Single-agent ibrutinib in RESONATE-2™ and RESONATE™ versus treatments in the real-world PHEDRA databases for patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia.

ABSTRACT: After analyzing treatment patterns in chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) (objective 1), we investigated the relative effectiveness of ibrutinib versus other commonly used treatments (objective 2) in patients with treatment-naïve and relapsed/refractory CLL, comparing patient-level data from two randomized registration trials with two real-world databases. Hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated using a multivariate Cox proportional hazards model, adjusted for differences in baseline characteristics. Rituximab-containing regimens were often prescribed in clinical practice. The most frequently prescribed regimens were fludarabine + cyclophosphamide + rituximab (FCR, 29.3%), bendamustine + rituximab (BR, 17.7%), and other rituximab-containing regimens (22.0%) in the treatment-naïve setting (n = 604), other non-FCR/BR rituximab-containing regimens (38.7%) and non-rituximab-containing regimens (28.5%) in the relapsed/refractory setting (n = 945). Adjusted HRs (95% CI) for progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS), respectively, with ibrutinib versus real-world regimens were 0.23 (0.14-0.37; p < 0.0001) and 0.40 (0.22-0.76; p = 0.0048) in the treatment-naïve setting, and 0.21 (0.16-0.27; p < 0.0001) and 0.29 (0.21-0.41; p < 0.0001) in the relapsed/refractory setting. When comparing real-world use of ibrutinib (n = 53) versus other real-world regimens in relapsed/refractory CLL (objective 3), adjusted HRs (95% CI) were 0.37 (0.22-0.63; p = 0.0003) for PFS and 0.53 (0.27-1.03; p < 0.0624) for OS. This adjusted analysis, based on nonrandomized patient data, suggests ibrutinib to be more effective than other commonly used regimens for CLL.

SUBMITTER: Salles G 

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6900267 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature