Dataset Information

Ibrutinib versus rituximab in relapsed or refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia or small lymphocytic lymphoma: a randomized, open-label phase 3 study.

ABSTRACT: In the Asia-Pacific region, treatment options are limited for patients with relapsed/refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL)/small lymphocytic lymphoma (SLL). Rituximab is widely used in this setting when purine analog-based therapies are not appropriate. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of ibrutinib compared with rituximab in a randomized, open-label phase 3 study in predominantly Asian patients with relapsed/refractory CLL/SLL. Patients (N = 160) were randomly assigned 2:1 to receive 420 mg ibrutinib (n = 106) until disease progression (PD) or unacceptable toxicity or up to six cycles of rituximab (n = 54). The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS); key secondary endpoints were overall response rate (ORR), overall survival (OS), and safety. Rituximab-treated patients could crossover to receive ibrutinib after confirmed PD. At data cutoff, median treatment duration was 16.4 months for ibrutinib and 4.6 months for rituximab. Ibrutinib significantly improved PFS (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.180, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.105-0.308). ORR was significantly higher (P < 0.0001) with ibrutinib (53.8%) than with rituximab (7.4%). At a median follow-up of 17.8 months, ibrutinib improved OS compared with rituximab (HR = 0.446; 95% CI: 0.221-0.900; P = 0.0206). Overall incidence of adverse events (AEs) was similar between treatments and was not exposure-adjusted. With ibrutinib, most common AEs were diarrhea and platelet count decreased; with rituximab, most common AEs were neutrophil count decreased and platelet count decreased. Grade ?3 AEs were reported in 82.7% of ibrutinib-treated patients and 59.6% of rituximab-treated patients. Ibrutinib improved PFS, ORR, and OS compared with rituximab and displayed a manageable safety profile in Asian patients with relapsed/refractory CLL/SLL.

SUBMITTER: Huang X

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5911578 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Ibrutinib versus rituximab in relapsed or refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia or small lymphocytic lymphoma: a randomized, open-label phase 3 study.

Huang Xiaojun X Huang Xiaojun X Qiu Lugui L Jin Jie J Zhou Daobin D Chen Xiequn X Hou Ming M Hu Jianda J Hu Yu Y Ke Xiaoyan X Li Junmin J Liang Yingmin Y Liu Ting T Lv Yue Y Ren Hanyun H Sun Aining A Wang Jianmin J Zhao Chunting C Salman Mariya M Sun Steven S Howes Angela A Wang Jingzhao J Wu Peng P Li Jianyong J

Cancer medicine 20180313 4

In the Asia-Pacific region, treatment options are limited for patients with relapsed/refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL)/small lymphocytic lymphoma (SLL). Rituximab is widely used in this setting when purine analog-based therapies are not appropriate. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of ibrutinib compared with rituximab in a randomized, open-label phase 3 study in predominantly Asian patients with relapsed/refractory CLL/SLL. Patients (N = 160) were randomly assigned 2:1 to receive ...[more]

PMID: 29533000

Similar Datasets

Project description:PurposeZanubrutinib is a potent, irreversible next-generation Bruton tyrosine kinase (BTK) inhibitor designed to maximize BTK occupancy and minimize off-target kinase inhibition. We hypothesized that complete/sustained BTK occupancy may improve efficacy outcomes and increased BTK specificity may minimize off-target inhibition-related toxicities.Patients and methodsALPINE (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03734016) is a global, randomized, open-label phase III study of zanubrutinib versus ibrutinib in patients with relapsed/refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia. The primary end point was investigator-assessed overall response rate (ORR). The preplanned interim analysis was scheduled approximately 12 months after the first 415 patients were enrolled.ResultsBetween November 1, 2018, and December 14, 2020, 652 patients were enrolled. We present the interim analysis of the first 415 enrolled patients randomly assigned to receive zanubrutinib (n = 207) or ibrutinib (n = 208). At 15 months of median follow-up, ORR (partial or complete response) was significantly higher with zanubrutinib (78.3%; 95% CI, 72.0 to 83.7) versus ibrutinib (62.5%; 95% CI, 55.5 to 69.1; two-sided P < .001). ORR was higher with zanubrutinib versus ibrutinib in subgroups with del(17p)/TP53 mutations (80.5% v 50.0%) and del(11q) (83.6% v 69.1%); 12-month progression-free survival in all patients was higher with zanubrutinib (94.9%) versus ibrutinib (84.0%; hazard ratio, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.23 to 0.69). Atrial fibrillation rate was significantly lower with zanubrutinib versus ibrutinib (2.5% v 10.1%; two-sided P = .001). Rates of cardiac events, major hemorrhages, and adverse events leading to treatment discontinuation/death were lower with zanubrutinib.ConclusionZanubrutinib had a significantly higher ORR, lower atrial fibrillation rate, and improved progression-free survival and overall cardiac safety profile versus ibrutinib. These data support improved efficacy/safety outcomes with selective BTK inhibition.

Project description:BackgroundData regarding the efficacy of treatment with ibrutinib-rituximab, as compared with standard chemoimmunotherapy with fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab, in patients with previously untreated chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) have been limited.MethodsIn a phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned (in a 2:1 ratio) patients 70 years of age or younger with previously untreated CLL to receive either ibrutinib and rituximab for six cycles (after a single cycle of ibrutinib alone), followed by ibrutinib until disease progression, or six cycles of chemoimmunotherapy with fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab. The primary end point was progression-free survival, and overall survival was a secondary end point. We report the results of a planned interim analysis.ResultsA total of 529 patients underwent randomization (354 patients to the ibrutinib-rituximab group, and 175 to the chemoimmunotherapy group). At a median follow-up of 33.6 months, the results of the analysis of progression-free survival favored ibrutinib-rituximab over chemoimmunotherapy (89.4% vs. 72.9% at 3 years; hazard ratio for progression or death, 0.35; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.22 to 0.56; P<0.001), and the results met the protocol-defined efficacy threshold for the interim analysis. The results of the analysis of overall survival also favored ibrutinib-rituximab over chemoimmunotherapy (98.8% vs. 91.5% at 3 years; hazard ratio for death, 0.17; 95% CI, 0.05 to 0.54; P<0.001). In a subgroup analysis involving patients without immunoglobulin heavy-chain variable region (IGHV) mutation, ibrutinib-rituximab resulted in better progression-free survival than chemoimmunotherapy (90.7% vs. 62.5% at 3 years; hazard ratio for progression or death, 0.26; 95% CI, 0.14 to 0.50). The 3-year progression-free survival among patients with IGHV mutation was 87.7% in the ibrutinib-rituximab group and 88.0% in the chemoimmunotherapy group (hazard ratio for progression or death, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.14 to 1.36). The incidence of adverse events of grade 3 or higher (regardless of attribution) was similar in the two groups (in 282 of 352 patients [80.1%] who received ibrutinib-rituximab and in 126 of 158 [79.7%] who received chemoimmunotherapy), whereas infectious complications of grade 3 or higher were less common with ibrutinib-rituximab than with chemoimmunotherapy (in 37 patients [10.5%] vs. 32 [20.3%], P<0.001).ConclusionsThe ibrutinib-rituximab regimen resulted in progression-free survival and overall survival that were superior to those with a standard chemoimmunotherapy regimen among patients 70 years of age or younger with previously untreated CLL. (Funded by the National Cancer Institute and Pharmacyclics; E1912 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02048813.).

Project description:Purpose of reviewThere have been significant advances in the treatment of relapsed/refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) over the past two decades. However, the intention of treatment remains control of the disease and delay of progression rather than a cure which remains largely elusive. Considering that CLL is mostly seen in older patients, there are multiple factors that play a role in the selection of CLL beyond the frontline treatment. Here, we review the concept of relapsed CLL, factors that predispose to relapse, and therapeutic options available to this patient population. We also review investigational therapies and provide a framework for selection of therapies in this setting.Recent findingsPlease check if the affiliations are presented correctly.Targeted therapies with continuous BTK inhibitors (BTKi) or fixed duration venetoclax plus anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody therapy have established superiority over chemoimmunotherapy in relapsed CLL and have become the preferred standard of care treatment. The second-generation more selective BTK inhibitors (acalabrutinib and zanubrutinib) have shown improved safety profile compared to ibrutinib. However, resistance to the covalent BTK inhibitors may emerge and is commonly associated with mutations in BTK or other downstream enzymes. The novel non-covalent BTK inhibitors such as pirtobrutinib (Loxo-305) and nemtabrutinib (ARQ 531) are showing promising activities for relapsed CLL refractory to prior covalent BTKi. Other novel therapies such as chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cell therapy have also shown significant activities for relapsed and refractory CLL. Measurable residual disease (MRD) assessment has a growing importance in venetoclax-based limited-duration therapy and there is mounting evidence that MRD negativity improves outcomes. However, it remains to be seen if this will become an established clinically significant endpoint. Further, the optimal sequence of various treatment options remains to be determined. Patients with relapsed CLL now have more options for the treatment of the disease. The choice of therapy is best individualized especially in the absence of direct comparisons of targeted therapies, and the coming years will bring more data on the best sequence of use of the therapeutic agents.

Dataset Information

Ibrutinib versus rituximab in relapsed or refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia or small lymphocytic lymphoma: a randomized, open-label phase 3 study.

Publications

Ibrutinib versus rituximab in relapsed or refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia or small lymphocytic lymphoma: a randomized, open-label phase 3 study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets