MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2979367976 · doi:10.1182/blood.v124.21.3450.3450

Long-Term Outcome of a Phase 1 Study of the Investigational Oral Proteasome Inhibitor (PI) Ixazomib at the Recommended Phase 3 Dose (RP3D) in Patients (Pts) with Relapsed or Refractory Systemic Light-Chain (AL) Amyloidosis (RRAL)

2014· article· en· W2979367976 sur OpenAlexaff
Giampaolo Merlini, Vaishali Sanchorawala, Zonder A Jeffrey, Vishal Kukreti, Stefan Schoenland, Arnaud Jaccard, Angela Dispenzieri, Adam D. Cohen, Deborah Berg, Zheng Yuan, Ai‐Min Hui, Giovanni Palladini, Raymond L. Comenzo

Notice bibliographique

RevueBlood · 2014
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
ThématiqueAmyloidosis: Diagnosis, Treatment, Outcomes
Établissements canadiensPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésIxazomibMedicineTolerabilityInternal medicineAL amyloidosisAdverse effectPopulationProgression-free survivalOncologyProteasome inhibitorGastroenterologySurgeryMultiple myelomaCarfilzomibOverall survivalImmunology

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Abstract Background Systemic AL amyloidosis is a life-threatening disease with limited treatment options. Response criteria have been recently updated and retrospectively validated (Palladini et al, J Clin Oncol 2012). Hematologic response (suppression of FLCs) has been shown to predict for both organ response and survival (ibid). Preliminary results from the present phase 1 study (NCT01318902) regarding the safety, tolerability, and maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of ixazomib (the first oral PI to be investigated in the clinic) in RRAL were reported previously (Merlini et al, ASH 2012). At that time, 11 pts had received the MTD/RP3D of ixazomib - 4.0 mg. Here we update the safety data (primary objective) and report hematologic and organ responses, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) (secondary objectives) for the extended population of 22 pts receiving the RP3D. Methods Pts with RRAL after ≥1 prior therapy and with measureable heart/kidney involvement and cardiac biomarker stage I/II disease were eligible. Two expansion cohorts (PI-naïve and PI-exposed) were enrolled at the RP3D. Pts received oral ixazomib on days 1, 8, and 15 for up to 12 x 28-day cycles; continuation until disease progression was allowed. Pts with less than partial response (PR) after 3 cycles received added dexamethasone (Dex) 40 mg, days 1–4 from cycle 4 onwards. Adverse events (AEs) were graded by NCI-CTCAE v4.03. Responses were assessed per standard criteria (Palladini et al, J Clin Oncol 2012). Results At data cut-off (Dec 6, 2013), 27 pts had been enrolled, 22 at the RP3D of ixazomib 4.0 mg; the other 5 pts were enrolled at 5.5 mg and are not included in these analyses. In pts who received ixazomib 4.0 mg, median age was 64.5 yrs (range 54–78); 13 were male. Mayo cardiac biomarker risk stage was I/II/III in 11/10/1 pts, respectively. Median baseline FLC differential (dFLC) and NT-proBNP were 146 mg/L (range 40–734) and 849 pg/mL (range 51–5691). Major organ involvement included heart, kidney, or both in 9, 8, and 5 pts, with a median of 2 (range 1–6) organ systems involved. Pts had received a median of 3 prior therapies, including transplantation in 16 pts; 16 pts had received prior bortezomib (PI exposed) and 6 were PI naïve. Other prior therapies included melphalan (n=21), Dex (n=16), IMiDs (n=11), and cyclophosphamide (n=10). Best hematologic response to prior therapy was complete response (CR) in 3 pts, very good PR (VGPR) in 4, PR in 14, and stable disease (SD) in 1 pt; organ response was achieved by 5 pts, with 12 pts having no response. Exposure and outcome data by prior PI exposure are shown in the table. Pts discontinued due to disease progression (n=6), pt withdrawal, symptomatic deterioration (each n=3), or unsatisfactory response (n=2); 5 pts completed 12 cycles; 3 pts are ongoing. Overall hematologic response rate (ORR) was 52%. After a median follow-up of 16.9 mos, the 9 pts who achieved ≥VGPR, had a median PFS of 17.0 mos compared with 10.7 mos in pts who achieved a lesser response (p=0.03). Cardiac/renal response was observed in 50%/18% of pts (all ≥VGPR). The most common drug-related AEs included diarrhea, nausea (each n=7), fatigue, thrombocytopenia (each n=6), peripheral neuropathy, and pyrexia (each n=4). Drug-related grade 3 AEs (>1 pt) were thrombocytopenia (n=3), diarrhea, and maculo-papular rash (each n=2). Table.PI naïven=6PI exposed n=16TotalN=22Cycles received, median (range)12 (1–22)3.5 (1–16)5.5 (1–22)Dex added, n358Hematologic response-evaluable ptsn=5n=16N=21Response, n (%)ORR5 (100)6 (38)11 (52)CR2 (40)02 (10)VGPR3 (60)4 (25)7 (33)PR02 (13)2 (10)SD09 (56)9 (43)Cardiac response/heart evaluable, n/N (%)3/4 (75)3/8 (38)6/12 (50)Renal response/kidney evaluable, n/N (%)1/3 (33)1/8 (13)2/11 (18)1 yr hematologic PFS rate, %8341602 yr OS rate, %835157 Conclusions This is one of the first studies prospectively assessing hematologic and organ response according to the updated consensus criteria. These data suggest weekly oral ixazomib 4.0 mg is feasible and generally well tolerated in RRAL pts with vital organ dysfunction. High quality hematologic responses (≥VGPR) were observed in 43% of pts; these responses were sustained at 1 yr in 60% of this heavily-pretreated population. Achieving ≥VGPR was associated with cardiac response and extended PFS. These results warrant a phase 3 study of ixazomib plus Dex vs physician's choice of treatment, which is ongoing (NCT01659658). Disclosures Merlini: Pfizer: Honoraria; Millennium: the Takeda Oncology Company: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Off Label Use: Use of the investigational agent ixazomib, an oral proteasome inhibitor, in the treatment of relapsed or refractory light-chain amyloidosis. Sanchorawala:Celgene: Research Funding; Millennium: the Takeda Oncology Company: Research Funding; Onyx: Research Funding. Jeffrey:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Kukreti:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria. Schoenland:Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Jaccard:Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria. Dispenzieri:Millennium: the Takeda Oncology Company: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding. Cohen:Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Advisory Board, Advisory Board Other; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Advisory Board, Advisory Board Other, Research Funding; Janssen: Advisory Board, Advisory Board Other; Celgene: Member, Independent Response Adjudication Committee Other. Berg:Takeda Pharmaceutical International Co.: Employment. Yuan:Takeda Pharmaceutical International Co.: Employment. Hui:Takeda Pharmaceutical International Co.: Employment. Comenzo:Millennium:the Takeda Oncology Company: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Teva: Research Funding; Prothena: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau.

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 machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,002
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Essai non randomisé · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,002
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,011

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0020,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,001
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,001
Communication savante0,0010,001
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,002
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0010,001

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.

Tête enseignante Opus0,018
Tête enseignante GPT0,281
Écart entre enseignants0,263 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_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 découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeEssai non randomisé
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations22
Publié2014
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueBloodMême sujetAmyloidosis: Diagnosis, Treatment, OutcomesTravaux en français237 207