Aggressive Lymphomas

The oral immunomodulatory drug lenalidomide is active and may provide prolonged responses in certain patients with a rare and aggressive subtype of primary cutaneous lymphoma, according to results of a phase 2 study.

In the study, which comprised 19 patients with primary cutaneous diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, leg type (PCDLBCL, LT), 5 patients (26.3%) had a response at 6 months, and there were still 3 patients in response at 12 months. The findings were reported in the Journal of Investigative Dermatology.

In an exploratory analysis, reducing the dose of lenalidomide was associated with prolonged response and improved survival, noted lead author Marie Beylot-Barry, MD, of the dermatology department, Hôpital Saint-André, CHU Bordeaux, France, and her colleagues.

“Lenalidomide at reduced doses may allow prolonged responses in few patients, and represents a therapeutic option in relapsing/refractory PCDLBCL, LT,” the researchers wrote.

Found mostly on the lower limbs of elderly patients, PCDLBCL, LT exhibits aggressive behavior and is associated with a high rate of skin recurrences. First-line therapy for the cutaneous lymphoma is typically rituximab and chemotherapy, regardless of clinical stage or patient age, the researchers wrote, though primary resistance or recurrence after treatment occurs in about half of patients. “In such relapsing or refractory cases, no treatment has demonstrated a sustained benefit thus far,” they noted.

Lenalidomide has already demonstrated efficacy in relapsed/refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) and it induces inhibition of cell signaling, engaging NF-kappaB signaling. PCDLBCL, LT is marked by genetic alterations leading to the NF-kappaB pathway, which represents a therapeutic target.

Dr. Beylot-Barry and her colleagues initiated a multicenter, single-arm, phase 2 trial of 19 patients refractory/relapsing PCDLBCL, LT. Median progression-free survival in the trial was 4.9 months. The 6-month overall response rate – the primary endpoint of the trial – was 26.3%, which was not significantly superior to a prespecified 20% minimal response rate, according to the researchers.

SOURCE: Beylot-Barry M et al. J Invest Dermatol. 2018 Mar 26. doi: 10.1016/j.jid.2018.03.1516.

The oral immunomodulatory drug lenalidomide is active and may provide prolonged responses in certain patients with a rare and aggressive subtype of primary cutaneous lymphoma, according to results of a phase 2 study.

In the study, which comprised 19 patients with primary cutaneous diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, leg type (PCDLBCL, LT), 5 patients (26.3%) had a response at 6 months, and there were still 3 patients in response at 12 months. The findings were reported in the Journal of Investigative Dermatology.

In an exploratory analysis, reducing the dose of lenalidomide was associated with prolonged response and improved survival, noted lead author Marie Beylot-Barry, MD, of the dermatology department, Hôpital Saint-André, CHU Bordeaux, France, and her colleagues.

“Lenalidomide at reduced doses may allow prolonged responses in few patients, and represents a therapeutic option in relapsing/refractory PCDLBCL, LT,” the researchers wrote.

Found mostly on the lower limbs of elderly patients, PCDLBCL, LT exhibits aggressive behavior and is associated with a high rate of skin recurrences. First-line therapy for the cutaneous lymphoma is typically rituximab and chemotherapy, regardless of clinical stage or patient age, the researchers wrote, though primary resistance or recurrence after treatment occurs in about half of patients. “In such relapsing or refractory cases, no treatment has demonstrated a sustained benefit thus far,” they noted.

Lenalidomide has already demonstrated efficacy in relapsed/refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) and it induces inhibition of cell signaling, engaging NF-kappaB signaling. PCDLBCL, LT is marked by genetic alterations leading to the NF-kappaB pathway, which represents a therapeutic target.

Dr. Beylot-Barry and her colleagues initiated a multicenter, single-arm, phase 2 trial of 19 patients refractory/relapsing PCDLBCL, LT. Median progression-free survival in the trial was 4.9 months. The 6-month overall response rate – the primary endpoint of the trial – was 26.3%, which was not significantly superior to a prespecified 20% minimal response rate, according to the researchers.

SOURCE: Beylot-Barry M et al. J Invest Dermatol. 2018 Mar 26. doi: 10.1016/j.jid.2018.03.1516.

The oral immunomodulatory drug lenalidomide is active and may provide prolonged responses in certain patients with a rare and aggressive subtype of primary cutaneous lymphoma, according to results of a phase 2 study.

In the study, which comprised 19 patients with primary cutaneous diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, leg type (PCDLBCL, LT), 5 patients (26.3%) had a response at 6 months, and there were still 3 patients in response at 12 months. The findings were reported in the Journal of Investigative Dermatology.

In an exploratory analysis, reducing the dose of lenalidomide was associated with prolonged response and improved survival, noted lead author Marie Beylot-Barry, MD, of the dermatology department, Hôpital Saint-André, CHU Bordeaux, France, and her colleagues.

“Lenalidomide at reduced doses may allow prolonged responses in few patients, and represents a therapeutic option in relapsing/refractory PCDLBCL, LT,” the researchers wrote.

Found mostly on the lower limbs of elderly patients, PCDLBCL, LT exhibits aggressive behavior and is associated with a high rate of skin recurrences. First-line therapy for the cutaneous lymphoma is typically rituximab and chemotherapy, regardless of clinical stage or patient age, the researchers wrote, though primary resistance or recurrence after treatment occurs in about half of patients. “In such relapsing or refractory cases, no treatment has demonstrated a sustained benefit thus far,” they noted.

Lenalidomide has already demonstrated efficacy in relapsed/refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) and it induces inhibition of cell signaling, engaging NF-kappaB signaling. PCDLBCL, LT is marked by genetic alterations leading to the NF-kappaB pathway, which represents a therapeutic target.

Dr. Beylot-Barry and her colleagues initiated a multicenter, single-arm, phase 2 trial of 19 patients refractory/relapsing PCDLBCL, LT. Median progression-free survival in the trial was 4.9 months. The 6-month overall response rate – the primary endpoint of the trial – was 26.3%, which was not significantly superior to a prespecified 20% minimal response rate, according to the researchers.

SOURCE: Beylot-Barry M et al. J Invest Dermatol. 2018 Mar 26. doi: 10.1016/j.jid.2018.03.1516.

In mantle cell lymphoma (MCL), ibrutinib plus venetoclax significantly improved the complete response rate, compared with what has been previously reported for ibrutinib alone, according to results of a phase 2 study.

Clinical outcomes with the combination seem superior to previously reported results for either treatment alone, said lead investigator Constantine S. Tam, MBBS, MD, of the Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, and his coinvestigators.

“The results of our study, which used a historical cohort as a control, are consistent with the notion that the combination of ibrutinib and venetoclax is highly effective in mantle-cell lymphoma,” the investigators wrote in the New England Journal of Medicine.

The BTK inhibitor ibrutinib and the BCL2 inhibitor venetoclax are two of the most active agents for this B-cell cancer, investigators reported. The rationale for combining the agents is “compelling” because they affect different critical pathways in the malignant B cell.

Both agents have demonstrated complete response rates of 21% in previous studies of relapsed or refractory MCL, and preclinical studies suggest the combination of ibrutinib and venetoclax would be synergistic.

In the present single-group, phase 2 study, 24 patients with MCL (23 relapsed or refractory, 1 previously untreated) started ibrutinib 560 mg daily; at 4 weeks, venetoclax was started at a low dose and increased to 400 mg daily.

The study primary end point – complete response rate at week 16 assessed by CT – was 42%, compared with 9% for ibrutinib monotherapy in the phase 2 PCYC-1104-CA study (P less than .001).

Computed tomography assessment was used for the primary end point to allow comparison to the ibrutinib monotherapy study, which did not use positron emission tomography for restaging. “Our study was designed to have 80% power to reject a complete response rate of 9% (at a one-sided alpha level of 0.05) if the rate of complete response was at least 30%,” the investigators noted.

Complete response rate assessed by positron emission tomography at week 16 was 62%, and was 71% overall.

In all, 67% of patients had absence of minimal residual disease by flow cytometry. At 15 months, 78% of the responses were ongoing, and at 18 months, 57% of patients were alive and progression free.

“Such outcomes appear to be substantially better than those that have been reported for ibrutinib or venetoclax monotherapy,” the investigators wrote.

The combination had side effects that are “acceptable to both patients and physicians,” investigators wrote. Side effects, usually low grade, included diarrhea in 83% of patients, fatigue in 75%, and nausea or vomiting in 71%. Tumor lysis syndrome was seen in two patients.

Whether ibrutinib plus venetoclax is superior to ibrutinib alone is being formally evaluated in an ongoing phase 3 study.

Janssen and AbbVie partially funded the current phase 2 study. Dr. Tam reported financial ties to Janssen, AbbVie, and Pharmacyclics. Other study authors reported financial ties to various pharmaceutical companies.

SOURCE: Tam C et al. N Engl J Med. 2018;378:1211-23.

In mantle cell lymphoma (MCL), ibrutinib plus venetoclax significantly improved the complete response rate, compared with what has been previously reported for ibrutinib alone, according to results of a phase 2 study.

Clinical outcomes with the combination seem superior to previously reported results for either treatment alone, said lead investigator Constantine S. Tam, MBBS, MD, of the Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, and his coinvestigators.

“The results of our study, which used a historical cohort as a control, are consistent with the notion that the combination of ibrutinib and venetoclax is highly effective in mantle-cell lymphoma,” the investigators wrote in the New England Journal of Medicine.

The BTK inhibitor ibrutinib and the BCL2 inhibitor venetoclax are two of the most active agents for this B-cell cancer, investigators reported. The rationale for combining the agents is “compelling” because they affect different critical pathways in the malignant B cell.

Both agents have demonstrated complete response rates of 21% in previous studies of relapsed or refractory MCL, and preclinical studies suggest the combination of ibrutinib and venetoclax would be synergistic.

In the present single-group, phase 2 study, 24 patients with MCL (23 relapsed or refractory, 1 previously untreated) started ibrutinib 560 mg daily; at 4 weeks, venetoclax was started at a low dose and increased to 400 mg daily.

The study primary end point – complete response rate at week 16 assessed by CT – was 42%, compared with 9% for ibrutinib monotherapy in the phase 2 PCYC-1104-CA study (P less than .001).

Computed tomography assessment was used for the primary end point to allow comparison to the ibrutinib monotherapy study, which did not use positron emission tomography for restaging. “Our study was designed to have 80% power to reject a complete response rate of 9% (at a one-sided alpha level of 0.05) if the rate of complete response was at least 30%,” the investigators noted.

Complete response rate assessed by positron emission tomography at week 16 was 62%, and was 71% overall.

In all, 67% of patients had absence of minimal residual disease by flow cytometry. At 15 months, 78% of the responses were ongoing, and at 18 months, 57% of patients were alive and progression free.

“Such outcomes appear to be substantially better than those that have been reported for ibrutinib or venetoclax monotherapy,” the investigators wrote.

The combination had side effects that are “acceptable to both patients and physicians,” investigators wrote. Side effects, usually low grade, included diarrhea in 83% of patients, fatigue in 75%, and nausea or vomiting in 71%. Tumor lysis syndrome was seen in two patients.

Whether ibrutinib plus venetoclax is superior to ibrutinib alone is being formally evaluated in an ongoing phase 3 study.

Janssen and AbbVie partially funded the current phase 2 study. Dr. Tam reported financial ties to Janssen, AbbVie, and Pharmacyclics. Other study authors reported financial ties to various pharmaceutical companies.

SOURCE: Tam C et al. N Engl J Med. 2018;378:1211-23.

In mantle cell lymphoma (MCL), ibrutinib plus venetoclax significantly improved the complete response rate, compared with what has been previously reported for ibrutinib alone, according to results of a phase 2 study.

Clinical outcomes with the combination seem superior to previously reported results for either treatment alone, said lead investigator Constantine S. Tam, MBBS, MD, of the Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, and his coinvestigators.

“The results of our study, which used a historical cohort as a control, are consistent with the notion that the combination of ibrutinib and venetoclax is highly effective in mantle-cell lymphoma,” the investigators wrote in the New England Journal of Medicine.

The BTK inhibitor ibrutinib and the BCL2 inhibitor venetoclax are two of the most active agents for this B-cell cancer, investigators reported. The rationale for combining the agents is “compelling” because they affect different critical pathways in the malignant B cell.

Both agents have demonstrated complete response rates of 21% in previous studies of relapsed or refractory MCL, and preclinical studies suggest the combination of ibrutinib and venetoclax would be synergistic.

In the present single-group, phase 2 study, 24 patients with MCL (23 relapsed or refractory, 1 previously untreated) started ibrutinib 560 mg daily; at 4 weeks, venetoclax was started at a low dose and increased to 400 mg daily.

The study primary end point – complete response rate at week 16 assessed by CT – was 42%, compared with 9% for ibrutinib monotherapy in the phase 2 PCYC-1104-CA study (P less than .001).

Computed tomography assessment was used for the primary end point to allow comparison to the ibrutinib monotherapy study, which did not use positron emission tomography for restaging. “Our study was designed to have 80% power to reject a complete response rate of 9% (at a one-sided alpha level of 0.05) if the rate of complete response was at least 30%,” the investigators noted.

Complete response rate assessed by positron emission tomography at week 16 was 62%, and was 71% overall.

In all, 67% of patients had absence of minimal residual disease by flow cytometry. At 15 months, 78% of the responses were ongoing, and at 18 months, 57% of patients were alive and progression free.

“Such outcomes appear to be substantially better than those that have been reported for ibrutinib or venetoclax monotherapy,” the investigators wrote.

The combination had side effects that are “acceptable to both patients and physicians,” investigators wrote. Side effects, usually low grade, included diarrhea in 83% of patients, fatigue in 75%, and nausea or vomiting in 71%. Tumor lysis syndrome was seen in two patients.

Whether ibrutinib plus venetoclax is superior to ibrutinib alone is being formally evaluated in an ongoing phase 3 study.

Janssen and AbbVie partially funded the current phase 2 study. Dr. Tam reported financial ties to Janssen, AbbVie, and Pharmacyclics. Other study authors reported financial ties to various pharmaceutical companies.

SOURCE: Tam C et al. N Engl J Med. 2018;378:1211-23.

LA JOLLA, CALIF. – In patients with relapsed peripheral T-cell lymphoma, the goal before moving to transplant is achieving complete or near-complete remission, according to Steven M. Horwitz, MD, of Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York.

“If you’re really trying to go to transplant, you want a complete remission or close to it. So that’s often been combination chemotherapy. But I think what we’re learning is, when some of the newer agents are combined, we’re seeing higher complete response rates. And we’re doing a better job at picking subtype specific approaches,” Dr. Horwitz said in a video interview at the annual T-cell Lymphoma Forum.

Dr. Horwitz also explored the role for reduced-intensity regimens in older patients, the use of radiation conditioning, and which new agents look most promising in peripheral T-cell lymphoma.

Dr. Horwitz had previously disclosed financial relationships with Celgene, Forty Seven, Huya Bioscience International, Infinity, Kyowa Hakko Kirin, Millennium, Seattle Genetics, and Takeda. The T-Cell Lymphoma Forum is held by Jonathan Wood & Associates, which is owned by the same company as this news organization.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Horwitz SM. TCLF 2018.

LA JOLLA, CALIF. – In patients with relapsed peripheral T-cell lymphoma, the goal before moving to transplant is achieving complete or near-complete remission, according to Steven M. Horwitz, MD, of Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York.

“If you’re really trying to go to transplant, you want a complete remission or close to it. So that’s often been combination chemotherapy. But I think what we’re learning is, when some of the newer agents are combined, we’re seeing higher complete response rates. And we’re doing a better job at picking subtype specific approaches,” Dr. Horwitz said in a video interview at the annual T-cell Lymphoma Forum.

Dr. Horwitz also explored the role for reduced-intensity regimens in older patients, the use of radiation conditioning, and which new agents look most promising in peripheral T-cell lymphoma.

Dr. Horwitz had previously disclosed financial relationships with Celgene, Forty Seven, Huya Bioscience International, Infinity, Kyowa Hakko Kirin, Millennium, Seattle Genetics, and Takeda. The T-Cell Lymphoma Forum is held by Jonathan Wood & Associates, which is owned by the same company as this news organization.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Horwitz SM. TCLF 2018.

LA JOLLA, CALIF. – In patients with relapsed peripheral T-cell lymphoma, the goal before moving to transplant is achieving complete or near-complete remission, according to Steven M. Horwitz, MD, of Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York.

“If you’re really trying to go to transplant, you want a complete remission or close to it. So that’s often been combination chemotherapy. But I think what we’re learning is, when some of the newer agents are combined, we’re seeing higher complete response rates. And we’re doing a better job at picking subtype specific approaches,” Dr. Horwitz said in a video interview at the annual T-cell Lymphoma Forum.

Dr. Horwitz also explored the role for reduced-intensity regimens in older patients, the use of radiation conditioning, and which new agents look most promising in peripheral T-cell lymphoma.

Dr. Horwitz had previously disclosed financial relationships with Celgene, Forty Seven, Huya Bioscience International, Infinity, Kyowa Hakko Kirin, Millennium, Seattle Genetics, and Takeda. The T-Cell Lymphoma Forum is held by Jonathan Wood & Associates, which is owned by the same company as this news organization.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Horwitz SM. TCLF 2018.

Photo from Novartis

The Institute for Clinical and Economic Review (ICER) has made policy recommendations intended to ensure affordability and access to chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapies.

ICER released a Final Evidence Report on tisagenlecleucel (Kymriah, Novartis) and axicabtagene ciloleucel (Yescarta, Kite Pharma/Gilead), 2 CAR T-cell therapies approved in the US to treat B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia (B-ALL) and non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL), respectively.

The report says the pricing of these therapies aligns with patient benefit, but changes will be needed in future pricing, payment, and delivery mechanisms to ensure patient access without threatening health system affordability.

“Given the currently available evidence, these therapies appear to be effective options for those with B-ALL or NHL, though uncertainty in the evidence raised questions around the long-term value for money,” said Dan Ollendorf, PhD, ICER’s chief scientific officer.

Net health benefit

ICER’s report says tisagenlecleucel provides a net health benefit for children with B-ALL, and both tisagenlecleucel and axicabtagene ciloleucel provide a net health benefit for adults with certain types of NHL. (Novartis is seeking approval for tisagenlecleucel in NHL).

The evidence suggests there is at least a small net health benefit of the CAR T-cell therapies compared to other therapies. The benefit may be substantial, but uncertainties remain.

The data show complete remission (CR), disease-free survival (DFS), and overall survival (OS) rates are superior for NHL patients who receive axicabtagene ciloleucel, compared to patients who receive standard chemoimmunotherapy regimens.

Similarly, B-ALL patients treated with tisagenlecleucel have superior CR, DFS, and OS rates to patients treated with standard therapies. CR and OS rates are also superior in NHL patients treated with tisagenlecleucel, but DFS has not been reported in this population.

The report says there is insufficient evidence to distinguish between the 2 CAR T-cell therapies for the treatment of NHL.

Toxicity and uncertainty

The report highlights the fact that cytokine release syndrome, neurological symptoms, and B-cell aplasia have been observed in patients who receive CAR T-cell therapies. However, these sometimes severe adverse events are generally “manageable.”

In addition to toxicity, the report highlights sources of uncertainty. These include the fact that studies of tisagenlecleucel and axicabtagene ciloleucel are small, single-arm trials with short follow-up; comparisons with historical controls may be misleading; and improvements in the CAR T-cell manufacturing process may change outcomes.

Cost-effectiveness

The report states that the cost-effectiveness of each therapy fell below or within commonly cited thresholds of $50,000 to $150,000 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) over a lifetime.

For its analyses, ICER used the wholesale acquisition cost (WAC) plus an assumed hospital mark-up. The analyses were also based on the assumption that survival benefits observed in clinical trials would continue after the trials ended.

For tisagenlecleucel in pediatric B-ALL, the WAC is $475,000. The long-term cost-effectiveness compared to clofarabine is $45,871 per QALY gained.

For axicabtagene ciloleucel in adults with NHL, the WAC is $373,000. The long-term cost-effectiveness compared to salvage chemotherapy is $136,078 per QALY gained. The effectiveness assumptions for chemotherapy were based on an average of salvage chemotherapy regimens from the SCHOLAR-1 trial, and the cost assumptions were based on the cost of the R-DHAP (rituximab, dexamethasone, cytarabine, and cisplatin) regimen.

The report says tisagenlecleucel’s price would remain in alignment with value even if price premiums of 102% to 194% were applied.

Meanwhile, axicabtagene ciloleucel’s price could be increased by up to 11% and remain in alignment with the upper threshold ($150,000 per QALY gained) but would need to be discounted by 28% to align with the lower threshold ($100,000 per QALY gained).

Tisagenlecleucel, as a treatment for B-ALL, is not expected to cross the $915 million threshold for annual budget impact.

However, the short-term costs of axicabtagene ciloleucel for relapsed/refractory NHL could exceed the threshold. Only 38% of the estimated 5900 eligible patients could receive axicabtagene ciloleucel in a year before crossing the threshold.

Because of these findings, ICER issued an “Affordability and Access Alert” for axicabtagene ciloleucel.

This alert is intended to signal when the added costs associated with a new treatment may be difficult for the healthcare system to absorb over the short-term without displacing other needed services or contributing to unsustainable growth in healthcare insurance costs.

“Based on current evidence, both therapies appear to be priced in alignment with their clinical value, but there are potential short-term affordability concerns—for axicabtagene ciloleucel under its current indication and for both treatments should they receive future approvals for broader patient populations,” Dr Ollendorf said.

Panel voting results

ICER’s report was reviewed at a public meeting of the California Technology Assessment Forum on March 2.

Most of the panel said tisagenlecleucel provides intermediate long-term value for money when treating B-ALL. However, the significant uncertainty surrounding the long-term risks and benefits of the therapy precluded a high-value vote.

After deliberating on the value of axicabtagene ciloleucel to treat NHL, the panel’s votes were split between low-value and intermediate-value, driven by similar concerns about long-term uncertainty.

Policy recommendations

Following the voting session, ICER convened a policy roundtable of experts, including physicians, patient advocates, manufacturer representatives, and payer representatives.

Based on the roundtable discussion, ICER developed recommendations for enhanced stakeholder communication, innovative payment models, generation of additional evidence, settings of care, and patient education.

“With many other potentially transformative therapies in the pipeline, stakeholders must collaborate now to develop payment and delivery systems that can ensure timely patient access, manage short-term affordability for expensive one-time treatments, and continue to reward the innovation that brings these new treatments to market,” Dr Ollendorf said.

Some of ICER’s recommendations include:

• When launching novel therapies approved with limited clinical evidence, such as CAR T-cell therapies, manufacturers and payers should consider using a lower launch price that could be increased if substantial clinical benefits are confirmed or using a higher initial price tied to a requirement for refunds or rebates if real-world evidence fails to confirm high expectations.
• Outcomes-based pricing arrangements must be linked to “meaningful clinical outcomes assessed with sufficient follow up.”
• Hospital mark-up for CAR T-cell therapies “should reflect the expected additional cost for care delivered in the hospital, rather than a percentage of the drug cost to avoid perverse incentives in choosing the treatment location.”
• Initially, CAR T-cell therapies should be delivered in “manufacturer-accredited centers to ensure the quality and appropriateness of care.” Later, “centers of excellence accredited by specialty societies” can administer these therapies, as long as providers have “sufficient expertise” to manage serious side effects.
• Centers should ensure that patients understand what to expect from CAR T-cell therapy, including long-term consequences.
• Because additional evidence on CAR T-cell therapies is needed, all patients who receive these therapies should enter into a registry with planned long-term follow-up.
• Studies should determine the optimal timing of CAR T-cell therapy in the sequence of treatments for B-ALL and NHL.

Additional recommendations and more details are available in ICER’s report.

About ICER

ICER is an independent, non-profit research institute that produces reports analyzing evidence on the effectiveness and value of drugs and other medical services.

ICER’s reports include evidence-based calculations of prices for new drugs that reflect the degree of improvement expected in long-term patient outcomes, while also highlighting price levels that might contribute to unaffordable short-term cost growth for the overall healthcare system.

ICER’s reports incorporate input from stakeholders and are the subject of public hearings through 3 core programs: the California Technology Assessment Forum, the Midwest Comparative Effectiveness Public Advisory Council, and the New England Comparative Effectiveness Public Advisory Council.

These independent panels review ICER’s reports at public meetings to deliberate on the evidence and develop recommendations for how patients, clinicians, insurers, and policymakers can improve the quality and value of healthcare.

Photo from Novartis

The Institute for Clinical and Economic Review (ICER) has made policy recommendations intended to ensure affordability and access to chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapies.

ICER released a Final Evidence Report on tisagenlecleucel (Kymriah, Novartis) and axicabtagene ciloleucel (Yescarta, Kite Pharma/Gilead), 2 CAR T-cell therapies approved in the US to treat B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia (B-ALL) and non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL), respectively.

The report says the pricing of these therapies aligns with patient benefit, but changes will be needed in future pricing, payment, and delivery mechanisms to ensure patient access without threatening health system affordability.

“Given the currently available evidence, these therapies appear to be effective options for those with B-ALL or NHL, though uncertainty in the evidence raised questions around the long-term value for money,” said Dan Ollendorf, PhD, ICER’s chief scientific officer.

Net health benefit

ICER’s report says tisagenlecleucel provides a net health benefit for children with B-ALL, and both tisagenlecleucel and axicabtagene ciloleucel provide a net health benefit for adults with certain types of NHL. (Novartis is seeking approval for tisagenlecleucel in NHL).

The evidence suggests there is at least a small net health benefit of the CAR T-cell therapies compared to other therapies. The benefit may be substantial, but uncertainties remain.

The data show complete remission (CR), disease-free survival (DFS), and overall survival (OS) rates are superior for NHL patients who receive axicabtagene ciloleucel, compared to patients who receive standard chemoimmunotherapy regimens.

Similarly, B-ALL patients treated with tisagenlecleucel have superior CR, DFS, and OS rates to patients treated with standard therapies. CR and OS rates are also superior in NHL patients treated with tisagenlecleucel, but DFS has not been reported in this population.

The report says there is insufficient evidence to distinguish between the 2 CAR T-cell therapies for the treatment of NHL.

Toxicity and uncertainty

The report highlights the fact that cytokine release syndrome, neurological symptoms, and B-cell aplasia have been observed in patients who receive CAR T-cell therapies. However, these sometimes severe adverse events are generally “manageable.”

In addition to toxicity, the report highlights sources of uncertainty. These include the fact that studies of tisagenlecleucel and axicabtagene ciloleucel are small, single-arm trials with short follow-up; comparisons with historical controls may be misleading; and improvements in the CAR T-cell manufacturing process may change outcomes.

Cost-effectiveness

The report states that the cost-effectiveness of each therapy fell below or within commonly cited thresholds of $50,000 to $150,000 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) over a lifetime.

For its analyses, ICER used the wholesale acquisition cost (WAC) plus an assumed hospital mark-up. The analyses were also based on the assumption that survival benefits observed in clinical trials would continue after the trials ended.

For tisagenlecleucel in pediatric B-ALL, the WAC is $475,000. The long-term cost-effectiveness compared to clofarabine is $45,871 per QALY gained.

For axicabtagene ciloleucel in adults with NHL, the WAC is $373,000. The long-term cost-effectiveness compared to salvage chemotherapy is $136,078 per QALY gained. The effectiveness assumptions for chemotherapy were based on an average of salvage chemotherapy regimens from the SCHOLAR-1 trial, and the cost assumptions were based on the cost of the R-DHAP (rituximab, dexamethasone, cytarabine, and cisplatin) regimen.

The report says tisagenlecleucel’s price would remain in alignment with value even if price premiums of 102% to 194% were applied.

Meanwhile, axicabtagene ciloleucel’s price could be increased by up to 11% and remain in alignment with the upper threshold ($150,000 per QALY gained) but would need to be discounted by 28% to align with the lower threshold ($100,000 per QALY gained).

Tisagenlecleucel, as a treatment for B-ALL, is not expected to cross the $915 million threshold for annual budget impact.

However, the short-term costs of axicabtagene ciloleucel for relapsed/refractory NHL could exceed the threshold. Only 38% of the estimated 5900 eligible patients could receive axicabtagene ciloleucel in a year before crossing the threshold.

Because of these findings, ICER issued an “Affordability and Access Alert” for axicabtagene ciloleucel.

This alert is intended to signal when the added costs associated with a new treatment may be difficult for the healthcare system to absorb over the short-term without displacing other needed services or contributing to unsustainable growth in healthcare insurance costs.

“Based on current evidence, both therapies appear to be priced in alignment with their clinical value, but there are potential short-term affordability concerns—for axicabtagene ciloleucel under its current indication and for both treatments should they receive future approvals for broader patient populations,” Dr Ollendorf said.

Panel voting results

ICER’s report was reviewed at a public meeting of the California Technology Assessment Forum on March 2.

Most of the panel said tisagenlecleucel provides intermediate long-term value for money when treating B-ALL. However, the significant uncertainty surrounding the long-term risks and benefits of the therapy precluded a high-value vote.

After deliberating on the value of axicabtagene ciloleucel to treat NHL, the panel’s votes were split between low-value and intermediate-value, driven by similar concerns about long-term uncertainty.

Policy recommendations

Following the voting session, ICER convened a policy roundtable of experts, including physicians, patient advocates, manufacturer representatives, and payer representatives.

Based on the roundtable discussion, ICER developed recommendations for enhanced stakeholder communication, innovative payment models, generation of additional evidence, settings of care, and patient education.

“With many other potentially transformative therapies in the pipeline, stakeholders must collaborate now to develop payment and delivery systems that can ensure timely patient access, manage short-term affordability for expensive one-time treatments, and continue to reward the innovation that brings these new treatments to market,” Dr Ollendorf said.

Some of ICER’s recommendations include:

• When launching novel therapies approved with limited clinical evidence, such as CAR T-cell therapies, manufacturers and payers should consider using a lower launch price that could be increased if substantial clinical benefits are confirmed or using a higher initial price tied to a requirement for refunds or rebates if real-world evidence fails to confirm high expectations.
• Outcomes-based pricing arrangements must be linked to “meaningful clinical outcomes assessed with sufficient follow up.”
• Hospital mark-up for CAR T-cell therapies “should reflect the expected additional cost for care delivered in the hospital, rather than a percentage of the drug cost to avoid perverse incentives in choosing the treatment location.”
• Initially, CAR T-cell therapies should be delivered in “manufacturer-accredited centers to ensure the quality and appropriateness of care.” Later, “centers of excellence accredited by specialty societies” can administer these therapies, as long as providers have “sufficient expertise” to manage serious side effects.
• Centers should ensure that patients understand what to expect from CAR T-cell therapy, including long-term consequences.
• Because additional evidence on CAR T-cell therapies is needed, all patients who receive these therapies should enter into a registry with planned long-term follow-up.
• Studies should determine the optimal timing of CAR T-cell therapy in the sequence of treatments for B-ALL and NHL.

Additional recommendations and more details are available in ICER’s report.

About ICER

ICER is an independent, non-profit research institute that produces reports analyzing evidence on the effectiveness and value of drugs and other medical services.

ICER’s reports include evidence-based calculations of prices for new drugs that reflect the degree of improvement expected in long-term patient outcomes, while also highlighting price levels that might contribute to unaffordable short-term cost growth for the overall healthcare system.

ICER’s reports incorporate input from stakeholders and are the subject of public hearings through 3 core programs: the California Technology Assessment Forum, the Midwest Comparative Effectiveness Public Advisory Council, and the New England Comparative Effectiveness Public Advisory Council.

These independent panels review ICER’s reports at public meetings to deliberate on the evidence and develop recommendations for how patients, clinicians, insurers, and policymakers can improve the quality and value of healthcare.

Photo from Novartis

The Institute for Clinical and Economic Review (ICER) has made policy recommendations intended to ensure affordability and access to chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapies.

ICER released a Final Evidence Report on tisagenlecleucel (Kymriah, Novartis) and axicabtagene ciloleucel (Yescarta, Kite Pharma/Gilead), 2 CAR T-cell therapies approved in the US to treat B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia (B-ALL) and non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL), respectively.

The report says the pricing of these therapies aligns with patient benefit, but changes will be needed in future pricing, payment, and delivery mechanisms to ensure patient access without threatening health system affordability.

“Given the currently available evidence, these therapies appear to be effective options for those with B-ALL or NHL, though uncertainty in the evidence raised questions around the long-term value for money,” said Dan Ollendorf, PhD, ICER’s chief scientific officer.

Net health benefit

ICER’s report says tisagenlecleucel provides a net health benefit for children with B-ALL, and both tisagenlecleucel and axicabtagene ciloleucel provide a net health benefit for adults with certain types of NHL. (Novartis is seeking approval for tisagenlecleucel in NHL).

The evidence suggests there is at least a small net health benefit of the CAR T-cell therapies compared to other therapies. The benefit may be substantial, but uncertainties remain.

The data show complete remission (CR), disease-free survival (DFS), and overall survival (OS) rates are superior for NHL patients who receive axicabtagene ciloleucel, compared to patients who receive standard chemoimmunotherapy regimens.

Similarly, B-ALL patients treated with tisagenlecleucel have superior CR, DFS, and OS rates to patients treated with standard therapies. CR and OS rates are also superior in NHL patients treated with tisagenlecleucel, but DFS has not been reported in this population.

The report says there is insufficient evidence to distinguish between the 2 CAR T-cell therapies for the treatment of NHL.

Toxicity and uncertainty

The report highlights the fact that cytokine release syndrome, neurological symptoms, and B-cell aplasia have been observed in patients who receive CAR T-cell therapies. However, these sometimes severe adverse events are generally “manageable.”

In addition to toxicity, the report highlights sources of uncertainty. These include the fact that studies of tisagenlecleucel and axicabtagene ciloleucel are small, single-arm trials with short follow-up; comparisons with historical controls may be misleading; and improvements in the CAR T-cell manufacturing process may change outcomes.

Cost-effectiveness

The report states that the cost-effectiveness of each therapy fell below or within commonly cited thresholds of $50,000 to $150,000 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) over a lifetime.

For its analyses, ICER used the wholesale acquisition cost (WAC) plus an assumed hospital mark-up. The analyses were also based on the assumption that survival benefits observed in clinical trials would continue after the trials ended.

For tisagenlecleucel in pediatric B-ALL, the WAC is $475,000. The long-term cost-effectiveness compared to clofarabine is $45,871 per QALY gained.

For axicabtagene ciloleucel in adults with NHL, the WAC is $373,000. The long-term cost-effectiveness compared to salvage chemotherapy is $136,078 per QALY gained. The effectiveness assumptions for chemotherapy were based on an average of salvage chemotherapy regimens from the SCHOLAR-1 trial, and the cost assumptions were based on the cost of the R-DHAP (rituximab, dexamethasone, cytarabine, and cisplatin) regimen.

The report says tisagenlecleucel’s price would remain in alignment with value even if price premiums of 102% to 194% were applied.

Meanwhile, axicabtagene ciloleucel’s price could be increased by up to 11% and remain in alignment with the upper threshold ($150,000 per QALY gained) but would need to be discounted by 28% to align with the lower threshold ($100,000 per QALY gained).

Tisagenlecleucel, as a treatment for B-ALL, is not expected to cross the $915 million threshold for annual budget impact.

However, the short-term costs of axicabtagene ciloleucel for relapsed/refractory NHL could exceed the threshold. Only 38% of the estimated 5900 eligible patients could receive axicabtagene ciloleucel in a year before crossing the threshold.

Because of these findings, ICER issued an “Affordability and Access Alert” for axicabtagene ciloleucel.

This alert is intended to signal when the added costs associated with a new treatment may be difficult for the healthcare system to absorb over the short-term without displacing other needed services or contributing to unsustainable growth in healthcare insurance costs.

“Based on current evidence, both therapies appear to be priced in alignment with their clinical value, but there are potential short-term affordability concerns—for axicabtagene ciloleucel under its current indication and for both treatments should they receive future approvals for broader patient populations,” Dr Ollendorf said.

Panel voting results

ICER’s report was reviewed at a public meeting of the California Technology Assessment Forum on March 2.

Most of the panel said tisagenlecleucel provides intermediate long-term value for money when treating B-ALL. However, the significant uncertainty surrounding the long-term risks and benefits of the therapy precluded a high-value vote.

After deliberating on the value of axicabtagene ciloleucel to treat NHL, the panel’s votes were split between low-value and intermediate-value, driven by similar concerns about long-term uncertainty.

Policy recommendations

Following the voting session, ICER convened a policy roundtable of experts, including physicians, patient advocates, manufacturer representatives, and payer representatives.

Based on the roundtable discussion, ICER developed recommendations for enhanced stakeholder communication, innovative payment models, generation of additional evidence, settings of care, and patient education.

“With many other potentially transformative therapies in the pipeline, stakeholders must collaborate now to develop payment and delivery systems that can ensure timely patient access, manage short-term affordability for expensive one-time treatments, and continue to reward the innovation that brings these new treatments to market,” Dr Ollendorf said.

Some of ICER’s recommendations include:

• When launching novel therapies approved with limited clinical evidence, such as CAR T-cell therapies, manufacturers and payers should consider using a lower launch price that could be increased if substantial clinical benefits are confirmed or using a higher initial price tied to a requirement for refunds or rebates if real-world evidence fails to confirm high expectations.
• Outcomes-based pricing arrangements must be linked to “meaningful clinical outcomes assessed with sufficient follow up.”
• Hospital mark-up for CAR T-cell therapies “should reflect the expected additional cost for care delivered in the hospital, rather than a percentage of the drug cost to avoid perverse incentives in choosing the treatment location.”
• Initially, CAR T-cell therapies should be delivered in “manufacturer-accredited centers to ensure the quality and appropriateness of care.” Later, “centers of excellence accredited by specialty societies” can administer these therapies, as long as providers have “sufficient expertise” to manage serious side effects.
• Centers should ensure that patients understand what to expect from CAR T-cell therapy, including long-term consequences.
• Because additional evidence on CAR T-cell therapies is needed, all patients who receive these therapies should enter into a registry with planned long-term follow-up.
• Studies should determine the optimal timing of CAR T-cell therapy in the sequence of treatments for B-ALL and NHL.

Additional recommendations and more details are available in ICER’s report.

About ICER

ICER is an independent, non-profit research institute that produces reports analyzing evidence on the effectiveness and value of drugs and other medical services.

ICER’s reports include evidence-based calculations of prices for new drugs that reflect the degree of improvement expected in long-term patient outcomes, while also highlighting price levels that might contribute to unaffordable short-term cost growth for the overall healthcare system.

ICER’s reports incorporate input from stakeholders and are the subject of public hearings through 3 core programs: the California Technology Assessment Forum, the Midwest Comparative Effectiveness Public Advisory Council, and the New England Comparative Effectiveness Public Advisory Council.

These independent panels review ICER’s reports at public meetings to deliberate on the evidence and develop recommendations for how patients, clinicians, insurers, and policymakers can improve the quality and value of healthcare.

Syringe

Health Canada has approved a subcutaneous (SC) formulation of rituximab (Rituxan®) to treat patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL).

The product is now approved for use in combination with fludarabine and cyclophosphamide to treat patients with previously treated or untreated CLL, Binet Stage B or C.

The SC formulation is intended to provide a more convenient delivery method than intravenous (IV) rituximab. The SC formulation enables administration of the drug in large volumes under the skin.

“The approval of Rituxan SC is exciting news and a meaningful advancement for those living with CLL, as intravenous treatments can take around 4 hours to receive, requiring patients to spend up to a half day sitting in the chemo suite,” said Robin Markowitz, chief executive officer of Lymphoma Canada.

“The administration of Rituxan SC only takes 7 minutes, giving patients valuable time back in their day.”

SAWYER study

Health Canada’s approval of SC rituximab is based on data from the phase 1b SAWYER study. This randomized study was conducted in patients with previously untreated CLL to investigate the pharmacokinetic profile, safety, and efficacy of SC rituximab in combination with chemotherapy.

Results from this study were published in The Lancet Haematology in March 2016.

The trial included 176 patients who were randomized to receive SC rituximab (1600 mg, n=88) or IV rituximab (500 mg/m², n=88) on day 1 from cycles 2 to 6. In cycle 1, both groups received IV rituximab (375 mg/m²) on day 0.

All patients also received fludarabine (IV 25 mg/m² on days 1-3 of all cycles or orally at either 25 mg/m² on days 1-5 of all cycles or 30-40 mg/m² on days 1-3 of all cycles) and cyclophosphamide (IV at 250 mg/m² on days 1-3 of all cycles or orally at either 150 mg/m² on days 1-5 of all cycles or 200-250 mg/m² on days 1-3 of all cycles) every 4 weeks for up to 6 cycles.

The primary endpoint was pharmacokinetic noninferiority of SC to IV rituximab assessed at cycle 5. At that time, the geometric mean trough serum concentration in the SC rituximab arm was noninferior to that in the IV arm—97.5 µg/mL and 61.5 µg/mL, respectively—with an adjusted geometric mean ratio of 1.53 (90% CI, 1.27 to 1.85).

Safety was a secondary endpoint, and efficacy was an exploratory endpoint.

The overall response rate was 85% in the SC arm and 81% in the IV arm. Complete response rates were 26% and 33%, respectively.

Rates of adverse events (AEs) were 96% in the SC arm and 91% in the IV arm. Rates of grade 3 or higher AEs were 69% and 71%, respectively, and rates of serious AEs were 29% and 33%, respectively.

The most common serious AE overall was febrile neutropenia, which occurred in 11% of patients in the SC arm and 4% in the IV arm.

The most common AEs of any grade (occurring in >20% of patients in either arm) were:

• Neutropenia—65% with SC and 58% with IV
• Thrombocytopenia—24% with SC and 26% with IV
• Anemia—13% with SC and 24% with IV
• Nausea—38% with SC and 35% with IV
• Vomiting—21% with SC and 22% with IV
• Pyrexia—32% with SC and 25% with IV
• Injection-site erythema—26% with SC and 0% with IV.

Local cutaneous reactions were reported in 42% of patients in the SC arm. The most common of these were injection-site erythema (26%) and injection-site pain (16%).

Syringe

Health Canada has approved a subcutaneous (SC) formulation of rituximab (Rituxan®) to treat patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL).

The product is now approved for use in combination with fludarabine and cyclophosphamide to treat patients with previously treated or untreated CLL, Binet Stage B or C.

The SC formulation is intended to provide a more convenient delivery method than intravenous (IV) rituximab. The SC formulation enables administration of the drug in large volumes under the skin.

“The approval of Rituxan SC is exciting news and a meaningful advancement for those living with CLL, as intravenous treatments can take around 4 hours to receive, requiring patients to spend up to a half day sitting in the chemo suite,” said Robin Markowitz, chief executive officer of Lymphoma Canada.

“The administration of Rituxan SC only takes 7 minutes, giving patients valuable time back in their day.”

SAWYER study

Health Canada’s approval of SC rituximab is based on data from the phase 1b SAWYER study. This randomized study was conducted in patients with previously untreated CLL to investigate the pharmacokinetic profile, safety, and efficacy of SC rituximab in combination with chemotherapy.

Results from this study were published in The Lancet Haematology in March 2016.

The trial included 176 patients who were randomized to receive SC rituximab (1600 mg, n=88) or IV rituximab (500 mg/m², n=88) on day 1 from cycles 2 to 6. In cycle 1, both groups received IV rituximab (375 mg/m²) on day 0.

All patients also received fludarabine (IV 25 mg/m² on days 1-3 of all cycles or orally at either 25 mg/m² on days 1-5 of all cycles or 30-40 mg/m² on days 1-3 of all cycles) and cyclophosphamide (IV at 250 mg/m² on days 1-3 of all cycles or orally at either 150 mg/m² on days 1-5 of all cycles or 200-250 mg/m² on days 1-3 of all cycles) every 4 weeks for up to 6 cycles.

The primary endpoint was pharmacokinetic noninferiority of SC to IV rituximab assessed at cycle 5. At that time, the geometric mean trough serum concentration in the SC rituximab arm was noninferior to that in the IV arm—97.5 µg/mL and 61.5 µg/mL, respectively—with an adjusted geometric mean ratio of 1.53 (90% CI, 1.27 to 1.85).

Safety was a secondary endpoint, and efficacy was an exploratory endpoint.

The overall response rate was 85% in the SC arm and 81% in the IV arm. Complete response rates were 26% and 33%, respectively.

Rates of adverse events (AEs) were 96% in the SC arm and 91% in the IV arm. Rates of grade 3 or higher AEs were 69% and 71%, respectively, and rates of serious AEs were 29% and 33%, respectively.

The most common serious AE overall was febrile neutropenia, which occurred in 11% of patients in the SC arm and 4% in the IV arm.

The most common AEs of any grade (occurring in >20% of patients in either arm) were:

• Neutropenia—65% with SC and 58% with IV
• Thrombocytopenia—24% with SC and 26% with IV
• Anemia—13% with SC and 24% with IV
• Nausea—38% with SC and 35% with IV
• Vomiting—21% with SC and 22% with IV
• Pyrexia—32% with SC and 25% with IV
• Injection-site erythema—26% with SC and 0% with IV.

Local cutaneous reactions were reported in 42% of patients in the SC arm. The most common of these were injection-site erythema (26%) and injection-site pain (16%).

Syringe

Health Canada has approved a subcutaneous (SC) formulation of rituximab (Rituxan®) to treat patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL).

The product is now approved for use in combination with fludarabine and cyclophosphamide to treat patients with previously treated or untreated CLL, Binet Stage B or C.

The SC formulation is intended to provide a more convenient delivery method than intravenous (IV) rituximab. The SC formulation enables administration of the drug in large volumes under the skin.

“The approval of Rituxan SC is exciting news and a meaningful advancement for those living with CLL, as intravenous treatments can take around 4 hours to receive, requiring patients to spend up to a half day sitting in the chemo suite,” said Robin Markowitz, chief executive officer of Lymphoma Canada.

“The administration of Rituxan SC only takes 7 minutes, giving patients valuable time back in their day.”

SAWYER study

Health Canada’s approval of SC rituximab is based on data from the phase 1b SAWYER study. This randomized study was conducted in patients with previously untreated CLL to investigate the pharmacokinetic profile, safety, and efficacy of SC rituximab in combination with chemotherapy.

Results from this study were published in The Lancet Haematology in March 2016.

The trial included 176 patients who were randomized to receive SC rituximab (1600 mg, n=88) or IV rituximab (500 mg/m², n=88) on day 1 from cycles 2 to 6. In cycle 1, both groups received IV rituximab (375 mg/m²) on day 0.

All patients also received fludarabine (IV 25 mg/m² on days 1-3 of all cycles or orally at either 25 mg/m² on days 1-5 of all cycles or 30-40 mg/m² on days 1-3 of all cycles) and cyclophosphamide (IV at 250 mg/m² on days 1-3 of all cycles or orally at either 150 mg/m² on days 1-5 of all cycles or 200-250 mg/m² on days 1-3 of all cycles) every 4 weeks for up to 6 cycles.

The primary endpoint was pharmacokinetic noninferiority of SC to IV rituximab assessed at cycle 5. At that time, the geometric mean trough serum concentration in the SC rituximab arm was noninferior to that in the IV arm—97.5 µg/mL and 61.5 µg/mL, respectively—with an adjusted geometric mean ratio of 1.53 (90% CI, 1.27 to 1.85).

Safety was a secondary endpoint, and efficacy was an exploratory endpoint.

The overall response rate was 85% in the SC arm and 81% in the IV arm. Complete response rates were 26% and 33%, respectively.

Rates of adverse events (AEs) were 96% in the SC arm and 91% in the IV arm. Rates of grade 3 or higher AEs were 69% and 71%, respectively, and rates of serious AEs were 29% and 33%, respectively.

The most common serious AE overall was febrile neutropenia, which occurred in 11% of patients in the SC arm and 4% in the IV arm.

The most common AEs of any grade (occurring in >20% of patients in either arm) were:

• Neutropenia—65% with SC and 58% with IV
• Thrombocytopenia—24% with SC and 26% with IV
• Anemia—13% with SC and 24% with IV
• Nausea—38% with SC and 35% with IV
• Vomiting—21% with SC and 22% with IV
• Pyrexia—32% with SC and 25% with IV
• Injection-site erythema—26% with SC and 0% with IV.

Local cutaneous reactions were reported in 42% of patients in the SC arm. The most common of these were injection-site erythema (26%) and injection-site pain (16%).

Voxtalisib, an investigational agent that targets both mTOR and multiple isoforms of PI3K, showed “promising” efficacy with acceptable safety in patients with relapsed or refractory follicular lymphoma (FL), results of a phase 2 trial indicate.

Among 46 patients with FL, the overall response rate was 41.3%, including five (10.9%) complete responses. The median progression-free survival in this group was 58 weeks, reported Jennifer R. Brown, MD, PhD, of the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in Boston, and her colleagues.

“The observed activity of voxtalisib in relapsed or refractory follicular lymphoma, notable for inducing complete responses in 10.9% of patients, warrants further study,” the investigators wrote in a study published in the Lancet Haematology.

Efficacy of the drug was limited, however, against aggressive malignancies, including mantle cell lymphoma (MCL), diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), or chronic lymphocytic leukemia/small lymphocytic lymphoma (CLL/SLL).

Voxtalisib (XL765) is a potent inhibitor of all four class I PI3Ks, as well as a less robust inhibitor of the mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR). In contrast, idelalisib (Zydelig) – which is approved by the Food and Drug Administration for treatment of relapsed/refractory FL or for CLL, in combination with rituximab – inhibits only the delta isoform of PI3K, and does not have marked anti–mTOR properties.

The investigators conducted an open-label, nonrandomized trial of voxtalisib in 30 centers in the United States, Belgium, France, Germany, the Netherlands, and Australia.

Adults 18 years or older with relapsed or refractory MCL, FL, DLBCL or CLL/SLL with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 2 or less were enrolled. All patients received voxtalisib 50 mg orally twice daily in 28-day continuous dosing cycles until progression or unacceptable toxicity.

All patients who received more the 4 weeks of treatment and had both a baseline and one or more on-treatment tumor assessments were included in the efficacy analysis. Patients with lymphoma had received a median of three prior lines of therapy, and those with CLL had received a median of four prior lines.

The overall response rate in the entire study population was 18.3% (30 patients), including 22 partial and 8 complete responses. ORR rates were as follows:

• FL: 41.3% (19 of 46 patients).
• MCL: 11.9% (5 of 42 patients).
• DLBCL: 4.9% (2 of 41 patients).
• CLL/SLL: 11.4% (4 of 35 patients).

The safety analysis, which included all 167 patients enrolled, was consistent with that of previous studies of voxtalisib, the investigators said. The most frequently reported adverse events of any grade or type were diarrhea in 35% of patients, fatigue in 32%, nausea in 27%, pyrexia in 26%, cough 24%, and decreased appetite in 21%.

Grade 3 or greater adverse events include anemia in 12%, and pneumonia and thrombocytopenia in 8% each. Slightly more than half of all patients (58.1%) had a serious adverse event.

The investigators noted that voxtalisib’s short plasma half-life may explain the drug’s lack of efficacy against the aggressive lymphomas and CLL/SLL. Longer-acting formulations of the drug or more frequent dosing might address this problem, although the latter solution could be challenging for patients to follow, the investigators acknowledged.

In light of the results, no further studies of voxtalisib in CLL are planned, thought investigation of the drug alone or in combination with chemoimmunotherapy is warranted for patients with follicular lymphoma, the investigators wrote.

The study was funded by Sanofi. Dr. Brown reported consulting for Janssen, Gilead, Celgene, Sun BioPharma, Novartis, AbbVie, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Astellas, RedX, Pharmacyclics, Genentech/Roche, Verastem, and TG Therapeutics, and grants from Gilead and Sun BioPharma.

SOURCE: Brown J et al. Lancet Haematol. 2018 Mar 14. doi: 10.1016/S2352-3026(18)30030-9.
 

Voxtalisib, an investigational agent that targets both mTOR and multiple isoforms of PI3K, showed “promising” efficacy with acceptable safety in patients with relapsed or refractory follicular lymphoma (FL), results of a phase 2 trial indicate.

Among 46 patients with FL, the overall response rate was 41.3%, including five (10.9%) complete responses. The median progression-free survival in this group was 58 weeks, reported Jennifer R. Brown, MD, PhD, of the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in Boston, and her colleagues.

“The observed activity of voxtalisib in relapsed or refractory follicular lymphoma, notable for inducing complete responses in 10.9% of patients, warrants further study,” the investigators wrote in a study published in the Lancet Haematology.

Efficacy of the drug was limited, however, against aggressive malignancies, including mantle cell lymphoma (MCL), diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), or chronic lymphocytic leukemia/small lymphocytic lymphoma (CLL/SLL).

Voxtalisib (XL765) is a potent inhibitor of all four class I PI3Ks, as well as a less robust inhibitor of the mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR). In contrast, idelalisib (Zydelig) – which is approved by the Food and Drug Administration for treatment of relapsed/refractory FL or for CLL, in combination with rituximab – inhibits only the delta isoform of PI3K, and does not have marked anti–mTOR properties.

The investigators conducted an open-label, nonrandomized trial of voxtalisib in 30 centers in the United States, Belgium, France, Germany, the Netherlands, and Australia.

Adults 18 years or older with relapsed or refractory MCL, FL, DLBCL or CLL/SLL with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 2 or less were enrolled. All patients received voxtalisib 50 mg orally twice daily in 28-day continuous dosing cycles until progression or unacceptable toxicity.

All patients who received more the 4 weeks of treatment and had both a baseline and one or more on-treatment tumor assessments were included in the efficacy analysis. Patients with lymphoma had received a median of three prior lines of therapy, and those with CLL had received a median of four prior lines.

The overall response rate in the entire study population was 18.3% (30 patients), including 22 partial and 8 complete responses. ORR rates were as follows:

• FL: 41.3% (19 of 46 patients).
• MCL: 11.9% (5 of 42 patients).
• DLBCL: 4.9% (2 of 41 patients).
• CLL/SLL: 11.4% (4 of 35 patients).

The safety analysis, which included all 167 patients enrolled, was consistent with that of previous studies of voxtalisib, the investigators said. The most frequently reported adverse events of any grade or type were diarrhea in 35% of patients, fatigue in 32%, nausea in 27%, pyrexia in 26%, cough 24%, and decreased appetite in 21%.

Grade 3 or greater adverse events include anemia in 12%, and pneumonia and thrombocytopenia in 8% each. Slightly more than half of all patients (58.1%) had a serious adverse event.

The investigators noted that voxtalisib’s short plasma half-life may explain the drug’s lack of efficacy against the aggressive lymphomas and CLL/SLL. Longer-acting formulations of the drug or more frequent dosing might address this problem, although the latter solution could be challenging for patients to follow, the investigators acknowledged.

In light of the results, no further studies of voxtalisib in CLL are planned, thought investigation of the drug alone or in combination with chemoimmunotherapy is warranted for patients with follicular lymphoma, the investigators wrote.

The study was funded by Sanofi. Dr. Brown reported consulting for Janssen, Gilead, Celgene, Sun BioPharma, Novartis, AbbVie, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Astellas, RedX, Pharmacyclics, Genentech/Roche, Verastem, and TG Therapeutics, and grants from Gilead and Sun BioPharma.

SOURCE: Brown J et al. Lancet Haematol. 2018 Mar 14. doi: 10.1016/S2352-3026(18)30030-9.
 

Voxtalisib, an investigational agent that targets both mTOR and multiple isoforms of PI3K, showed “promising” efficacy with acceptable safety in patients with relapsed or refractory follicular lymphoma (FL), results of a phase 2 trial indicate.

Among 46 patients with FL, the overall response rate was 41.3%, including five (10.9%) complete responses. The median progression-free survival in this group was 58 weeks, reported Jennifer R. Brown, MD, PhD, of the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in Boston, and her colleagues.

“The observed activity of voxtalisib in relapsed or refractory follicular lymphoma, notable for inducing complete responses in 10.9% of patients, warrants further study,” the investigators wrote in a study published in the Lancet Haematology.

Efficacy of the drug was limited, however, against aggressive malignancies, including mantle cell lymphoma (MCL), diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), or chronic lymphocytic leukemia/small lymphocytic lymphoma (CLL/SLL).

Voxtalisib (XL765) is a potent inhibitor of all four class I PI3Ks, as well as a less robust inhibitor of the mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR). In contrast, idelalisib (Zydelig) – which is approved by the Food and Drug Administration for treatment of relapsed/refractory FL or for CLL, in combination with rituximab – inhibits only the delta isoform of PI3K, and does not have marked anti–mTOR properties.

The investigators conducted an open-label, nonrandomized trial of voxtalisib in 30 centers in the United States, Belgium, France, Germany, the Netherlands, and Australia.

Adults 18 years or older with relapsed or refractory MCL, FL, DLBCL or CLL/SLL with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 2 or less were enrolled. All patients received voxtalisib 50 mg orally twice daily in 28-day continuous dosing cycles until progression or unacceptable toxicity.

All patients who received more the 4 weeks of treatment and had both a baseline and one or more on-treatment tumor assessments were included in the efficacy analysis. Patients with lymphoma had received a median of three prior lines of therapy, and those with CLL had received a median of four prior lines.

The overall response rate in the entire study population was 18.3% (30 patients), including 22 partial and 8 complete responses. ORR rates were as follows:

• FL: 41.3% (19 of 46 patients).
• MCL: 11.9% (5 of 42 patients).
• DLBCL: 4.9% (2 of 41 patients).
• CLL/SLL: 11.4% (4 of 35 patients).

The safety analysis, which included all 167 patients enrolled, was consistent with that of previous studies of voxtalisib, the investigators said. The most frequently reported adverse events of any grade or type were diarrhea in 35% of patients, fatigue in 32%, nausea in 27%, pyrexia in 26%, cough 24%, and decreased appetite in 21%.

Grade 3 or greater adverse events include anemia in 12%, and pneumonia and thrombocytopenia in 8% each. Slightly more than half of all patients (58.1%) had a serious adverse event.

The investigators noted that voxtalisib’s short plasma half-life may explain the drug’s lack of efficacy against the aggressive lymphomas and CLL/SLL. Longer-acting formulations of the drug or more frequent dosing might address this problem, although the latter solution could be challenging for patients to follow, the investigators acknowledged.

In light of the results, no further studies of voxtalisib in CLL are planned, thought investigation of the drug alone or in combination with chemoimmunotherapy is warranted for patients with follicular lymphoma, the investigators wrote.

The study was funded by Sanofi. Dr. Brown reported consulting for Janssen, Gilead, Celgene, Sun BioPharma, Novartis, AbbVie, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Astellas, RedX, Pharmacyclics, Genentech/Roche, Verastem, and TG Therapeutics, and grants from Gilead and Sun BioPharma.

SOURCE: Brown J et al. Lancet Haematol. 2018 Mar 14. doi: 10.1016/S2352-3026(18)30030-9.
 

Photo from Business Wire

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved brentuximab vedotin (ADCETRIS) in combination with chemotherapy for adults with previously untreated, stage III or IV classical Hodgkin lymphoma (cHL).

This is the fifth approved indication for BV in the US and the first regimen approved for frontline, stage III/IV cHL in the US in more than 40 years.

“The standard of care for treating newly diagnosed, advanced Hodgkin lymphoma has not changed in more than 4 decades,” said Joseph M. Connors, MD, of BC Cancer in Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.

“For years, the physician community has been conducting clinical trials to identify improved regimens that are both less toxic and more effective—to no avail.”

The ECHELON-1 study changed that, according to Dr Connors.

“The ECHELON-1 study results demonstrated superior efficacy of the ADCETRIS plus chemotherapy regimen, when compared to the standard of care, while removing bleomycin—an agent that can cause unpredictable and sometimes fatal lung toxicity—completely from the regimen,” he said. “This represents a meaningful advance for this often younger patient population.”

In the phase 3 ECHELON-1 trial, researchers compared BV plus doxorubicin, vinblastine, and dacarbazine (A+AVD) to doxorubicin, bleomycin, vinblastine, and dacarbazine (ABVD).

In addition to supporting the new approval for BV in cHL, ECHELON-1 results also served to convert an accelerated approval of BV to standard approval. The drug now has standard FDA approval for the treatment of adults with systemic anaplastic large-cell lymphoma (ALCL) who have failed at least 1 prior multi-agent chemotherapy regimen.

BV also has standard FDA approval for:

• Adults with cHL who have failed autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplant (auto-HSCT) or, in those who are not auto-HSCT candidates, have failed at least 2 prior multi-agent chemotherapy regimens
• Post-auto-HSCT consolidation in adults with cHL at high risk of relapse or progression
• Adults with primary cutaneous ALCL or CD30-expressing mycosis fungoides who have received prior systemic therapy.

ECHELON-1

Result from ECHELON-1 were presented at the 2017 ASH Annual Meeting and simultaneously published in NEJM.

In this trial, researchers compared A+AVD to ABVD as frontline treatment for 1334 patients with advanced cHL. The primary endpoint was modified progression-free survival (PFS), which was defined as time to progression, death, or evidence of non-complete response after completion of frontline therapy followed by subsequent anticancer therapy.

According to an independent review facility, A+AVD provided a significant improvement in modified PFS compared to ABVD. The hazard ratio was 0.77 (P=0.035), which corresponds to a 23% reduction in the risk of progression, death, or the need for additional anticancer therapy.

The 2-year modified PFS rate was 82.1% in the A+AVD arm and 77.2% in the ABVD arm.

There was no significant difference between the treatment arms when it came to response rates or overall survival.

The objective response rate was 86% in the A+AVD arm and 83% in the ABVD arm (P=0.12). The complete response rate was 73% and 70%, respectively (P=0.22).

The interim 2-year overall survival rate was 97% in the A+AVD arm and 95% in the ABVD arm (hazard ratio=0.72; P=0.19).

The overall incidence of adverse events (AEs) was 99% in the A+AVD arm and 98% in the ABVD arm. The incidence of grade 3 or higher AEs was 83% and 66%, respectively, and the incidence of serious AEs was 43% and 27%, respectively.

Neutropenia, febrile neutropenia, and peripheral neuropathy were more common with A+AVD, while pulmonary toxicity was more common with ABVD.

Photo from Business Wire

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved brentuximab vedotin (ADCETRIS) in combination with chemotherapy for adults with previously untreated, stage III or IV classical Hodgkin lymphoma (cHL).

This is the fifth approved indication for BV in the US and the first regimen approved for frontline, stage III/IV cHL in the US in more than 40 years.

“The standard of care for treating newly diagnosed, advanced Hodgkin lymphoma has not changed in more than 4 decades,” said Joseph M. Connors, MD, of BC Cancer in Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.

“For years, the physician community has been conducting clinical trials to identify improved regimens that are both less toxic and more effective—to no avail.”

The ECHELON-1 study changed that, according to Dr Connors.

“The ECHELON-1 study results demonstrated superior efficacy of the ADCETRIS plus chemotherapy regimen, when compared to the standard of care, while removing bleomycin—an agent that can cause unpredictable and sometimes fatal lung toxicity—completely from the regimen,” he said. “This represents a meaningful advance for this often younger patient population.”

In the phase 3 ECHELON-1 trial, researchers compared BV plus doxorubicin, vinblastine, and dacarbazine (A+AVD) to doxorubicin, bleomycin, vinblastine, and dacarbazine (ABVD).

In addition to supporting the new approval for BV in cHL, ECHELON-1 results also served to convert an accelerated approval of BV to standard approval. The drug now has standard FDA approval for the treatment of adults with systemic anaplastic large-cell lymphoma (ALCL) who have failed at least 1 prior multi-agent chemotherapy regimen.

BV also has standard FDA approval for:

• Adults with cHL who have failed autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplant (auto-HSCT) or, in those who are not auto-HSCT candidates, have failed at least 2 prior multi-agent chemotherapy regimens
• Post-auto-HSCT consolidation in adults with cHL at high risk of relapse or progression
• Adults with primary cutaneous ALCL or CD30-expressing mycosis fungoides who have received prior systemic therapy.

ECHELON-1

Result from ECHELON-1 were presented at the 2017 ASH Annual Meeting and simultaneously published in NEJM.

In this trial, researchers compared A+AVD to ABVD as frontline treatment for 1334 patients with advanced cHL. The primary endpoint was modified progression-free survival (PFS), which was defined as time to progression, death, or evidence of non-complete response after completion of frontline therapy followed by subsequent anticancer therapy.

According to an independent review facility, A+AVD provided a significant improvement in modified PFS compared to ABVD. The hazard ratio was 0.77 (P=0.035), which corresponds to a 23% reduction in the risk of progression, death, or the need for additional anticancer therapy.

The 2-year modified PFS rate was 82.1% in the A+AVD arm and 77.2% in the ABVD arm.

There was no significant difference between the treatment arms when it came to response rates or overall survival.

The objective response rate was 86% in the A+AVD arm and 83% in the ABVD arm (P=0.12). The complete response rate was 73% and 70%, respectively (P=0.22).

The interim 2-year overall survival rate was 97% in the A+AVD arm and 95% in the ABVD arm (hazard ratio=0.72; P=0.19).

The overall incidence of adverse events (AEs) was 99% in the A+AVD arm and 98% in the ABVD arm. The incidence of grade 3 or higher AEs was 83% and 66%, respectively, and the incidence of serious AEs was 43% and 27%, respectively.

Neutropenia, febrile neutropenia, and peripheral neuropathy were more common with A+AVD, while pulmonary toxicity was more common with ABVD.

Photo from Business Wire

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved brentuximab vedotin (ADCETRIS) in combination with chemotherapy for adults with previously untreated, stage III or IV classical Hodgkin lymphoma (cHL).

This is the fifth approved indication for BV in the US and the first regimen approved for frontline, stage III/IV cHL in the US in more than 40 years.

“The standard of care for treating newly diagnosed, advanced Hodgkin lymphoma has not changed in more than 4 decades,” said Joseph M. Connors, MD, of BC Cancer in Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.

“For years, the physician community has been conducting clinical trials to identify improved regimens that are both less toxic and more effective—to no avail.”

The ECHELON-1 study changed that, according to Dr Connors.

“The ECHELON-1 study results demonstrated superior efficacy of the ADCETRIS plus chemotherapy regimen, when compared to the standard of care, while removing bleomycin—an agent that can cause unpredictable and sometimes fatal lung toxicity—completely from the regimen,” he said. “This represents a meaningful advance for this often younger patient population.”

In the phase 3 ECHELON-1 trial, researchers compared BV plus doxorubicin, vinblastine, and dacarbazine (A+AVD) to doxorubicin, bleomycin, vinblastine, and dacarbazine (ABVD).

In addition to supporting the new approval for BV in cHL, ECHELON-1 results also served to convert an accelerated approval of BV to standard approval. The drug now has standard FDA approval for the treatment of adults with systemic anaplastic large-cell lymphoma (ALCL) who have failed at least 1 prior multi-agent chemotherapy regimen.

BV also has standard FDA approval for:

• Adults with cHL who have failed autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplant (auto-HSCT) or, in those who are not auto-HSCT candidates, have failed at least 2 prior multi-agent chemotherapy regimens
• Post-auto-HSCT consolidation in adults with cHL at high risk of relapse or progression
• Adults with primary cutaneous ALCL or CD30-expressing mycosis fungoides who have received prior systemic therapy.

ECHELON-1

Result from ECHELON-1 were presented at the 2017 ASH Annual Meeting and simultaneously published in NEJM.

In this trial, researchers compared A+AVD to ABVD as frontline treatment for 1334 patients with advanced cHL. The primary endpoint was modified progression-free survival (PFS), which was defined as time to progression, death, or evidence of non-complete response after completion of frontline therapy followed by subsequent anticancer therapy.

According to an independent review facility, A+AVD provided a significant improvement in modified PFS compared to ABVD. The hazard ratio was 0.77 (P=0.035), which corresponds to a 23% reduction in the risk of progression, death, or the need for additional anticancer therapy.

The 2-year modified PFS rate was 82.1% in the A+AVD arm and 77.2% in the ABVD arm.

There was no significant difference between the treatment arms when it came to response rates or overall survival.

The objective response rate was 86% in the A+AVD arm and 83% in the ABVD arm (P=0.12). The complete response rate was 73% and 70%, respectively (P=0.22).

The interim 2-year overall survival rate was 97% in the A+AVD arm and 95% in the ABVD arm (hazard ratio=0.72; P=0.19).

The overall incidence of adverse events (AEs) was 99% in the A+AVD arm and 98% in the ABVD arm. The incidence of grade 3 or higher AEs was 83% and 66%, respectively, and the incidence of serious AEs was 43% and 27%, respectively.

Neutropenia, febrile neutropenia, and peripheral neuropathy were more common with A+AVD, while pulmonary toxicity was more common with ABVD.

David Barrett, MD, PhD

Researchers analyzed peripheral blood T cells from 157 pediatric cancer patients at diagnosis and after chemotherapy and found the potential to produce effective chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cells declined with each cycle of chemotherapy.

This was also true for acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) and Wilms’ tumor, which had high CAR T-cell manufacturing potential in the pre-chemotherapy samples.

Children younger than 3 years particularly showed a significant decline in CAR T-cell potential with cumulative cycles of chemotherapy.

“Everybody knows that chemotherapy is really bad for your T cells, and the more chemo you get, the less likely you are to have healthy T cells,” David M. Barrett, MD, PhD, of Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia in Pennsylvania, said at a press preview of research to be presented at the AACR Annual Meeting 2018.

“We know a lot about what a highly active, highly successful CAR T cell looks like right before it goes back into the patient after it’s finished manufacturing,” Dr Barrett added.

But he and his colleagues wanted to determine what goes into producing high-quality cells from a patient and the difference between cells that were good starting material and cells that weren’t.

The investigators analyzed blood samples from pediatric patients with ALL, non-Hodgkin lymphoma, neuroblastoma, osteosarcoma, rhabdomyosarcoma, Wilms’ tumor, Hodgkin lymphoma, chronic myeloid leukemia, and Ewing sarcoma. The team collected samples at diagnosis and after every cycle of chemotherapy.

Using flow cytometry, they quantified the CD3+ cell population and expanded the T cells using CD3 and CD28 stimulatory beads, “the backbone of pretty much every center’s way to make CAR T cells in the lab,” Dr Barrett said.

And the researchers found poor CAR T-cell manufacturing potential in all tumor types at diagnosis except for ALL and Wilms’ tumor. In standard-risk and high-risk ALL, more than 90% of patients had high-quality T cells at diagnosis.

The team report the findings in abstract 1631, which is scheduled to be presented at the AACR Annual Meeting on April 15.

“This may have played into why pediatric ALL is one of the great successes with CAR T-cell therapy,” Dr Barrett explained. “We may have actually been working with uniquely well-suited, good starting material to build a CAR T cell.”

T cells from lymphoma patients—Burkitt lymphoma, diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, primary mediastinal B-cell lymphoma, and Hodgkin lymphoma—were actually quite poor in their potential to become good CAR T cells, Dr Barrett noted.

“This may be reflected clinically in pediatrics at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia,” he said. “We’ve only been able to successfully treat 3 children with lymphoma, as opposed to more than 200 children with leukemia.”

The only other type of tumor that seemed to have good CAR T potential was Wilms’ tumor.

“I don’t have a CAR T cell for Wilms’ tumor yet,” Dr Barrett said, “but, if I wanted to make one, I would at least have a degree of confidence that the cells gotten from a patient would at least be able to be successfully made into a highly functional T cell that can go back into a patient.”

The investigators also observed that cumulative chemotherapy alters the metabolic profile in T cells, “gradually turning them by cycle 6 into something that doesn’t work anymore,” Dr Barrett said.

The researchers then looked into what differences there were in the quality of collected T cells and found that metabolic changes varied with tumor and treatment.

T cells with poor CAR T-cell potential were biased toward using glycolysis as their energy source instead of using fatty acids.

“Normal, healthy donor T cells cluster together in terms of metabolic pathways that are active or inactive,” Dr Barrett explained.

“[P]atients who had leukemia and the Wilms’ tumor patients could make successful CAR T cells from those samples. On the other hand, solid tumors and a Hodgkin disease patient look like they have a very different metabolic profile. And that is associated with failure to make a good CAR T cell.”

The investigators were able to get the T cells to shift metabolic pathways by “essentially force-feeding T cells things like fatty acids so they don’t use as much glucose,” Dr Barrett said.

“We’ve had some success in force-feeding them essentially neutral amino acids and others like arginine. And so you can actually potentially provide a T cell with an attractive alternative fuel source.”

Dr Barrett noted that the findings have already altered practice for children at his institution.

They now collect T cells early even if the patient is not eligible for a CAR trial, “simply because we know that cumulative chemotherapy is going to progressively deteriorate the likelihood that those cells will make a functional CAR product, and we’ve been recommending that to other centers,” Dr Barrett said.

“We’re trying to understand what goes into making the best starting material so that we can alter our approaches to make sure that we make a highly functional CAR T-cell product not only for kids with leukemia and CART19, but also potentially for solid tumor CARs as we try to develop those in the future.” 

David Barrett, MD, PhD

Researchers analyzed peripheral blood T cells from 157 pediatric cancer patients at diagnosis and after chemotherapy and found the potential to produce effective chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cells declined with each cycle of chemotherapy.

This was also true for acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) and Wilms’ tumor, which had high CAR T-cell manufacturing potential in the pre-chemotherapy samples.

Children younger than 3 years particularly showed a significant decline in CAR T-cell potential with cumulative cycles of chemotherapy.

“Everybody knows that chemotherapy is really bad for your T cells, and the more chemo you get, the less likely you are to have healthy T cells,” David M. Barrett, MD, PhD, of Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia in Pennsylvania, said at a press preview of research to be presented at the AACR Annual Meeting 2018.

“We know a lot about what a highly active, highly successful CAR T cell looks like right before it goes back into the patient after it’s finished manufacturing,” Dr Barrett added.

But he and his colleagues wanted to determine what goes into producing high-quality cells from a patient and the difference between cells that were good starting material and cells that weren’t.

The investigators analyzed blood samples from pediatric patients with ALL, non-Hodgkin lymphoma, neuroblastoma, osteosarcoma, rhabdomyosarcoma, Wilms’ tumor, Hodgkin lymphoma, chronic myeloid leukemia, and Ewing sarcoma. The team collected samples at diagnosis and after every cycle of chemotherapy.

Using flow cytometry, they quantified the CD3+ cell population and expanded the T cells using CD3 and CD28 stimulatory beads, “the backbone of pretty much every center’s way to make CAR T cells in the lab,” Dr Barrett said.

And the researchers found poor CAR T-cell manufacturing potential in all tumor types at diagnosis except for ALL and Wilms’ tumor. In standard-risk and high-risk ALL, more than 90% of patients had high-quality T cells at diagnosis.

The team report the findings in abstract 1631, which is scheduled to be presented at the AACR Annual Meeting on April 15.

“This may have played into why pediatric ALL is one of the great successes with CAR T-cell therapy,” Dr Barrett explained. “We may have actually been working with uniquely well-suited, good starting material to build a CAR T cell.”

T cells from lymphoma patients—Burkitt lymphoma, diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, primary mediastinal B-cell lymphoma, and Hodgkin lymphoma—were actually quite poor in their potential to become good CAR T cells, Dr Barrett noted.

“This may be reflected clinically in pediatrics at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia,” he said. “We’ve only been able to successfully treat 3 children with lymphoma, as opposed to more than 200 children with leukemia.”

The only other type of tumor that seemed to have good CAR T potential was Wilms’ tumor.

“I don’t have a CAR T cell for Wilms’ tumor yet,” Dr Barrett said, “but, if I wanted to make one, I would at least have a degree of confidence that the cells gotten from a patient would at least be able to be successfully made into a highly functional T cell that can go back into a patient.”

The investigators also observed that cumulative chemotherapy alters the metabolic profile in T cells, “gradually turning them by cycle 6 into something that doesn’t work anymore,” Dr Barrett said.

The researchers then looked into what differences there were in the quality of collected T cells and found that metabolic changes varied with tumor and treatment.

T cells with poor CAR T-cell potential were biased toward using glycolysis as their energy source instead of using fatty acids.

“Normal, healthy donor T cells cluster together in terms of metabolic pathways that are active or inactive,” Dr Barrett explained.

“[P]atients who had leukemia and the Wilms’ tumor patients could make successful CAR T cells from those samples. On the other hand, solid tumors and a Hodgkin disease patient look like they have a very different metabolic profile. And that is associated with failure to make a good CAR T cell.”

The investigators were able to get the T cells to shift metabolic pathways by “essentially force-feeding T cells things like fatty acids so they don’t use as much glucose,” Dr Barrett said.

“We’ve had some success in force-feeding them essentially neutral amino acids and others like arginine. And so you can actually potentially provide a T cell with an attractive alternative fuel source.”

Dr Barrett noted that the findings have already altered practice for children at his institution.

They now collect T cells early even if the patient is not eligible for a CAR trial, “simply because we know that cumulative chemotherapy is going to progressively deteriorate the likelihood that those cells will make a functional CAR product, and we’ve been recommending that to other centers,” Dr Barrett said.

“We’re trying to understand what goes into making the best starting material so that we can alter our approaches to make sure that we make a highly functional CAR T-cell product not only for kids with leukemia and CART19, but also potentially for solid tumor CARs as we try to develop those in the future.” 

David Barrett, MD, PhD

Researchers analyzed peripheral blood T cells from 157 pediatric cancer patients at diagnosis and after chemotherapy and found the potential to produce effective chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cells declined with each cycle of chemotherapy.

This was also true for acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) and Wilms’ tumor, which had high CAR T-cell manufacturing potential in the pre-chemotherapy samples.

Children younger than 3 years particularly showed a significant decline in CAR T-cell potential with cumulative cycles of chemotherapy.

“Everybody knows that chemotherapy is really bad for your T cells, and the more chemo you get, the less likely you are to have healthy T cells,” David M. Barrett, MD, PhD, of Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia in Pennsylvania, said at a press preview of research to be presented at the AACR Annual Meeting 2018.

“We know a lot about what a highly active, highly successful CAR T cell looks like right before it goes back into the patient after it’s finished manufacturing,” Dr Barrett added.

But he and his colleagues wanted to determine what goes into producing high-quality cells from a patient and the difference between cells that were good starting material and cells that weren’t.

The investigators analyzed blood samples from pediatric patients with ALL, non-Hodgkin lymphoma, neuroblastoma, osteosarcoma, rhabdomyosarcoma, Wilms’ tumor, Hodgkin lymphoma, chronic myeloid leukemia, and Ewing sarcoma. The team collected samples at diagnosis and after every cycle of chemotherapy.

Using flow cytometry, they quantified the CD3+ cell population and expanded the T cells using CD3 and CD28 stimulatory beads, “the backbone of pretty much every center’s way to make CAR T cells in the lab,” Dr Barrett said.

And the researchers found poor CAR T-cell manufacturing potential in all tumor types at diagnosis except for ALL and Wilms’ tumor. In standard-risk and high-risk ALL, more than 90% of patients had high-quality T cells at diagnosis.

The team report the findings in abstract 1631, which is scheduled to be presented at the AACR Annual Meeting on April 15.

“This may have played into why pediatric ALL is one of the great successes with CAR T-cell therapy,” Dr Barrett explained. “We may have actually been working with uniquely well-suited, good starting material to build a CAR T cell.”

T cells from lymphoma patients—Burkitt lymphoma, diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, primary mediastinal B-cell lymphoma, and Hodgkin lymphoma—were actually quite poor in their potential to become good CAR T cells, Dr Barrett noted.

“This may be reflected clinically in pediatrics at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia,” he said. “We’ve only been able to successfully treat 3 children with lymphoma, as opposed to more than 200 children with leukemia.”

The only other type of tumor that seemed to have good CAR T potential was Wilms’ tumor.

“I don’t have a CAR T cell for Wilms’ tumor yet,” Dr Barrett said, “but, if I wanted to make one, I would at least have a degree of confidence that the cells gotten from a patient would at least be able to be successfully made into a highly functional T cell that can go back into a patient.”

The investigators also observed that cumulative chemotherapy alters the metabolic profile in T cells, “gradually turning them by cycle 6 into something that doesn’t work anymore,” Dr Barrett said.

The researchers then looked into what differences there were in the quality of collected T cells and found that metabolic changes varied with tumor and treatment.

T cells with poor CAR T-cell potential were biased toward using glycolysis as their energy source instead of using fatty acids.

“Normal, healthy donor T cells cluster together in terms of metabolic pathways that are active or inactive,” Dr Barrett explained.

“[P]atients who had leukemia and the Wilms’ tumor patients could make successful CAR T cells from those samples. On the other hand, solid tumors and a Hodgkin disease patient look like they have a very different metabolic profile. And that is associated with failure to make a good CAR T cell.”

The investigators were able to get the T cells to shift metabolic pathways by “essentially force-feeding T cells things like fatty acids so they don’t use as much glucose,” Dr Barrett said.

“We’ve had some success in force-feeding them essentially neutral amino acids and others like arginine. And so you can actually potentially provide a T cell with an attractive alternative fuel source.”

Dr Barrett noted that the findings have already altered practice for children at his institution.

They now collect T cells early even if the patient is not eligible for a CAR trial, “simply because we know that cumulative chemotherapy is going to progressively deteriorate the likelihood that those cells will make a functional CAR product, and we’ve been recommending that to other centers,” Dr Barrett said.

“We’re trying to understand what goes into making the best starting material so that we can alter our approaches to make sure that we make a highly functional CAR T-cell product not only for kids with leukemia and CART19, but also potentially for solid tumor CARs as we try to develop those in the future.” 

Classic mantle cell lymphoma (cMCL) has long been treated as a uniformly aggressive disease in need of similarly aggressive treatment, but that approach may be leading to overtreatment, according to one expert.

“The cMCL encompasses a broad category of lymphomas with highly variable clinical behaviors. A contemporary categorization of cMCL as a predominantly aggressive entity is misleading, as only an estimated 20% to 25% of patients with cMCL present with a symptomatic or aggressively behaving disease,” Leonid L. Yavorkovsky, MD, PhD, of the Kaiser Permanente San Jose Medical Center (Calif.), wrote in a commentary in JAMA Oncology.

Wikimedia Commons/TexasPathologistMSW/CC-ASA 4.0 International

While groups like the National Comprehensive Cancer Network and the European Society for Medical Oncology recommend that only older patients and those with significant comorbidities should be exempted from intensive therapy, Dr. Yavorkovsky said cMCL should be evaluated on an individual basis, looking closely at the prognostic markers Ki-67, SOX-11, and TP53 to identify asymptomatic patients who might be able to safely delay aggressive treatment. He also called for more risk-adapted patient assignment to cMCL clinical trials.

“The failure to recognize the erratic nature of cMCL in clinical studies may confound the outcome gains and, ultimately, undermine the ensuing treatment recommendations,” Dr. Yavorkovsky wrote.

Read his full commentary in JAMA Oncology.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Yavorkovsky L, JAMA Oncology. 2018 Mar 1. doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2017.5685.

Classic mantle cell lymphoma (cMCL) has long been treated as a uniformly aggressive disease in need of similarly aggressive treatment, but that approach may be leading to overtreatment, according to one expert.

“The cMCL encompasses a broad category of lymphomas with highly variable clinical behaviors. A contemporary categorization of cMCL as a predominantly aggressive entity is misleading, as only an estimated 20% to 25% of patients with cMCL present with a symptomatic or aggressively behaving disease,” Leonid L. Yavorkovsky, MD, PhD, of the Kaiser Permanente San Jose Medical Center (Calif.), wrote in a commentary in JAMA Oncology.

Wikimedia Commons/TexasPathologistMSW/CC-ASA 4.0 International

While groups like the National Comprehensive Cancer Network and the European Society for Medical Oncology recommend that only older patients and those with significant comorbidities should be exempted from intensive therapy, Dr. Yavorkovsky said cMCL should be evaluated on an individual basis, looking closely at the prognostic markers Ki-67, SOX-11, and TP53 to identify asymptomatic patients who might be able to safely delay aggressive treatment. He also called for more risk-adapted patient assignment to cMCL clinical trials.

“The failure to recognize the erratic nature of cMCL in clinical studies may confound the outcome gains and, ultimately, undermine the ensuing treatment recommendations,” Dr. Yavorkovsky wrote.

Read his full commentary in JAMA Oncology.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Yavorkovsky L, JAMA Oncology. 2018 Mar 1. doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2017.5685.

Classic mantle cell lymphoma (cMCL) has long been treated as a uniformly aggressive disease in need of similarly aggressive treatment, but that approach may be leading to overtreatment, according to one expert.

“The cMCL encompasses a broad category of lymphomas with highly variable clinical behaviors. A contemporary categorization of cMCL as a predominantly aggressive entity is misleading, as only an estimated 20% to 25% of patients with cMCL present with a symptomatic or aggressively behaving disease,” Leonid L. Yavorkovsky, MD, PhD, of the Kaiser Permanente San Jose Medical Center (Calif.), wrote in a commentary in JAMA Oncology.

Wikimedia Commons/TexasPathologistMSW/CC-ASA 4.0 International

While groups like the National Comprehensive Cancer Network and the European Society for Medical Oncology recommend that only older patients and those with significant comorbidities should be exempted from intensive therapy, Dr. Yavorkovsky said cMCL should be evaluated on an individual basis, looking closely at the prognostic markers Ki-67, SOX-11, and TP53 to identify asymptomatic patients who might be able to safely delay aggressive treatment. He also called for more risk-adapted patient assignment to cMCL clinical trials.

“The failure to recognize the erratic nature of cMCL in clinical studies may confound the outcome gains and, ultimately, undermine the ensuing treatment recommendations,” Dr. Yavorkovsky wrote.

Read his full commentary in JAMA Oncology.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Yavorkovsky L, JAMA Oncology. 2018 Mar 1. doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2017.5685.

SALT LAKE CITY – Chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy may be an effective bridge to hematopoietic cell transplant (HCT) for high-risk B-cell malignancies, according to a systematic analysis of patient data from the National Cancer Institute.

Additionally, patients who have received CAR T-cell therapy are likely to enter HCT with a minimal residual disease (MRD)–negative complete response, which raises the possibility of a significantly less intense conditioning regimen that could omit total body irradiation (TBI), Haneen Shalabi, DO, said at the combined annual meetings of the Center for International Blood & Marrow Transplant Research and the American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation.

“Patients who underwent HCT post–CAR T therapy did not have increased transplant-related morbidity or mortality,” said Dr. Shalabi, a pediatric oncologist in the hematologic diseases division of the National Cancer Institute’s pediatric oncology branch.

The combined approach also overcomes the frequent relapses seen after CAR T-cell therapy in this population. Of the 45 patients who received CAR T-cell therapy and achieved MRD-negative complete response as measured by flow cytometry, 20 did not go on to receive HCT. Of the 20 who didn’t receive HCT, 16 (80%) relapsed; 19 of the 20 (95%) had received prior HCT, said Dr. Shalabi.

However, of the 25 patients who proceeded on to receive HCT, 15 (60%) were in ongoing remission, with a median duration of 35 months (range, 11-55 months). Six patients (24%) experienced transplant-related mortality; four of these patients had no prior HCT. Ten patients (40%) experienced acute graft-versus-host disease (GVHD); two of these patients experienced grade 4 GVHD, and one experienced grade 3 GVHD.

Of the 25 patients who went on to HCT, 19 were receiving their first transplant, with a median time to transplant after CAR T-cell therapy of 57 days. Five patients (20%) had primary refractory disease. Most patients (n = 18; 72%) had TBI-based conditioning prior to their post–CAR T-cell therapy HCT. The median patient age was 15 (range, 5-30) years.

The systematic review included patients from two phase 1 studies; one was of CD19-28z CAR T-cell therapy for children and young adults with B-cell leukemia or lymphoma, and the other was of CD22-41BB CAR T-cell therapy for children and young adults with recurrent or refractory B-cell malignancies expressing CD22.

To weigh the benefit of the combined CAR T-cell therapy/HCT approach, Dr. Shalabi and her colleagues used a competing risk analysis to determine the risk of relapse post-HCT versus the risk of transplant-related mortality. Among patients undergoing their first HCT, the researchers found a 12-month cumulative incidence of relapse of 5.3% with the combined CAR T-cell therapy/HCT approach (95% confidence interval, 0.3%-22.1%). The 24-month cumulative incidence of relapse was 11.3% (95% CI, 1.7%-31.1%).

[email protected]

SOURCE: Shalabi H et al. 2018 BMT Tandem Meetings, Abstract 6.

SALT LAKE CITY – Chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy may be an effective bridge to hematopoietic cell transplant (HCT) for high-risk B-cell malignancies, according to a systematic analysis of patient data from the National Cancer Institute.

Additionally, patients who have received CAR T-cell therapy are likely to enter HCT with a minimal residual disease (MRD)–negative complete response, which raises the possibility of a significantly less intense conditioning regimen that could omit total body irradiation (TBI), Haneen Shalabi, DO, said at the combined annual meetings of the Center for International Blood & Marrow Transplant Research and the American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation.

“Patients who underwent HCT post–CAR T therapy did not have increased transplant-related morbidity or mortality,” said Dr. Shalabi, a pediatric oncologist in the hematologic diseases division of the National Cancer Institute’s pediatric oncology branch.

The combined approach also overcomes the frequent relapses seen after CAR T-cell therapy in this population. Of the 45 patients who received CAR T-cell therapy and achieved MRD-negative complete response as measured by flow cytometry, 20 did not go on to receive HCT. Of the 20 who didn’t receive HCT, 16 (80%) relapsed; 19 of the 20 (95%) had received prior HCT, said Dr. Shalabi.

However, of the 25 patients who proceeded on to receive HCT, 15 (60%) were in ongoing remission, with a median duration of 35 months (range, 11-55 months). Six patients (24%) experienced transplant-related mortality; four of these patients had no prior HCT. Ten patients (40%) experienced acute graft-versus-host disease (GVHD); two of these patients experienced grade 4 GVHD, and one experienced grade 3 GVHD.

Of the 25 patients who went on to HCT, 19 were receiving their first transplant, with a median time to transplant after CAR T-cell therapy of 57 days. Five patients (20%) had primary refractory disease. Most patients (n = 18; 72%) had TBI-based conditioning prior to their post–CAR T-cell therapy HCT. The median patient age was 15 (range, 5-30) years.

The systematic review included patients from two phase 1 studies; one was of CD19-28z CAR T-cell therapy for children and young adults with B-cell leukemia or lymphoma, and the other was of CD22-41BB CAR T-cell therapy for children and young adults with recurrent or refractory B-cell malignancies expressing CD22.

To weigh the benefit of the combined CAR T-cell therapy/HCT approach, Dr. Shalabi and her colleagues used a competing risk analysis to determine the risk of relapse post-HCT versus the risk of transplant-related mortality. Among patients undergoing their first HCT, the researchers found a 12-month cumulative incidence of relapse of 5.3% with the combined CAR T-cell therapy/HCT approach (95% confidence interval, 0.3%-22.1%). The 24-month cumulative incidence of relapse was 11.3% (95% CI, 1.7%-31.1%).

[email protected]

SOURCE: Shalabi H et al. 2018 BMT Tandem Meetings, Abstract 6.

SALT LAKE CITY – Chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy may be an effective bridge to hematopoietic cell transplant (HCT) for high-risk B-cell malignancies, according to a systematic analysis of patient data from the National Cancer Institute.

Additionally, patients who have received CAR T-cell therapy are likely to enter HCT with a minimal residual disease (MRD)–negative complete response, which raises the possibility of a significantly less intense conditioning regimen that could omit total body irradiation (TBI), Haneen Shalabi, DO, said at the combined annual meetings of the Center for International Blood & Marrow Transplant Research and the American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation.

“Patients who underwent HCT post–CAR T therapy did not have increased transplant-related morbidity or mortality,” said Dr. Shalabi, a pediatric oncologist in the hematologic diseases division of the National Cancer Institute’s pediatric oncology branch.

The combined approach also overcomes the frequent relapses seen after CAR T-cell therapy in this population. Of the 45 patients who received CAR T-cell therapy and achieved MRD-negative complete response as measured by flow cytometry, 20 did not go on to receive HCT. Of the 20 who didn’t receive HCT, 16 (80%) relapsed; 19 of the 20 (95%) had received prior HCT, said Dr. Shalabi.

However, of the 25 patients who proceeded on to receive HCT, 15 (60%) were in ongoing remission, with a median duration of 35 months (range, 11-55 months). Six patients (24%) experienced transplant-related mortality; four of these patients had no prior HCT. Ten patients (40%) experienced acute graft-versus-host disease (GVHD); two of these patients experienced grade 4 GVHD, and one experienced grade 3 GVHD.

Of the 25 patients who went on to HCT, 19 were receiving their first transplant, with a median time to transplant after CAR T-cell therapy of 57 days. Five patients (20%) had primary refractory disease. Most patients (n = 18; 72%) had TBI-based conditioning prior to their post–CAR T-cell therapy HCT. The median patient age was 15 (range, 5-30) years.

The systematic review included patients from two phase 1 studies; one was of CD19-28z CAR T-cell therapy for children and young adults with B-cell leukemia or lymphoma, and the other was of CD22-41BB CAR T-cell therapy for children and young adults with recurrent or refractory B-cell malignancies expressing CD22.

To weigh the benefit of the combined CAR T-cell therapy/HCT approach, Dr. Shalabi and her colleagues used a competing risk analysis to determine the risk of relapse post-HCT versus the risk of transplant-related mortality. Among patients undergoing their first HCT, the researchers found a 12-month cumulative incidence of relapse of 5.3% with the combined CAR T-cell therapy/HCT approach (95% confidence interval, 0.3%-22.1%). The 24-month cumulative incidence of relapse was 11.3% (95% CI, 1.7%-31.1%).

[email protected]

SOURCE: Shalabi H et al. 2018 BMT Tandem Meetings, Abstract 6.