Ibrutinib Monotherapy in Relapsed/Refractory Follicular Lymphoma (FL): Preliminary Results of a Phase 2 Consortium (P2C) Trial
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Background: Bruton’s tyrosine kinase (BTK) is an essential component of the B-cell receptor signaling pathway, a pathway critical to the survival and proliferation of malignant B cells. Ibrutinib, a small molecule inhibitor of BTK, has shown significant activity in several B-cell malignancies and is currently FDA approved for the treatment of patients (pts) with CLL or mantle cell lymphoma who have received at least one prior treatment.In a Phase 1 dose-escalation study, ibrutinib induced a response in 6 (38%) of 16 patients (pts) with relapsed/refractory FL and 6/11 (54%) of pts treated at doses ≥ 2.5 mg/kg (Advani JCO 2013, Fowler ASH abstr 156:2012). 560 mg daily was identified as a well-tolerated dose in lymphoma resulting in full-target occupancy. On the basis of these results, the Mayo Clinic and Princess Margaret P2Cs conducted a CTEP-sponsored Phase 2 trial of single-agent ibrutinib in relapsed/refractory FL (NCI 9271). Methods: Eligible pts had relapsed or refractory FL (Gr 1, 2, or 3a) that had progressed during or after 1 or more prior chemotherapy regimens. Therapy consisted of ibrutinib, 560 mg daily, until progression or unacceptable toxicity. Response was assessed by CT at 8 weeks and then every 12 weeks. All pts were required to have an on-study biopsy and a second biopsy at progression after response with fresh tissue collected for correlative studies. The primary endpoint was overall response rate (ORR) and secondary endpoints were safety and tolerability, overall survival, time to response, time to treatment failure, duration of response, and progression-free survival (PFS). Planned exploratory correlative studies included C1D8 and C3D1 FDG-PET response evaluation in a subset of 20 patients, and whole-transcriptome sequencing for correlation of mutations with response and resistance. Results: 40 patients (38 evaluable for response) were accrued from April 2013 to April 2014. Median age was 64 years (range 46-82), 70% were men, 55% had FLIPI ≥ 3, median number of prior regimens was 3 (range 1-11), 20% had a prior stem cell transplant, 45% were rituximab refractory, and 36% were refractory to their most recent treatment. At a median follow-up of 6.5 months (mo) (range 1.8-14.6+), the ORR for the 40 intention-to-treat pts is 30% (95% CI: 17-47%) with 1 CR and 11 PRs by CT criteria (4/12 responders had a negative restaging PET/CT). 26 (65%) patients have exhibited tumor size reduction. Only 2/18 (11%) pts with rituximab-refractory disease responded, compared to 8/19 (42%) pts with rituximab-sensitive disease (P=0.06) and 2/3 who were rituximab-naïve. There was no correlation between response and number of prior regimens. Median time to response was 2.4 mo (range 1.8-12.9 mo). Median PFS is 9.9 mo (95% CI: 6 mo, not reached). One of 12 responders has progressed after 9.9 mo on treatment. Median treatment duration was 5 mo (range 1-15+ mo). Dose delays (2 pts) and reductions were infrequent (4 pts). 17 pts have discontinued treatment due to PD (12), refusal (2), AEs (2), and death (1). Gr 3-4 AEs occurred in 30% of pts, including the following AEs in more than 1 pt: anemia (2), neutropenia (3), and infection (2). 3 pts have died (1 PD, 1 pneumonia, 1 gastric hemorrhage). Of the 20 pts with C1D8 PET scans, 19 also had C3D1 PET scans and were evaluable for response. Six of these 19 pts had objective responses by CT criteria at week 8 or beyond. Of the 6 responders, C1D8 PET/CT showed qualitative (visual) improvement in 3 pts, no visual change in 1 pt, and qualitative worsening in 2 pts. On the C3D1 PET/CT, 4 of 6 had qualitative improvement and 2 had no change. Evaluation of quantitative PET data including SUVs and total lesion glycolysis is ongoing and will be presented. Conclusions: Single agent ibrutinib is well tolerated with a modest ORR in relapsed/refractory FL at this early assessment. Continued follow-up is warranted to capture late responders and to establish response duration. Ibrutinib appears less active in FL than in MCL and CLL. Early PET scans (C1D8) do not reliably predict for response. Support by N01-CM-2011-00099 Disclosures Bartlett: Gilead: Consultancy, Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Astra Zeneca: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; ImaginAb: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Millennium: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Medimmune: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Off Label Use: PF-05082566 for B-NHL. Kuruvilla:Janssen: Honoraria. Reeder:Millennium, Celgene, Novartis: Research Funding.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».