20ins NSCLC compared with 5.8 months (95% CI, 5.6-6.0) for wt-NSCLC. No meaningful difference in rwOS between the groups was observed. CONCLUSIONS: ICI therapy may be less effective for patients with EGFR ex20ins compared with wt-NSCLC. Consistent with prior data on exon 19 deletion and L858R substitution, tumors harboring ex20ins appear to be less responsive to immune checkpoint inhibition than wt-NSCLC.

Comparative effectiveness of ciltacabtagene autoleucel in CARTITUDE-1 versus physician's choice of therapy in the Flatiron Health multiple myeloma cohort registry for the treatment of patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma.

Introduction: Ciltacabtagene autoleucel (cilta-cel) is a novel chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy that is being evaluated in the CARTITUDE-1 trial (NCT03548207) in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) who received as part of their previous therapy an immunomodulatory drug, proteasome inhibitor, and an anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody (i.e., triple-class exposed). Given the absence of a control arm in CARTITUDE-1, this study assessed the comparative effectiveness of cilta-cel and physician's choice of treatment (PCT) using an external real-world control arm from the Flatiron Health multiple myeloma cohort registry. Methods: Given the availability of individual patient data for cilta-cel from CARTITUDE-1 and PCT in Flatiron, inverse probability of treatment weighting was used to adjust for unbalanced baseline covariates of prognostic significance: refractory status, cytogenetic profile, International Staging System stage, time to progression on last regimen, number of prior lines of therapy, years since diagnosis, and age. Comparative effectiveness was estimated for progression-free survival (PFS), time to next treatment (TTNT), and overall survival (OS). A range of sensitivity analyses were conducted. Results: Baseline characteristics were similar between the two cohorts after propensity score weighting. Patients with cilta-cel had improved PFS (HR: 0.18 [95% CI: 0.12, 0.27; p < 0.0001]), TTNT (HR: 0.15 [95% CI: 0.09, 0.22; p < 0.0001]), and OS (HR: 0.25 [95% CI: 0.13, 0.46; p < 0.0001]) versus PCT. Cilta-cel treatment benefit was robust and consistent across all sensitivity analyses. Conclusion: Cilta-cel demonstrated significantly superior effectiveness over PCT for all outcomes, highlighting its potential as an effective therapy in patients with triple-class exposed RRMM.

Daratumumab Improves Depth of Response and Progression-free Survival in Transplant-ineligible, High-risk, Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma.

BACKGROUND: Patients with high-risk, newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (HR-NDMM) who are ineligible for autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) have limited first-line treatment options. Recent meta-analyses evaluating the impact of incorporating daratumumab in the backbone regimen on progression-free survival (PFS) have found mixed results in these patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A pooled analysis of patient-level data for ASCT-ineligible patients with HR-NDMM [ie, del(17p), t(4;14), t(14;16)] from the MAIA and ALCYONE trials; stratified by study identifier and adjusting for cytogenetic abnormality subtype, baseline performance status, International Staging System stage, myeloma type, and renal impairment; was conducted. Impact of daratumumab on PFS and rates of complete response or better (≥CR), minimal residual disease (MRD)-negative CR, very good partial response or better (≥VGPR), and overall response (ORR) was compared to control. RESULTS: Among 101 patients in the daratumumab and 89 patients in the control cohort, median follow-up was 43.7 months. Daratumumab reduced the risk of progression or death by 41% (adjusted hazard ratio for PFS [95% confidence interval (CI)] = 0.59 [0.41-0.85]) versus control. At 36 months, the estimated proportion of patients who did not progress and were still alive was 41.3% in the daratumumab and 19.9% in the control cohort. Rates of ≥CR (41.6% vs. 22.5%), MRD-negative CR (24.8% vs. 5.6%), ≥VGPR (75.2% vs. 46.1%), and ORR (92.1% vs. 74.2%) were higher for daratumumab versus control. CONCLUSION: These findings demonstrate that incorporation of daratumumab in frontline treatment regimens reduced the risk of progression or death and improved response rates among ASCT-ineligible HR-NDMM patients.

Comparative Efficacy of Ciltacabtagene Autoleucel in CARTITUDE-1 vs Physician's Choice of Therapy in the Long-Term Follow-Up of POLLUX, CASTOR, and EQUULEUS Clinical Trials for the Treatment of Patients with Relapsed or Refractory Multiple Myeloma.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Ciltacabtagene autoleucel (cilta-cel) is a novel agent being investigated in the single-arm CARTITUDE-1 trial (NCT03548207) for patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma who are triple-class exposed to an immunomodulatory drug, proteasome inhibitor, and an anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody. The objective of this study was to evaluate the comparative efficacy of cilta-cel vs physician's choice of treatment, as no head-to-head trials have been conducted. METHODS: An external control arm for CARTITUDE-1 was created from patients in the long-term follow-up for three clinical trials of daratumumab (POLLUX, CASTOR, and EQUULEUS) who satisfied the eligibility criteria of CARTITUDE-1. These patients received physician's choice of treatment following the discontinuation of study drugs. Inverse probability of treatment weighting was used to align the external control and CARTITUDE-1 populations on important baseline characteristics. Overall response rate, complete response or better rate, progression-free survival, time to next treatment, and overall survival were assessed. Several sensitivity analyses were conducted. RESULTS: After propensity score weighting, baseline characteristics were comparable between cohorts. Patients showed improved results with cilta-cel vs physician's choice of treatment: overall response rate (relative risk: 2.95 [95% confidence interval (CI) 2.27, 3.84; p < 0.0001]), complete response or better (relative risk: 111.70 [95% CI 29.08, 429.06; p < 0.0001]), progression-free survival (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.24 [95% CI 0.15, 0.37; p < 0.0001]), time to next treatment (HR: 0.14 [95% CI 0.09, 0.22; p < 0.0001]), and overall survival (HR: 0.21 [95% CI 0.13, 0.35; p < 0.0001]). Results were consistent across all sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Cilta-cel showed superior efficacy compared with physician's choice of treatment, making it a promising new treatment option for patients with triple-class exposed relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma.

Deep Prostate-specific Antigen Response following Addition of Apalutamide to Ongoing Androgen Deprivation Therapy and Long-term Clinical Benefit in SPARTAN.

BACKGROUND: Apalutamide plus androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) significantly improved metastasis-free survival (MFS), overall survival (OS), and time to prostate-specific antigen (PSA) progression in the placebo-controlled SPARTAN study of high-risk nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC). OBJECTIVE: To assess the relationships between PSA kinetics, outcomes, and molecular subtypes in SPARTAN. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The authors conducted a post hoc analysis of nmCRPC patients randomized to receive apalutamide (n = 806) or placebo (n = 401) plus ADT and a subset stratified by molecular classifiers. INTERVENTION: Apalutamide 240 mg/d. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The association between PSA kinetics and MFS, OS, time to PSA progression, and molecular subtypes was evaluated using the landmark analysis and Kaplan-Meier methods. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: By 3 mo, PSA decreased in most apalutamide-treated patients and increased in most placebo-treated patients. After apalutamide, the median time to PSA nadir, confirmed ≥50% PSA reduction, ≥90% PSA reduction, and PSA ≤0.2 ng/ml were 7.4, 1.0, 1.9, and 2.8 mo, respectively. By 6 mo, 90%, 57%, and 32% of apalutamide patients had ≥50% PSA reduction, ≥90% PSA reduction, and PSA ≤0.2 ng/ml, respectively, while only 1.5% of placebo patients experienced ≥50% PSA reduction. PSA reductions were observed within 3 mo and up to 12 mo of apalutamide treatment, and were similar across molecular subtypes. Deep PSA responses (≥90% PSA reduction or PSA ≤0.2 ng/ml) at landmark 6-mo apalutamide treatment were significantly associated with improved time to PSA progression (hazard ratio {HR} [95% confidence interval {CI}] 0.25 [0.18-0.33] or 0.13 [0.08-0.21]), MFS (0.41 [0.29-0.57] or 0.3 [0.19-0.47]), and OS (0.45 [0.35-0.59] or 0.26 [0.18-0.38]; p < 0.001 for all). CONCLUSIONS: Apalutamide plus ADT produced rapid, deep, and durable PSA responses by 6-mo treatment regardless of assessed molecular prognostic markers. An early PSA response with apalutamide was associated with clinical benefits, supporting prognostic value of PSA monitoring. PATIENT SUMMARY: In this report, we describe how prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels relate to outcomes in patients with nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer treated with apalutamide plus androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). We found that treatment with apalutamide plus ADT resulted in rapid, deep, and durable PSA responses in the majority of patients, including those with high-risk molecular subtypes, which were associated with improved survival.

Comparative clinical outcomes for patients with advanced NSCLC harboring EGFR exon 20 insertion mutations and common EGFR mutations.

INTRODUCTION: Real-world clinical outcomes in patients with advanced NSCLC harboring EGFR exon 20 insertion (exon20ins) mutations have not been extensively studied. We conducted a retrospective cohort study to assess the clinical outcomes of EGFR exon20ins compared with common EGFR (cEGFR) mutations. METHODS: Adults with advanced NSCLC harboring any EGFR mutations in the NSCLC Flatiron registry (2011 through May 2020) were included. To compare the relative prognosis (prognostic value) of exon20ins vs cEGFR, real-world overall survival (rwOS) was the primary endpoint. Separately, to compare the relative response to tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) treatment (predictive value), real-world progression-free survival (rwPFS) was the primary endpoint. RESULTS: For the prognostic value analysis, 3014 patients with EGFR mutant NSCLC (cEGFR, n = 2833; EGFR exon20ins, n = 181) were eligible. The median (95% CI) rwOS was 16.2 (11.04-19.38) months in the EGFR exon20ins cohort vs 25.5 (24.48-27.04) months in the cEGFR cohort (adjusted HR, 1.75 [1.45-2.13]; p < 0.0001); 5-year rwOS was 8% and 19%, respectively. For the predictive value analysis, 2825 patients received TKI treatment and were eligible (cEGFR, n = 2749; EGFR exon20ins, n = 76). The median (95% CI) rwPFS from start of the first TKI was 2.9 (2.14-3.91) months in the EGFR exon20ins cohort vs 10.5 (10.05-10.94) months in the cEGFR cohort (adjusted HR, 2.69 [2.05-3.54]; p < 0001). Among patients with EGFR exon20ins, the most common prescribed first-line therapy was platinum-based chemotherapy (61.3%) followed by EGFR TKIs (21.5%); second-line treatments were varied, with no clear standard of care. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with EGFR exon20ins have poor prognosis and receive little benefit from EGFR TKI treatment. More effective therapies are needed in this difficult-to-treat population.

Impact of clinical versus radiographic progression on clinical outcomes in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer.

OBJECTIVES: Unequivocal clinical progression (UCP)-a worsening of clinical status with or without radiographic progression (RAD)-represents a distinct mode of disease progression in metastatic prostate cancer. We evaluated the prevalence, risk factors and the impact of UCP on survival outcomes. METHODS: A post-hoc analysis of the COU-AA-302, a randomised phase 3 study of abiraterone plus prednisone (AAP) versus prednisone was performed. Baseline characteristics were summarised. Cox proportional-hazards model and Kaplan-Meier method were used for survival and time to event analyses, respectively. Iterative multiple imputation method was used for correlation between clinicoradiographic progression-free survival (crPFS) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Of 736 patients with disease progression, 280 (38%) had UCP-only and 124 (17%) had UCP plus RAD. Prognostic index model high-risk group was associated with increased likelihood of UCP (p<0.0001). Median OS was 25.7 months in UCP-only and 33.0 months for RAD-only (HR 1.39; 95% CI 1.16 to 1.66; p=0.0003). UCP adversely impacted OS in both treatment groups. Lowest OS was seen in patients with prostate specific antigen (PSA)-non-response plus UCP-only progression (median OS 22.6 months (95% CI 20.7 to 24.4)). Including UCP events lowered estimates of treatment benefit-median crPFS was 13.3 months (95% CI 11.1 to 13.8) versus median rPFS of 16.5 months (95% CI 13.8 to 16.8) in AAP group. Finally, crPFS showed high correlation with OS (r=0.67; 95% CI 0.63 to 0.71). CONCLUSIONS: UCP is a common and clinically relevant phenomenon in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) treated with AAP or prednisone. UCP is prognostic and associated with inferior OS and post-progression survival. A combination of PSA-non-response and UCP identifies patients with poorest survival. When included in PFS analysis, UCP diminishes estimates of treatment benefit. Continued study of UCP in mCRPC is warranted.

Prostate-Specific Membrane Antigen Ligand Positron Emission Tomography in Men with Nonmetastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer.

PURPOSE: Systemic androgen-signaling inhibition added to ongoing androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) improved clinical outcomes in patients with nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer without detectable metastases by conventional imaging (nmCRPC). Prostate-specific membrane antigen ligand positron emission tomography (PSMA-PET) detects prostate cancer with superior sensitivity to conventional imaging, but its performance in nmCRPC remains largely unknown. We characterized cancer burden in high-risk patients with nmCRPC using PSMA-PET. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: We retrospectively included 200 patients with nmCRPC, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) >2 ng/mL, and high risk for metastatic disease [PSA doubling time (PSADT) of ≤10 months and/or Gleason score of ≥8] from six high-volume PET centers. We centrally reviewed PSMA-PET detection rate for pelvic disease and distant metastases (M1). We further evaluated SPARTAN patients stratified by risk factors for PSMA-PET-detected M1 disease. RESULTS: PSMA-PET was positive in 196 of 200 patients. Overall, 44% had pelvic diseases, including 24% with local prostate bed recurrence, and 55% had M1 disease despite negative conventional imaging. Interobserver agreement was very high (κ: 0.81-0.91). PSA ≥ 5.5 ng/mL, locoregional nodal involvement determined by pathology (pN1), prior primary radiation, and prior salvage radiotherapy independently predicted M1 disease (all P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: PSMA-PET detected any disease in nearly all patients and M1 disease in 55% of patients previously diagnosed with nmCRPC, including subgroups with PSADT of ≤10 months and Gleason score of ≥8. The value of PSMA-PET imaging for treatment guidance should be tested in future studies.

Long-Term Studies Assessing Outcomes of Ibrutinib Therapy in Patients With Del(11q) Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia.

BACKGROUND: Certain genomic features, such as del(11q), expression of unmutated immunoglobulin heavy-chain variable region (IGHV) gene, or complex karyotype, predict poorer outcomes to chemotherapy in patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). PATIENTS AND METHODS: We examined the pooled long-term follow-up data from PCYC-1115 (RESONATE-2), PCYC-1112 (RESONATE), and CLL3001 (HELIOS), comprising a total of 1238 subjects, to determine the prognostic significance of these markers in patients treated with ibrutinib. RESULTS: With a median follow-up of 47 months, ibrutinib-treated patients had longer progression-free survival (PFS) than patients treated in the comparator arm, regardless of genomic risk factors. Among patients treated with ibrutinib, we found that high-risk genomic features were not associated with shorter PFS (63-75% across all subgroups at 42 months) or overall survival (79-83% across all subgroups at 42 months). Surprisingly, we observed that ibrutinib-treated patients with del(11q) actually had a significantly longer PFS than ibrutinib-treated patients without del(11q) (42-month PFS rate 70% vs. 65%, P = .02). CONCLUSION: These analyses not only demonstrate that genomic risk factors previously associated with poor outcomes lose their adverse prognostic significance but also that del(11q) can be associated with a superior PFS with ibrutinib therapy.

Prognostic risk score for patients with relapsed or refractory chronic lymphocytic leukaemia treated with targeted therapies or chemoimmunotherapy: a retrospective, pooled cohort study with external validations.

BACKGROUND: Clinically validated prognostic models for overall survival do not exist for patients with relapsed or refractory chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (CLL) who are on targeted therapies. We aimed to create a prognostic model to identify high-risk individuals who do not achieve a good outcome with available targeted therapies. METHODS: In this retrospective, pooled cohort study, 2475 patients with CLL treated between June 22, 2012, and Sept 23, 2015, in six randomised trials of ibrutinib, idelalisib, and venetoclax, or at the Mayo Clinic CLL Database (MCCD) were included. Eligible patients had CLL, were previously treated, were aged 18 years or older, had ECOG performance status 0-1, and required further treatment as per the international workshop on CLL 2008 criteria. There was heterogeneity in other eligibility criteria. We evaluated 28 candidate factors known to affect the overall survival of these patients and applied univariate and multivariate analyses to derive the risk score in a training dataset (n=727) of patients treated with ibrutinib or chemoimmunotherapy. We validated the score in an internal-validation dataset (n=242) of patients treated with ibrutinib or chemoimmunotherapy and three external-validation datasets (idelalisib or chemoimmunotherapy dataset, n=897; venetoclax or chemoimmunotherapy dataset, n=389; and the MCCD [including patients treated with heterogeneous therapies], n=220), applying C-statistics as a measure of discrimination. FINDINGS: The derived model consisted of four factors (one point each; serum ß2-microglobulin ≥5 mg/dL, lactate dehydrogenase >upper limit of normal, haemoglobin <110 g/L for women or <120 g/L for men, and time from initiation of last therapy <24 months), separating patients into low (score 0-1), intermediate (score 2-3), and high risk (score 4) groups. The risk score was prognostic for overall survival in the training dataset (CS=0·74, 95% CI 0·60-0·85, log-rank p<0·0001), and in the internal-validation (CS=0·79, 0·56-0·97, log-rank p=0·0003), and all three external-validation cohorts (idelalisib or chemoimmunotherapy: CS=0·71, 0·59-0·81, log-rank p<0·0001; venetoclax or chemoimmunotherapy: CS =0·76, 0·66-0·85, log-rank p=0·014; MCCD cohort: CS=0·61, 0·56-0·66), log-rank p<0·0001). The risk score is available on Calculate by QxMD. INTERPRETATION: We present the first validated risk score to predict overall survival in patients with relapsed or refractory CLL treated with targeted therapy. The model is applicable to patients treated with all currently approved targeted therapies (ibrutinib, idelalisib, and venetoclax) and chemoimmunotherapy. This tool allows the identification of a well defined cohort of previously treated patients with CLL who are at high risk of death, and could be used in future prospective trials to test therapeutic options for these patients with an unmet clinical need. FUNDING: Lymphoma Research Foundation, Lymphoma Research Fund (Andrew D Zelenetz), and National Institutes of Health/National Cancer Institute.

Phase 3 study of subcutaneous bortezomib, thalidomide, and prednisolone consolidation after subcutaneous bortezomib-based induction and autologous stem cell transplantation in patients with previously untreated multiple myeloma: the VCAT study.

Efficacy and safety of bortezomib-based consolidation following ASCT were investigated in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma patients from Australia, Korea, and China. Patients received three cycles of bortezomib-cyclophosphamide-dexamethasone induction followed by high-dose therapy/ASCT, then were randomized (1:1) to consolidation with TP (thalidomide 100 mg/d for ≤12 months/until disease progression; prednisolone 50 mg on alternate days indefinitely/until disease progression; n = 100) or VTP (subcutaneous bortezomib 1.3 mg/m2 every 2 weeks for 32 weeks, plus TP; n = 103). The hypothesized difference in CR + VGPR rate (after ≤12 months consolidation therapy) was not met. The rate of CR + VGPR was numerically higher with VTP versus TP; however, this was not statistically significant (85.7% versus 77.1%; rate difference 8.6%; 95% confidence interval -2.3%-19.5%; p = .122). Secondary efficacy outcomes were similar between treatment arms. Addition of bortezomib to TP consolidation was associated with limited additional toxicity but did not significantly improve efficacy versus TP.

Results of an early access treatment protocol of daratumumab in United States patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma.

BACKGROUND: Daratumumab is a human CD38-directed monoclonal antibody indicated for the treatment of relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma (MM). METHODS: A multicenter, open-label treatment protocol provided early access to daratumumab for patients who had progressive MM after they received ≥3 prior lines of therapy that included a proteasome inhibitor and an immunomodulatory agent or if they were refractory to both a proteasome inhibitor and an immunomodulatory agent. Patients received daratumumab 16 mg/kg weekly for 8 weeks, every other week for 16 weeks, and monthly until they developed disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or 60 days after the drug gained US approval. Treatment-emergent grade ≥3 adverse events (AEs), serious AEs, and AEs of special interest were collected. RESULTS: Three hundred forty-eight patients were enrolled at 39 US sites between June and December 2015. Patients received study therapy for a median of 1.9 months (range, 0.03-6.0 months). Fifty-two percent of patients transitioned to commercially-available daratumumab and 37% discontinued because of progressive disease. Grade ≥3 AEs occurred in 50% of patients, including thrombocytopenia (15%) and anemia (14%). Serious AEs occurred in 35% of patients (12% were drug-related), including infections (11%). Infusion reactions occurred in 56%, 2%, and 2% of patients during the first, second, and all subsequent infusions, respectively; respiratory symptoms (cough, dyspnea, throat irritation, nasal congestion) were common. The infusion reaction rate for the first infusion was 38% in 50 patients at 2 sites who received montelukast as premedication for their first infusion and 59% in patients who did not receive montelukast. CONCLUSIONS: The current findings are consistent with previously reported trials and confirm the safety profile of daratumumab in heavily pretreated US patients who have relapsed or refractory MM. Cancer 2018;124:000-000.

The IMAAGEN Study: Effect of Abiraterone Acetate and Prednisone on Prostate Specific Antigen and Radiographic Disease Progression in Patients with Nonmetastatic Castration Resistant Prostate Cancer.

PURPOSE: We evaluated the use of abiraterone acetate (1,000 mg) plus prednisone (5 mg) in patients with high risk, nonmetastatic, castration resistant prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients considered at high risk for progression to metastatic disease (prostate specific antigen 10 ng/ml or greater, or prostate specific antigen doubling time 10 months or less) received abiraterone acetate plus prednisone daily in 28-day cycles. The primary study end point was the proportion of patients in whom a 50% or greater prostate specific antigen reduction was achieved during cycles 1 to 6. Secondary end points included time to prostate specific antigen progression, time to radiographic evidence of disease progression and safety. RESULTS: Of the 131 enrolled patients 44 (34%) remained on treatment with a median followup of 40.0 months. Median age was 72 years (range 48 to 90). Of the patients 82.4% were white and 14.5% were black. Median screening prostate specific antigen was 11.9 ng/dl and median prostate specific antigen doubling time was 3.4 months. Prostate specific antigen was significantly reduced (p <0.0001) with a 50% or greater prostate specific antigen reduction in 86.9% of cases and a 90% or greater reduction in 59.8%. Median time to prostate specific antigen progression was 28.7 months (95% CI 21.2-38.2). Median time to radiographic evidence of disease progression was not reached but on sensitivity analysis in 15 patients it was estimated to be 41.4 months (95% CI 27.6-not estimable). Baseline testosterone 12.5 ng/dl or greater and a 90% or greater prostate specific antigen reduction at cycle 3 were associated with longer time to prostate specific antigen progression and radiographic evidence of disease progression. Outcomes in black patients were similar to those in other patients. Adverse events, grade 3 or greater adverse events and serious adverse events were reported in 96.2%, 61.1% and 43.5% of patients, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with high risk, nonmetastatic, castration resistant prostate cancer treatment with abiraterone acetate plus prednisone demonstrated a significant 50% or greater prostate specific antigen reduction with encouraging results for the secondary end points, including the safety of 5 mg prednisone.

Association between complete response and outcomes in transplant-eligible myeloma patients in the era of novel agents.

OBJECTIVES: Achieving complete response (CR) has been linked to improved progression-free (PFS) and overall (OS) survival in myeloma. A meta-analysis was conducted to investigate whether this holds true in the era of novel agents (bortezomib, lenalidomide, thalidomide). METHODS: A total of 24 studies in newly diagnosed patients undergoing autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) that reported associations between responses and long-term outcomes (PFS/OS rates post-ASCT by response, or hazard ratios with 95% confidence intervals from Cox models) were identified and analyzed. RESULTS: Achievement of CR vs.