Upload
others
View
6
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Treating Early Relapse
Dr. A. Keith StewartMayo Clinic
Single Agent and Doublet Efficacy are Modest
Trial Phase nIMiD
exposedPI
exposed ORR PFS (months)
OS (months)
Thalidomide 2 169 0% 0% 30% 2y: 20% 2y: 48%
BTZ vs DEX 3 669 49% 0% 38% 6.22 30
BTZ + doxil 3 646 41% 0% 43% 9.3 33
Len Dex MM009 3 177 41% 10% 61% 11.1 29.6
Len Dex MM010 3 349 30% 4.5% 60% 11.3 38
CFZ (+dex 8) 2 266 100% 99% 23.7% 3.7 15.6
Pom D vs Dex 3 302 100% 95% 31% 4.2 13.1
Dara 2 106 100% 100% 29.2% 3.7 17.5
Barlogie B et al. Blood. 2001;98:492. Richardson PG et al. N Engl J Med. 2005;352:2487.Orlowski RZ et al. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:3892. Weber D et al. N Engl J Med. 2007;357:2133.
Dimopoulos M et al. N Engl J Med. 2007;357:2123. Siegel DS et al. Blood. 2012;120:2817. San Miguel J et al. Lancet Oncol. 2013;14:1055. Lonial S et al. Lancet. 2016;387:1551.
Key Numbers to Remember
•VD - 9
•RD - 17
High rate of attrition
Br J Haematol. 2016 Oct;175(2):252-264
61% 38% 15% 1%
Randomized Trials at Relapseü ASPIRE: KRd vs Rdü TOURMALINE-MM1: IRd vs Rdü ELOQUENT-2: ERd vs Rdü POLLUX DaraRd vs Rdü PANORAMA: PanVd vs Vdü CASTOR DaraVd vs Vdü ENDEAVOR Kd vs Vdü OPTIMMISM PVd vs Vdü ELOQUENT- 3 EPd vs Pdü ARROW K weekly vs K biweeklyü CANDOR KDara verus Kdü ICARIA ISA-PD vs. PD
ENDEAVOR: Carfilzomib/Dexamethasone Versus Bortezomib/Dexamethasone1
0
100
80
60
20
40
0 12 3018
Prog
ress
ion-
Free
Surv
ival
, %Carfilzomib group
(n = 464)
246
Bortezomib group(n = 465)
18.7 (95% CI, 15.6-NE) 9.4 (95% CI, 8.4-10.4)Median PFS, mo:
Carfilzomib groupBortezomib group
464 144 041 4331No. at RiskCarfilzomib groupBortezomib group 465 81 012 1252
HR = 0.53 (95% CI, 0.44-0.65); P < .0001
1. Dimopoulos MA et al. Lancet Oncol. 2016;17:27-38.
ASPIRE: Carfilzomib, Lenalidomide,and Dexamethasone1
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
480 6 12 24 30 36 42Time Since Randomization, mo
Prop
ortio
n Su
rviv
ing
With
out P
rogr
essi
on
18
HR: 0.69 (0.57-0.83)
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
480 6 12 24 30 36 42Time Since Randomization, mo
Prop
ortio
n Su
rviv
ing
Control group
18
Carfilzomib group
HR: 0.79 (0.63-0.99)P = .0001 P = .04
1. Stewart AK et al. N Engl J Med. 2015;372:142-152.
Median PFSCarfilzomib/RD: 26.3 monthsPlacebo/RD: 14.7 months
A.R.R.O.W. Study Design
Arm B: Twice-weekly carfilzomib + dex(10 min infusion of K)
Carfilzomib 20 mg/m2 IV D1, 2 (Cycle 1)Carfilzomib 27 mg/m2 IV D8, 9, 15, 16 (Cycle 1), D1, 2, 8, 9, 15, 16 (Cycle 2+)Dexamethasone 40 mg IV/PO D1, 8, 15 (All cycles)Dexamethasone 40 mg IV/PO D22 (Cycles 1-9 only)
Arm A: Once-weekly carfilzomib + dex(30 min infusion of K)
Carfilzomib 20 mg/m2 IV D1 (Cycle 1)Carfilzomib 70 mg/m2 IV D8, 15 (Cycle 1), D1, 8, 15 (Cycle 2+)Dexamethasone 40 mg IV/PO D1, 8, 15 (All cycles)Dexamethasone 40 mg IV/PO D22 (Cycles 1-9 only)
1:1 Randomization N = 478
•Relapsed and Refractory MM
•2-3 prior lines
•Prior exposure to IMiD & PI (except carfilzomib or oprozomib)
•PS 0-1
•CrCl of ≥30 mL/min
Stratification:
•ISS stage
•Refractory to bortezomib
•Age (<65 vs. ≥65)
28-day cycles
Follo
w-u
p fo
r D
isea
se S
tatu
s un
til
Conf
irm
ed P
D
Long
-ter
m F
ollo
w-u
p fo
r Su
rviv
al
Primary end point: PFS
María-Victoria Mateos
CrCl, creatinine clearance; D, day; IMiD, immunomodulator; ISS, international staging system; IV, intravenous; K, carfilzomib; PD, progressive disease; PI, proteasome inhibitor; PO, by mouth
Primary Endpoint: PFS
Data cutoff date: June 15, 2017; Median follow-up: 12.6 (once-weekly) and 12.0 (twice-weekly) months
CI, confidence interval; HR, hazard ratio
238 164 119 86 41 15 4 0Kd 20/27
Number of Patients at Risk:
++++++ + ++++
+++ +++ ++++ ++++ +++ ++++++++++++++++++++++ +++++++ +++++++++ ++++ ++++++ +++++ ++++ + +++ +
++++ ++++ + + +++ +++ ++++ ++++ +++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++++++++++++++ +++++++++ +++++++++++ +++++ +++++++ ++++ +++++ +
+++
0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21Months from Randomization
0
20
40
60
80
100Pr
opor
tion
Sur
vivi
ngW
itho
ut P
rogr
essi
on
Kd Once-weekly (70 mg/m2)
Kd Twice-weekly (27 mg/m2)
Once-weekly Kd 20/70 mg/m2
(n=240)
Twice-weekly Kd 20/27 mg/m2
(n=238)
Progression/Death, n (%) 126 (53%) 148 (62%)
Median PFS, months 11.2 7.6
HR (Kd 20/70/Kd 20/27) (95% CI) 0.693 (0.544, 0.883)
p-value (2-sided) 0.0029
240 178 145 114 69 24 5 0Kd 20/70
María-Victoria Mateos
Overall Response RatesO
RR,
%
CR 5%
ORR=62.9%
≥VGPR 34%
≥VGPR 13%
ORR=40.8%
CI, confidence interval; CR, complete response; OR, odds ratio; VGPR, very good partial response.
OR (95% CI); p-value (2-sided): 2.49 (1.72, 3.60); p<0.0001
CR 2%
María-Victoria Mateos
Adverse Events of Interest
AE, % (SMQN) Once-weekly Kd(n=238)
Twice-weekly Kd(n=235)
All grades Grade ≥3 All grades Grade ≥3
Peripheral neuropathy 4 0 7 <1
Acute renal failure 7 4 7 6
Cardiac failure 4 3 5 4
Ischemic heart disease 2 1 1 1
Pulmonary hypertension 2 0 1 <1
• Safety findings were consistent with the known safety profile of carfilzomib, and no new risks were identified.
AE, adverse event; SMQN, standardized MedDRA Query, narrow scope
María-Victoria Mateos
TOURMALINE: PFS Summary
No. at RiskIxazomib/RDPlacebo/Rd
360 345 332 315 298 283 270 248 233 224 206 182 145 119 111 95 72 58 44 34 26 14 9 1 0362 340 325 308 288 274 254 237 218 208 188 157 130 101 85 71 58 46 31 22 15 5 3 0 0
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.00 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Prog
ress
ion-
Free
Su
rviv
al, P
roba
bilit
y
Time Since Randomization, Months
Log rank P = .012HR = 0.742 (95% CI, 0.587-0.939)Number of events: Ixazomib/RD, 129; placebo/RD, 157
Median PFSIxazomib/RD: 20.6 monthsPlacebo/RD: 14.7 monthsMedian follow-up: ~15 months
1. Moreau P et al. Blood. 2015;126:727.
Phase 3 Studies of Daratumumab Combinations in in Patients With MM and ≥1 Prior Line of Therapy
DRd (n = 286)D 16 mg/kg IVEvery week: cycles 1-2Every 2 weeks: cycles 3-6Every 4 weeks until PDR 25 mg PO (similar to Rd alone)d 40 mg
Rd (n = 283)R 25 mg PO
Days 1-21 of each cycle until PDd 40 mg weekly until PD
RANDOMIZE
POLLUX
DVd (n = 251)D 16 mg/kg IVEvery week: cycles 1-3Every 3 weeks: cycles 4-8Every 4 weeks: cycles 9+V 1.3 mg/m2 SC (similar to Vd alone)d 20 mg
Vd (n = 247)V 1.3 mg/m2 SC on days 1, 4, 8, and 11 for 8 cyclesd 20 mg on days 1, 2, 4, 5, 8, 9, 11, and 12 for 8 cycles
CASTOR
RANDOMIZE
MRD Assessments•At suspected CR•3 and 6 months after CR
MRD Assessments•At suspected CR•6 and 12 months after first study dose
Patient characteristics • Median (range) prior lines: 1 (1-11)• Prior V: 84%• Prior R: 18%
Patient characteristics• Median (range) prior lines: 2 (1-10)• Prior V: 66%• Prior R: 42%
1. Avet-Loiseau H et al. ASH 2016. Abstract 246.
POLLUX: Daratumumab, Lenalidomide, and Dexamethasone1
0
20
40
60
80
100
210 3 6 9 12 15 18Time, MonthsPr
ogre
ssio
n-Fr
ee S
urvi
val,
%
N286283
Median PFS, monthsNE
18.4Daratumumab groupControl group
12-month PFS83.2 (95% CI, 78.3-87.2)
Daratumumabgroup
Control group
60.1 (95% CI, 54.0-65.7)
HR for progression or death = 0.37 (95% C, 0.27-0.52)P < .001
1. Dimopoulos MA et al. N Engl J Med. 2016;375:1319-1331.
CASTOR: Daratumumab, Bortezomib, and Dexamethasone1
1. Palumbo A et al. N Engl J Med. 2016;375:754-776.
Daratumumab Group(n = 251)
NE
Control Group(n = 247)
7.2Median PFS, months
0
0.20
0.40
0.60
0.80
1.00
150 3 6 9 12Time, Months
Prop
ortio
n Su
rviv
ing
With
out P
rogr
essi
on
HR for progression or death = 0.39 (95% CI, 0.28 -0.53)P < .001
Daratumumabgroup
Control group
MRD Negativity in Daratumumab Combination Studies (Cont’d)1
a P < .005. b P < .05.1. Avet-Loiseau H et al. ASH 2016. Abstract 246.
• Percent of MRD-negative patients among those who achieved ≥CR
CASTORPOLLUX
ITT
Popu
latio
n, %
05
1015
2520
DVD VD10-4
DVD VD DVD VD10-5 10-6
60
35
37
22 169IT
T Po
pula
tion,
%
010203040
DRD RD10-4
MRD negative MRD positive
DRD RD DRD RD10-5 10-6
65
42
52
2726
13
MRD negative MRD positive
• Efficacy and PK coprimary endpoints were not met, demonstrating noninferiority of daratumumab subQ to daratumumab IV
Phase 3 COLUMBA: Noninferiority Comparison of SubQ Versus IV Daratumumab in R/R MM1
Daratumumab subQ significantly decreased IRR rate and administration time with a safety profile comparable with daratumumab IV
1. Mateos MV et al. ASCO 2019. Abstract 8005.
• Open-label, randomized phase 2 trial• ORR: 53% for elotuzumab group vs 26% for control group;
odds ratio: 3.25 (95% CI, 1.49-7.11) • Elotuzumab 10 mg/kg IV every wk in cycles 1-2 and 20 mg/kg IV every 4 wk thereafter• Pomalidomide 4 mg PO on d 1-21 of each cycle• Dexamethasone 40- or 20-mg equivalent every wk for patients aged ≤75 or >75 y, respectively• Primary endpoint: PFS• Secondary endpoint: ORR
ELOQUENT-3: Addition of Elotuzumab to Pomalidomide/Dexamethasone Backbone1
1. Dimopoulos MA et al. N Engl J Med. 2018;379:19.
Patients with R/R MM who received ≥2 prior lines and are refractory or R/R to lenalidomide and a PI(N = 559)
28-d cyclesR
Elotuzumab + pomalidomide + dexamethasone
Pomalidomide + dexamethasone
ELOQUENT-3: PFS1
• In this population of lenalidomide- and PI-refractory patients, risk of progression or death was significantly lower among those who received elotuzumab + pomalidomide/dexamethasone vs pomalidomide + dexamethasone alone
1. Dimopoulos MA et al. N Engl J Med. 2018;379:19.
• Stratification• Age (≤ 75 y vs > 75 y)• Prior regimens (1 vs > 1)• β2-microglobulin at screening
(< 3.5 mg/L vs ≥ 3.5 to ≤ 5.5 mg/L vs > 5.5 mg/L)
Phase 3 OPTIMISMM Study Design
Richardson PG et al. ASCO 2018; Abstract 8001.
Vd (n = 278)BORT 1.3 mg/m2 sc
cycles 1-8: D 1, 4, 8, 11cycle 9+: D 1 and 8
LoDEX 20 mg (≤ 75 y) or 10 mg (> 75 y)day of and day after BORT
PD, subsequent
antimyeloma Tx,
and survival
PD or unacceptabl
e toxicity
PVd (n = 281)POM 4 mg D 1-14BORT 1.3 mg/m2 sc
cycles 1-8: D 1, 4, 8, 11cycles 9+: D 1 and 8
LoDEX 20 mg (≤ 75 y) or 10 mg (> 75 y)day of and day after BORT
RRMM
•1-3 prior regimens, ≥ 2 cycles of LEN•ECOG PS ≤ 2•Prior BORT allowed (PD with 1.3 mg/m2 twice weekly dose excluded)a
N = 559
LT follow-upFollow-up visit 28 days after Tx discontinuation
Enter PFS follow-up periodb
21-day cycles
Progression-Free Survival (ITT)Pr
obab
ility
of
Prog
ress
ion-
Free
Su
rviv
alEvents/N
Median PFS,
monthsHR (95% CI)
P Value
PVd 154/281 11.20 0.61 (0.49-0.77) < .0001Vd 162/278 7.10
278 176 112 66 42 30 20 14 4 4 3 2 2 0281 233 182 128 94 67 47 28 13 7 4 2 1 0
01
01
No. at RiskPVd
0.00 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45
Months
1.00.90.80.70.60.50.40.30.20.1
49%
32%
36%
22%
• Primary endpoint: PFS• Key secondary endpoints: ORR, OS, safety
Phase 3 ICARIA-MM Study: Isatuximab Plus Pomalidomide/Dexamethasone in R/R MM1,2
a Isatuximab 10 mg/kg IV on d 1, 8, 15, and 22 in the first cycle; d 1 and 15 in subsequent cycles. Pomalidomide 4 mg on d 1-21. Dexamethasone 40 mg for patients aged <75 y and 20 mg for patients aged ≥75 y on d 1, 8, 15, and 22.1. Richardson PG et al. ASCO 2019. Abstract 8004. 2. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02990338. Accessed September 6, 2019.
R/R MM•≥2 prior lines of therapy•Prior IMiD and PI•Progressed ≤60 d of prior therapy(N = 300)
R
Isatuximaba + pomalidomide + dexamethasone 28-d cycles
(n = 150)
Pomalidomide + dexamethasone(n = 150)
Until disease progression, occurrence of unacceptable
AEs, or patient’s
decision to discontinue the study
ICARIA-MM: PFS (by IRC)1
1. Richardson PG et al. ASCO 2019. Abstract 8004.
• Median time to first response: Isa/Pd = 35 days vs Pd = 58 days
• True CR rate in Isa/Pd underestimated because of isatuximab interference with M-protein measurement
ICARIA-MM: Response1
1. Richardson PG et al. ASCO 2019. Abstract 8004.
Isa/Pd(n = 154)
Pd(n = 153)
nCR, % 15.6 3.3
• MRD negativity at 10-5 (ITT): 5.2% for Isa/Pd vs 0% for Pd
Isa/Pd(n = 154)
Pd(n = 153)
ORR = 60.4%
ORR = 35.3%
P < .001
Usmani SZ, et al. ASH 2019. Abstract LBA6.
CANDOR: Car/Dara/Dex vs Car/Dex
PatientsN = 466
Key Eligibility Criteria:•RRMM•1 to 3 prior therapies with ≥ PR to ≥ 1 prior therapy•ECOG PS 0 to 2•CrCI ≥ 20 mL/min•LVEF ≥ 40%
R2:1
Carfilzomib at 56 mg/m2
Dexamethasone 40 mgDaratumumab 16 mg/kg
N = 312
N = 154
28-daycycles
Carfilzomib at 56 mg/m2
Dexamethasone 40 mg
Trea
tmen
t Unt
il D
isea
se
Prog
ress
ion
MRD sample:Baseline
MRD sample:Landmark
analysis MRD-negative CR
rate
MRD sample:Landmark analysis
Sustained MRD-negative CR rate
Primary Endpoint:
PFS
Key Secondary:ORR, MRD,
OS
0 4 8 12
16
20
24
28
32Months
26
Usmani SZ, et al. ASH 2019. Abstract LBA6.
CANDORResponse and PFS
KdD (n = 312)
Kd (n = 154)
Median follow-up time, months 16.9 16.3
Progression/death, n (%) 110 (35%) 68 (44%)
Median PFS, months NE 15.8
HR (KdD/Kd) (95% CI) 0.63 (0.46, 0.85)
P value (1-sided) .0014
Response
MRD
– 30 fatal events (9.7%) on Car/Dara/Dex vs 8 (5.2%) on Car/Dex • 14 (4.5%) due to infections vs 5 (2.6%) with Car/Dex; 4 (1.4%) due to cardiac disorders vs 0 with
Car/Dex
CANDOR: AEs of Interest
AE, n (%)
Car/Dara/Dex( n = 308)
Car/Dex ( n = 153)
All Grades Grade ≥ 3 All Grades Grade ≥ 3Acute renal failure 18 (5.8) 9 (2.9) 12 (7.8) 10 (6.5)Cardiac failure* 23 (7.5) 12 (3.9) 16 (10.5) 13 (8.5)Ischemic heart disease 13 (4.2) 9 (2.9) 5 (3.3) 4 (2.6)
Respiratory tract infection 225 (73.1) 89 (28.9) 84 (54.9) 24 (15.7)
Peripheral neuropathy 53 (17.2) 3 (1.0) 13 (8.5) 0Hypertension 98 (31.8) 55 (17.9) 44 (28.8) 21 (13.7)
IRR (on same day as any K) 126 (40.9) 38 (12.3) 43 (28.1) 8 (5.2)
Dara-related infusion reactions 56 (18.2) 7 (2.3) 0 0Viral infections 63 (20.5) 19 (6.2) 22 (14.4) 3 (2.0)
Usmani SZ, et al. ASH 2019. Abstract LBA6.
• Car/Dara/Dex resulted in – Significantly longer PFS
• 37% reduction in risk of progression or death– Deeper responses
• 10x higher MRD negative at 12 mo– PFS benefit across pre-specified subgroups– Consistent safety profile
• Increase in treatment-emergent fatal AEs on Car/Dara/Dex arm
Usmani SZ, et al. ASH 2019. Abstract LBA6. 29
CANDOR: Conclusions
Harrison SJ, et al. ASH 2019. Abstract 142.
Venetoclax/Bor/Dex vs Bor/DexBELLINI, Study Design
N = 291
Key Eligibility:• RRMM• 1 to 3 prior
lines of therapy• PI
nonrefractory
R2:1
Venetoclax (800 mg once daily) +
Bortezomib + Dexamethasone
PDN = 194
N = 97
Cycles 1 to 8: 21-day, bortezomib 1.3 mg/m2 days 1, 4, 8, 11 and dexamethasone 20 mg days 1, 2, 4, 5, 8, 9, 11, 12Cycles 9+: 35-day, bortezomib 1.3 mg/m2 days 1, 8, 15, 22 and dexamethasone 20 mg days 1, 2, 8, 9, 15, 16, 22, 23
Placebo +Bortezomib +
Dexamethasone
Primary endpoint:•PFS (per IRC)Key secondary endpoints:•ORR•≥ VGPR•OS•QoL/PRO parameters
PD
Stratification factors • Bortezomib sensitive vs naive• Prior lines of therapy: 1 vs 2 to 3
Nonranked secondary endpoints PFS in BCL2high (IHC), DOR, TTP, MRD negativity rate, other PROs (GHS, fatigue)
Key subgroup analyses t(11;14), high/standard-risk cytogenetics, and BCL2 gene expression
4
30
Data cutoff Jul 15, 2019.
Harrison SJ, et al. ASH 2019. Abstract 0142.
Venetoclax/Bor/Dex vs Bor/DexBELLINI, Subgroup Analysis
31
PFS was significantly prolonged in the venetoclax arm vs placebo arm in patients with t(11;14) or BCL2high gene expression
– The addition of venetoclax to bor/dex resulted in significant efficacy in patients with RRMM harboring either t(11;14) or tumor cells expressing high levels of BCL2, with a favorable benefit-risk profile
• BCL2high gene expression was associated with prolonged PFS and higher response rates in the venetoclax arm independently of t(11;14)
• OS in patients with t(11;14) or BCL2high gene expression was not inferior with venetoclax
– PFS was not significantly improved with venetoclax, and OS favored placebo in those with tumor cells also negative for t(11;14) and expressing low levels of BCL2
– Biomarker selected trials in MM with t(11;14) or BCL2high gene expression
Harrison SJ, et al. ASH 2019. Abstract 0142.
Venetoclax/Bor/Dex vs Bor/DexBELLINI, Conclusions