FIXED‐DURATION VENETOCLAX PLUS OBINUTUZUMAB IMPROVES PFS AND MINIMAL RESIDUAL DISEASE NEGATIVITY IN PATIENTS WITH PREVIOUSLY UNTREATED CLL AND COMORBIDITIES
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: The multinational, open-label, phase 3 CLL14 trial (NCT02242942) compared fixed-duration targeted venetoclax plus obinutuzumab (VenG) treatment with chlorambucil-obinutuzumab (ClbG) treatment in previously untreated patients (pts) with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) and comorbidities. We present endpoint analyses with particular emphasis on progression-free survival (PFS) and minimal residual disease (MRD)-negativity. Methods: Pts with a CIRS score >6 and/or an estimated creatinine clearance <70 mL/min were randomized 1:1 to receive equal duration treatment with 12 cycles of standard Clb or Ven 400 mg daily in combination with G for the first 6 cycles. The primary endpoint was PFS. MRD-negativity in peripheral blood (PB) or bone marrow (BM) 3 months after treatment completion was a key secondary endpoint. MRD was analyzed serially from Cycle 4 every 3 months by an allele-specific oligonucleotide polymerase chain reaction assay (ASO-PCR; cut-off, 10-4) and by next generation sequencing (NGS; cut-offs, 10-4, 10-5, 10-6). Results: 432 pts were enrolled (216 in each treatment group; intent-to-treat population). Median age, total CIRS score, and CrCl at baseline were 72 years, 8, and 66.4 mL/min respectively. After 29 months’ median follow-up, superior PFS was observed with VenG vs ClbG (Figure 1a). Median PFS was not reached in either group: at Month 24, PFS rates were 88% with VenG and 64% with ClbG (hazard ratio [HR] 0.35; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.23–0.53; P<0.0001). MRD-negativity by ASO-PCR was significantly higher with VenG vs ClbG in both PB (76% vs 35% [P<0.0001]) and BM (57% vs 17% [P<0.0001]) 3 months after treatment completion. Overall, 75% of VenG MRD-negative pts in PB were also MRD-negative in BM vs 49% in the ClbG group. Landmark analysis for this timepoint by PB MRD status showed that MRD-negativity was associated with longer PFS. MRD-negativity rates were more sustainable with VenG: 81% (VenG) vs 27% (ClbG) of pts were MRD-negative 12 months after treatment completion (Figure 1b). MRD-negativity rates by NGS confirmed these results; 78% (VenG) vs 34% (ClbG) of pts had MRD-negative status at <10-4, 35% vs 15% at ≥10-6–<10-5 and 31% vs 4% at <10-6, respectively. Conclusions: Fixed-duration VenG induced deep, high (<10-4 in 3/4 of pts and <10-6 in 1/3 of pts), and long lasting MRD-negativity rates (with a low rate of conversion to MRD-positive status 1 year after treatment) in previously untreated pts with CLL and comorbidities, translating into improved PFS. Funding: This study was funded by F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd and Abbvie Inc. Third-party editing and administrative support was provided by Gardiner-Caldwell Communications, and was funded by F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd. This abstract has been previously submitted in part to ASCO 2019 and EHA 2019. Keywords: chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL); obinutuzumab; venetoclax. Disclosures: Fischer, K: Other Remuneration: Expenses: Roche. Porro Lurà, M: Employment Leadership Position: Roche; Stock Ownership: Roche. Al-Sawaf, O: Other Remuneration: Other relationship: AbbVie, Roche, Gilead, Janssen. Bahlo, J: Honoraria: Roche; Other Remuneration: Expenses: Roche. Fink, A: Consultant Advisory Role: Janssen. Tandon, M: Employment Leadership Position: Roche. Dixon, M: Employment Leadership Position: Roche; Stock Ownership: Roche. Warburton, S: Employment Leadership Position: Roche. Humphrey, K: Employment Leadership Position: Roche; Stock Ownership: Roche. Liberati, A: Other Remuneration: Personal Fees: Abbvie. Pinilla-Ibarz, J: Consultant Advisory Role: Janssen, Gilead, Abbvie, Pharmacyclics, Millenium Pharmaceuticals/Takeda, TEVA, TG Therapeutics; Research Funding: TG Therapeutics; Other Remuneration: Speakers' Bureau: Janssen, Gilead, Abbvie, Pharmacyclics, Millenium Pharmaceuticals/Takeda, TEVA, Bayer. Opat, S: Consultant Advisory Role: Roche, AbbVie; Honoraria: Roche, AbbVie; Research Funding: Roche; Other Remuneration: Speakers' Bureau: Roche. Utoft Niemann, C: Consultant Advisory Role: Abbvie, Janssen, Gilead, AstraZeneca, Sunesis, Acerta, CSL Behring, Roche; Research Funding: Abbvie, Janssen; Other Remuneration: Expenses: Novartis, Gilead, Roche; Other relationship: Roche - Payment for trial enrollment/patient management of the trial, indirectly through GCLLSG. Weinkove, R: Consultant Advisory Role: Abbvie; Honoraria: Abbvie; Other Remuneration: Other relationship: Capital & Coast District Health Board - Institution received reimbursement of the costs of conducting trial-related clinical procedures. Robinson, S: Consultant Advisory Role: Roche, AbbVie. Kipps, T: Employment Leadership Position: UC, San Diego Health, Moores Cancer Center; Consultant Advisory Role: AbbVie, Genentech-Roche, Gilead, Pharmacyclics, Celgene; Honoraria: Gilead, AbbVie, Pharmacyclics, Janssen, Verastem; Research Funding: AbbVie, Genentech-Roche, Pharmacyclics, Oncternal; Other Remuneration: Membership on an entity's board of directors, speaker's bureau, or its advisory committees: AbbVie, Pharmacyclics, Janssen, Verastem. Boettcher, S: Honoraria: Roche, AbbVie, Janssen; Research Funding: Celgene, Roche, AbbVie, Janssen; Other Remuneration: Personal Fees: Janssen, Abbvie. Tausch, E: Consultant Advisory Role: Roche; Other Remuneration: Speakers' Bureau: Roche; Expert testimony: Abbvie; Expenses: Abbvie. Schary, W: Employment Leadership Position: AbbVie; Stock Ownership: AbbVie. Eichhorst, B: Consultant Advisory Role: Abbvie, Roche; Honoraria: Abbvie, Roche; Research Funding: Abbvie, Roche; Other Remuneration: Speakers' Bureau and expenses: Abbvie, Roche. Wendtner, C: Honoraria: F. Hoffmann La-Roche Ltd, Abbvie, Janssen-Cilag, Gilead, MorphoSys, Mundipharma, Novartis; Research Funding: F. Hoffmann La-Roche Ltd, Abbvie, Janssen-Cilag, Gilead, MorphoSys, Mundipharma, Novartis. Langerak, A: Consultant Advisory Role: AbbVie; Research Funding: Roche-Genentech, Gilead. Kreuzer, K: Consultant Advisory Role: Roche, Abbvie; Other Remuneration: Expert Testimony: Roche, Abbvie. Goede, V: Consultant Advisory Role: Roche, Janssen, Gilead, AbbVie; Other Remuneration: Speakers’ Bureau: Roche, Janssen, Gilead. Stilgenbauer, S: Research Funding: AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Celgene, Gilead, GSK, Hoffmann La-Roche, Janssen, Novartis, Pharmacyclics, Sunesis; Other Remuneration: Personal Fees: AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Celgene, Gilead, GSK, Hoffmann La-Roche, Janssen, Novartis, Pharmacyclics, Sunesis. Mobasher, M: Employment Leadership Position: Genentech/F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, Corvus; Stock Ownership: Genentech/F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, Corvus; Other Remuneration: Expenses: Genentech/F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, Corvus. Ritgen, M: Consultant Advisory Role: Roche, Abbvie; Research Funding: Roche, Abbvie; Other Remuneration: Personal Fees – Roche. Hallek, M: Consultant Advisory Role: Roche, Abbvie; Honoraria: Roche, Abbvie, Gilead, Janssen, Celgene, Boehringer Ingelheim; Research Funding: Roche, Abbvie; Other Remuneration: Speakers’ Bureau: Roche, Abbvie.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".