No abstract

Acalabrutinib is a Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitor approved for patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). ASCEND is the pivotal phase 3 study of acalabrutinib versus investigator’s choice of idelalisib plus rituximab (IdR) or bendamustine plus rituximab (BR) in patients with relapsed/refractory (R/R) CLL. In the primary ASCEND analysis (median 16.1-month follow-up), acalabrutinib showed superior efficacy with an acceptable tolerability profile versus IdR/BR; here, we report final ~4 year follow-up results. Patients with R/R CLL received oral acalabrutinib 100 mg twice daily until progression or unacceptable toxicity, or investigator’s choice of IdR or BR. A total of 310 patients (acalabrutinib, n = 155; IdR, n = 119; BR, n = 36) were enrolled. At median follow-up of 46.5 months (acalabrutinib) and 45.3 months (IdR/BR), acalabrutinib significantly prolonged investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS) versus IdR/BR (median, not reached [NR] vs 16.8 months; P < 0.001); 42-month PFS rates were 62% (acalabrutinib) versus 19% (IdR/BR). Median overall survival (OS) was NR (both arms); 42-month OS rates were 78% (acalabrutinib) versus 65% (IdR/BR). Adverse events led to drug discontinuation in 23%, 67%, and 17% of patients in the acalabrutinib, IdR, and BR arms, respectively. Events of clinical interest (acalabrutinib vs IdR/BR) included all-grade atrial fibrillation/flutter (8% vs 3%), all-grade hypertension (8% vs 5%), all-grade major hemorrhage (3% vs 3%), grade ≥3 infections (29% vs 29%), and second primary malignancies excluding nonmelanoma skin cancer (7% vs 2%). At ~4 years follow-up, acalabrutinib maintained favorable efficacy versus standard-of-care regimens and a consistent tolerability profile in patients with R/R CLL.

Elderly and frail patients with multiple myeloma (MM) are more vulnerable to the toxicity of combination therapies, often resulting in treatment modifications and suboptimal outcomes. The phase 3 BOSTON study showed that once‐weekly selinexor and bortezomib with low‐dose dexamethasone (XVd) improved PFS and ORR compared with standard twice‐weekly bortezomib and moderate‐dose dexamethasone (Vd) in patients with previously treated MM. This is a retrospective subgroup analysis of the multicenter, prospective, randomized BOSTON trial. Post hoc analyses were performed to compare XVd versus Vd safety and efficacy according to age and frailty status (<65 and ≥65 years, nonfrail and frail). Patients ≥65 years with XVd had higher ORR (OR 1.77, p = .024), ≥VGPR (OR, 1.68, p = .027), PFS (HR 0.55, p = .002), and improved OS (HR 0.63, p = .030), compared with Vd. In frail patients, XVd was associated with a trend towards better PFS (HR 0.69, p = .08) and OS (HR 0.62, p = .062). Significant improvements were also observed in patients <65 (ORR and TTNT) and nonfrail patients (PFS, ORR, ≥VGPR, and TTNT). Patients treated with XVd had a lower incidence of grade ≥ 2 peripheral neuropathy in ≥65 year‐old (22% vs. 37%; p = .0060) and frail patients (15% vs. 44%; p = .0002). Grade ≥3 TEAEs were not observed more often in older compared to younger patients, nor in frail compared to nonfrail patients. XVd is safe and effective in patients <65 and ≥65 and in nonfrail and frail patients with previously treated MM.

Background: Bruton tyrosine kinase (BTK) inhibitors are a preferred treatment option in patients with relapsed/refractory (R/R) chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). Acalabrutinib (acala) is a next-generation, highly selective, covalent BTK inhibitor approved for the treatment of patients with CLL including those with R/R disease. In the primary analysis of the ASCEND study with a median follow-up duration of 16.1 months, acala monotherapy demonstrated superior progression-free survival (PFS) compared with idelalisib (Id) plus rituximab (R) (IdR) or bendamustine (B) plus R (BR) and favorable safety in patients with R/R CLL (Ghia et al. J Clin Oncol. 2020;38:2849-2861). Herein we report results of the ASCEND study at 3 years of follow-up. Methods: In this randomized, multicenter, open-label, phase 3 study (NCT02970318), patients with R/R CLL were randomized 1:1 to receive acala 100 mg orally (PO) twice daily or investigator's (INV) choice of IdR (Id: 150 mg PO twice daily; R: 375 x1 then 500 mg/m 2 intravenously [IV] for 8 total infusions) or BR (B: 70 mg/m 2 IV and R: 375 x1 then 500 mg/m 2 IV for 6 total cycles) until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Crossover to the acala monotherapy arm was permitted in patients who progressed on IdR or BR. Assessments included INV-assessed PFS, overall survival (OS), INV-assessed overall response rate (ORR), and safety. Results: A total of 310 patients (acala, n=155; IdR, n=119; BR, n=36) were enrolled (median age: 67 y; del(17p) 16%, unmutated IGHV 78%, Rai stage 3/4 42%). At a median (range) follow-up of 36.0 (0.5-44.0) and 35.2 (0.03-42.5) months (data cutoff: October 26, 2020) for acala and IdR/BR, respectively, acala significantly prolonged INV-assessed PFS vs IdR/BR (median: not reached [NR] vs 16.8 months, respectively; hazard ratio [HR]: 0.29; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.21, 0.41; P&lt;0.0001); 36-month PFS rates were 63% for acala vs 21% for IdR/BR (Figure 1). Similar PFS benefits were observed for acala vs IdR (median: 16.2 months [HR: 0.31; P&lt;0.0001]) and vs BR (median: 18.6 months [HR: 0.25; P&lt;0.0001]) when assessed separately (Figure 2). PFS benefit was also consistently shown in high-risk subgroups; in patients with the del(17p) mutation, median PFS was NR vs 13.8 months (HR: 0.13; 95% CI: 0.06, 0.3; P&lt;0.0001); 36-month PFS rates were 66% and 5% for acala and IdR/BR, respectively. In patients with unmutated IGHV, median PFS was NR vs 16.1 months (HR: 0.30; 95% CI: 0.21, 0.42; P&lt;0.0001); 36-month PFS rates were 61% and 17% for acala and IdR/BR, respectively. Median OS was NR in both arms; the 36-month OS rate was 80% for acala vs 73% for IdR/BR (Figure 3). ORR was 83% with acala vs 85% with IdR/BR (ORR including partial response with lymphocytosis was 92% vs 88%, respectively). Adverse events (AEs) occurring in ≥15% of patients in any treatment arm are shown in the Table; the most commonly reported all-grade AEs (≥20%) with acala were headache (23%), neutropenia (23%), diarrhea (21%), and upper respiratory tract infection (20%); with IdR, diarrhea (53%) and neutropenia (47%); and with BR, neutropenia (34%), fatigue (23%), infusion-related reaction (23%), and nausea (20%). Serious AEs (SAEs) were reported in 38% of acala, 63% of IdR, and 26% of BR patients; SAEs reported in ≥5% of patients in any treatment arm were pneumonia (acala 8%, IdR 9%, BR 3%), pyrexia (acala 2%, IdR 7%, BR 3%), and diarrhea (acala 1%, IdR 15%, BR 0%). AEs led to drug discontinuation in 21% of acala, 65% of IdR, and 17% of BR patients. Events of clinical interest included all-grade atrial fibrillation/flutter (acala 6%, IdR/BR 3%), all-grade hypertension (acala 7%, IdR/BR 4%), all-grade major hemorrhage (acala 3%, IdR/BR 3%), grade ≥3 infections (acala 25%, IdR/BR 27%), and all-grade second primary malignancies excluding non-melanoma skin cancer (acala 7%, IdR/BR 3%). Conclusions: At 3 years of follow-up, the efficacy of acala monotherapy was maintained, showing a significant PFS benefit over standard-of-care regimens in patients with R/R CLL. Acala also maintained an acceptable tolerability profile with no new safety findings identified with longer-term follow-up. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Jurczak: AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Bayer, BeiGene, Celtrion, Celgene, Debbiopharm, Epizyme, Incyte, Janssen, Loxo Oncology, Merck, Mei Pharma, Morphosys, Novo Nordisk, Roche, Sandoz, Takeda, TG Therapeutics, Pharmacyclics, Affirmed, Gilead Sciences, Nordic Nanovecto: Research Funding; AstraZeneca, BeiGene, Janssen, Loxo Oncology, Sandoz, Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; European Medicines Agency, Sandoz-Novartis, Janssen China R&D, BeiGene, Epizyme, Acerta, AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Jagiellonian University: Ended employment in the past 24 months; Maria Sklodowska-Curie National Research Institute of Oncology: Current Employment. Pluta: Celgene, Servier, Takeda, Novartis: Honoraria; Celgene: Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses; Janssen-Cilag, Kartos Therapeutics, Iqvia, Roche, Acerta Pharma, Pharmacyclics, BeiGene, Takeda: Research Funding; National University of Sanok: Current Employment; Szpital Specjalistyczny w Brzozowie: Ended employment in the past 24 months. Lysak: Novartis, Janssen-Cilag, AbbVie; AstraZeneca: Honoraria, Research Funding. Šimkovič: AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Janssen-Cilag, Gilead, Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel Grants. Kriachok: Takeda, Roche, Abbivie, Janssen, MSD: Consultancy; Takeda, Roche, Abbvie, Janssen, MSD, Pfizer: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Illes: Novartis, Janssen, Pfizer, Roche: Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses; Takeda, Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Janssen, Celgene, Novartis, Pfizer, Takeda, Roche: Consultancy. de la Serna: ABBVIE, ASTRAZENECA,ROCHE: Research Funding; AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Beigene, Gilead, GSK, Janssen, Jazzpharma, Novartis, Roche: Consultancy; AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Roche: Speakers Bureau. Campbell: Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; CSL Behring: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; BMS/Celgene: Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy, Research Funding. Musuraca: Janssen, Roche, Incyte: Honoraria; Janssen, Roche, Incyte: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen, Incyte, Roche: Consultancy. Jacob: Astrazeneca, GlaxoSmithKilne: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Horizon Discovery, Oxford Biomedica: Divested equity in a private or publicly-traded company in the past 24 months; AstraZeneca: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Clinical Haematology Services: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AbbVie, Astrazeneca: Honoraria. Avery: Macrogenics, Moderna: Divested equity in a private or publicly-traded company in the past 24 months. Wang: AstraZeneca: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Yu: AstraZeneca: Current Employment; EMD Serono Research Institute: Ended employment in the past 24 months; AstraZeneca, Johnson and Johnson, AbbVie, Abbott: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Merck KGaA: Divested equity in a private or publicly-traded company in the past 24 months. Ghia: AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Acerta/AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; ArQule/MSD: Consultancy, Honoraria; BeiGene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene/Juno/BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria; Gilead: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria; Sunesis: Research Funding.

Therapeutic regimens for previously treated multiple myeloma (MM) may not provide prolonged disease control and are often complicated by significant adverse events, including peripheral neuropathy. In patients with previously treated MM in the Phase 3 BOSTON study, once weekly selinexor, once weekly bortezomib, and 40 mg dexamethasone (XVd) demonstrated a significantly longer median progression-free survival (PFS), higher response rates, deeper responses, a trend to improved survival, and reduced incidence and severity of bortezomib-induced peripheral neuropathy when compared with standard twice weekly bortezomib and 80 mg dexamethasone (Vd). The pre-specified analyses described here evaluated the influence of the number of prior lines of therapy, prior treatment with lenalidomide, prior proteasome inhibitor (PI) therapy, prior immunomodulatory drug therapy, and prior autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) on the efficacy and safety of XVd compared with Vd. In this 1:1 randomized study, enrolled patients were assigned to receive once weekly oral selinexor (100 mg) with once weekly subcutaneous bortezomib (1.3 mg/m2) and 40 mg per week dexamethasone (XVd) versus standard twice weekly bortezomib and 80 mg per week dexamethasone (Vd). XVd significantly improved PFS, overall response rate, time-to-next-treatment, and showed reduced all grade and grade ≥ 2 peripheral neuropathy compared with Vd regardless of prior treatments, but the benefits of XVd over Vd were more pronounced in patients treated earlier in their disease course who had either received only one prior therapy, had never been treated with a PI, or had prior ASCT. Treatment with XVd improved outcomes as compared to Vd regardless of prior therapies as well as manageable and generally reversible adverse events. XVd was associated with clinical benefit and reduced peripheral neuropathy compared to standard Vd in previously treated MM. These results suggest that the once weekly XVd regimen may be optimally administered to patients earlier in their course of disease, as their first bortezomib-containing regimen, and in those relapsing after ASCT.Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03110562). Registered 12 April 2017. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03110562.