Updated Results from a Phase II Study of Mini-Hyper-CVD Plus Inotuzumab Ozogamicin, with or without Blinatumomab, in Older Adults with Newly Diagnosed Philadelphia Chromosome-Negative B-Cell Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background: Inotuzumab ozogamicin (INO) and blinatumomab are effective in the treatment relapsed/ refractory B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) and improve overall survival (OS) in this setting. The use of these agents in older adults with newly diagnosed B-cell ALL may allow for use of less chemotherapy and improve remission durations and OS compared to standard therapies. Methods: Patients (pts) ≥60 years of age with newly diagnosed Philadelphia chromosome (Ph)-negative pre-B-cell ALL were eligible. Pts were required to have a performance status of ≤3, total bilirubin ≤1.5 mg/dl, AST/ALT ≤3x ULN and creatinine ≤2 mg/dl. Pts received mini-hyper-CVD (cyclophosphamide and dexamethasone at 50% dose reduction, no anthracycline, methotrexate at 75% dose reduction, cytarabine at 0.5 g/m 2 x 4 doses) for up to 8 cycles. INO was given at a dose of 1.3-1.8mg/m 2 on day 3 of cycle 1 and 0.8-1.3mg/m 2 on day 3 of cycles 2-4. Rituximab (if CD20+) and prophylactic IT chemotherapy were given for the first 4 cycles. Responding pts received POMP maintenance for up to 3 years. In order to decrease the risk of veno-occlusive disease (VOD), the protocol was amended in 3/2017 (pts 50+) to give INO in fractionated doses each cycle (0.6 mg/m 2 on day 2 and 0.3 mg/m 2 on day 8 of cycle 1; 0.3 mg/m 2 on day 2 and 8 of cycles 2-4) and to administer 4 cycles of blinatumomab following 4 cycles of hyper-CVD plus INO, followed by maintenance with 12 cycles of POMP and 4 cycles of blinatumomab (1 cycle of blinatumomab after every 3 cycles of POMP). The cumulative dose of INO given before and after this most recent amendment was 4.3 mg/m 2 and 2.7 mg/m 2, respectively. Results: 75 pts have been treated. 6 pts were in complete remission (CR) at enrollment and unevaluable for morphological response. Pt characteristics are summarized in Table 1. Median age was 68 years (range, 60-87 years); 30 pts (40%) were ≥70 years. 39% were positive for TP53 mutation, 19% had Ph-like ALL (with 6 of the 8 Ph-like pts being CRLF2+ by flow), and 25% had adverse-risk karyotype. Among 69 pts evaluable for morphologic response, 68 (99%) responded (CR, n=61; CRp, n=6; CRi, n=1). MRD negativity by flow cytometry was achieved in 57/71 pts (80%) after 1 cycle and 71/74 pts (96%) overall. The 30-day and 60-day mortality rates were 0% and 3%, respectively. Among 74 pts who achieved remission, 10 (14%) relapsed, 4 (5%) underwent allogeneic SCT in first remission (1 of whom subsequently relapsed), 32 (43%) remain on treatment or have completed therapy, and 28 (38%) died in remission. Overall, 9 pts (12%) developed MDS/AML; in 7 of these cases the myeloid malignancy was TP53-mutated and in the 2 other cases, both the ALL and subsequent AML shared mutations in myeloid mutations (RUNX1, SRSF2, and TET2). Notably, 6 pts (8%) developed VOD, 1 after subsequent allogeneic SCT. The rate of VOD was 6/75 (8%) with no difference in VOD in pts who did or did not receive blinatumomab. With a median follow-up of 56 months (range, 1-111 months), the 5-year continuous remission and OS rates were 76% and 47%, respectively (Figure 1A). Outcomes were superior for those 60-69 years of age versus those who were ≥70 years (5-year OS rates: 58% and 31%, respectively; P=0.04) and for those without poor-risk cytogenetics (e.g. KMT2A rearranged, low hypodiploidy/near triploidy, complex cytogenetics) versus poor-risk cytogenetics (5-year OS rates: 56% and 25%, respectively; P=0.01). Pts ≥70 years of age were more likely to die in remission (20/29 [69%] vs. 19/45 [42%] in pts 60-69 years of age; P=0.03), which was a major driver of the poor survival in this age group. The 5-year OS for pts age 60-69 years with non-poor risk cytogenetics, age 60-69 with poor risk cytogenetics, age ≥70 with non-poor risk cytogenetics and age ≥70 with poor risk cytogenetics were 68%, 37%, 42% and 0% respectively (Figure 1B). Neither Ph-like ALL nor the presence of a TP53 mutation significantly impacted OS (P=0.26 and P=0.34, respectively). Conclusion: Low-intensity chemotherapy with hyper-CVD plus INO, with or without blinatumomab, in older adults with newly diagnosed Ph-negative ALL resulted in an overall response rate of 98% and a 5-year OS rate of 47%. Even with this relatively reduced-intensity regimen, deaths in remission (usually due to infection) occur, primarily in pts ≥70 years of age. A strategy using the combination INO and blinatumomab, without any chemotherapy, is being explored in this population. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Short: NGMBio: Consultancy; Astellas: Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Novartis: Honoraria; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Takeda Oncology: Consultancy, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria. Kantarjian: BMS: Research Funding; Aptitude Health: Honoraria; NOVA Research: Honoraria; Astra Zeneca: Honoraria; AbbVie: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; Immunogen: Research Funding; Ascentage: Research Funding; Pfizer: Honoraria, Research Funding; Amgen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Astellas Health: Honoraria; Jazz: Research Funding; Daiichi-Sankyo: Research Funding; Ipsen Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria; KAHR Medical Ltd: Honoraria; Precision Biosciences: Honoraria; Taiho Pharmaceutical Canada: Honoraria. Ravandi: Novartis: Honoraria; AbbVie: Honoraria, Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Xencor: Honoraria, Research Funding; Syros Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Astex: Honoraria, Research Funding; Jazz: Honoraria, Research Funding; Prelude: Research Funding; Amgen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Agios: Honoraria, Research Funding; Taiho: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Honoraria. Jain: Janssen: Honoraria; TG Therapeutics: Honoraria; Beigene: Honoraria; Precision Biosciences: Honoraria, Research Funding; Servier: Honoraria, Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Aprea Therapeutics: Research Funding; Fate Therapeutics: Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Honoraria, Research Funding; ADC Therapeutics: Honoraria, Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Adaptive Biotechnologies: Honoraria, Research Funding; Genentech: Honoraria, Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Research Funding; Cellectis: Honoraria, Research Funding; AbbVie: Honoraria, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding. Kadia: Genfleet: Other; AstraZeneca: Other; Genentech: Consultancy, Other: Grant/research support; Jazz: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy, Other: Grant/research support; Cure: Speakers Bureau; Aglos: Consultancy; Sanofi-Aventis: Consultancy; Pulmotech: Other; Dalichi Sankyo: Consultancy; BMS: Other: Grant/research support; Cellonkos: Other; Pfizer: Consultancy, Other; Astellas: Other; Ascentage: Other; Novartis: Consultancy; Liberum: Consultancy; Amgen: Other: Grant/research support. Khoury: Kiromic: Research Funding; Stemline Therapeutics: Research Funding; Angle: Research Funding. Wang: Stemline Therapeutics: Honoraria. Alvarado: Astex Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; MEI Pharma: Research Funding; Daiichi-Sankyo: Research Funding; FibroGen: Research Funding; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; CytomX Therapeutics: Consultancy; BerGenBio: Research Funding; Sun Pharma: Consultancy, Research Funding. Burger: Novartis: Other: Travel/Accommodations/Expenses, Speakers Bureau; Pharmacyclics LLC: Consultancy, Other: Travel/Accommodations/Expenses, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; TG Therapeutics: Other: Travel/Accommodations/Expenses, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Consultancy, Other: Travel/Accommodations/Expenses, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Beigene: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy, Other: Travel/Accommodations/Expenses, Speakers Bureau. Daver: Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novimmune: Research Funding; Glycomimetics: Research Funding; Hanmi: Research Funding; Gilead Sciences, Inc.: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding; Trillium: Consultancy, Research Funding; ImmunoGen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy; Trovagene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Astellas: Consultancy, Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sevier: Consultancy, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; FATE Therapeutics: Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Research Funding; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Other: Data Monitoring Committee member; Dava Oncology (Arog): Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Syndax: Consultancy; Shattuck Labs: Consultancy; Agios: Consultancy; Kite Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; SOBI: Consultancy; STAR Therapeutics: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Research Funding; Newave: Research Funding. Borthakur: University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center: Current Employment; Astex: Research Funding; GSK: Consultancy; ArgenX: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Protagonist: Consultancy; Ryvu: Research Funding; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. DiNardo: Bristol Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Research Funding; GlaxoSmithKline: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Honoraria; ImmuneOnc
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".