MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403597428 · doi:10.58931/cht.2022.1s0628

Safety and tolerability of Bruton's tyrosine kinase inhibitors in the treatment of Waldenström macroglobulinemia

2022· article· en· W4403597428 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Anthea Peters

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Hematology Today · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChronic Lymphocytic Leukemia Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTolerabilityMacroglobulinemiaWaldenstrom macroglobulinemiaBruton's tyrosine kinaseMedicineIbrutinibTyrosine kinaseInternal medicineCancer researchOncologyDermatologyPharmacologyAdverse effectLeukemiaLymphomaMultiple myelomaChronic lymphocytic leukemia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Waldenström macroglobulinemia (WM) is an indolent B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) characterized by malignant B cells that produce IgM monoclonal protein. Like other indolent B-cell NHLs, treatment is indicated when patients are symptomatic with lymphadenopathy, splenomegaly or have detrimental cytopenias, but uniquely hyperviscosity and other complications related to gammopathy may present a need for treatment. Currently in Canada chemoimmunotherapy using bendamustine and rituximab (BR) is the favored therapeutic combination for treatment-naïve patients with WM due to a superior efficacy and toxicity profile compared to rituximab plus CHOP and a fixed duration schedule. The availability of Bruton’s tyrosine kinase inhibitors (BTKi) have transformed the treatment landscape for patients with WM, particularly in the relapsed setting. Ibrutinib, a once-daily BTKi, was approved by Health Canada (HC) for WM in 2016 based on two non-randomized studies showing high response rates in heavily pretreated rituximab-refractory patients with sustained efficacy (86% progression-free survival (PFS) at 18 months) and acceptable tolerability. Ibrutinib forms an irreversible covalent bond to the cysteine residue (C481) at the active binding site of BTK. Patients with mutated MYD88 (MYD88MUT), who represent over 90% of patients with WM, have a higher rate of response with ibrutinib than those without (MYD88WT). Aside from its impressive efficacy, its oral administration offers a major advantage in terms of convenience for patients and lower administrative costs for publicly funded health care systems such as in Canada. The toxicity of ibrutinib has become of greater concern with the ongoing emergence of trial data and real-world clinical experience with the drug. The indefinite duration of treatment results in extended exposure of a primarily elderly patient population to toxicities such as increased bleeding risk, atrial fibrillation, hypertension, and infection. Discontinuation of ibrutinib due to adverse events occurs at a higher rate in the real-world compared to clinical trials and has been associated with an inferior overall survival in WM. Fortunately, several BTKis have recently emerged. Both acalabrutinib and zanubrutinib also bind irreversibly to BTK at C481, but both have more selectivity for targeting BTK than ibrutinib. Data has demonstrated that tighter and more selective binding of BTK does translate into fewer adverse effects for patients. The most informative study to date in this regard is the randomized phase 3 clinical trial comparing ibrutinib to zanubrutinib, the ASPEN study. ASPEN is the largest multicentre phase 3 trial to date randomizing 201 patients with MYD88MUT WM to receive ibrutinib at 420 mg daily (n=99) vs. zanubrutinib 160 mg twice daily (n=102), with 37 patients being treatment-naïve and 164 being relapsed or refractory (R/R) with a median of 1 prior line of therapy (range 1-8). The median age at enrolment was 70 however more patients randomized to zanubrutinib than to ibrutinib were >75 years old (33% vs 22%, respectively). Although not statistically significant, a higher rate of complete response (CR)/very good partial response (VGPR) was observed for zanubrutinib vs ibrutinib (28% vs 19%, respectively). With a median follow up of 19.4 months the major response rates (77% vs. 78%) and PFS (85% vs. 84% at 18 months) were also not statistically different in patients receiving zanubrutinib vs. ibrutinib, respectively. However, zanubrutinib was associated with a trend towards less toxicity. In particular, the incidences of all grade atrial fibrillation, diarrhea, bruising, muscle spasms, peripheral edema, and pneumonia were over 10% higher among ibrutinib-treated patients. The incidence of neutropenia was higher for zanubrutinib-treated patients (> 10% difference), although grade ≥3 infection rates were similar in both arms (1.2 and 1.1 events per 100 person-months). Further, more ibrutinib-treated patients required dose reductions (23% vs. 14%) and discontinued treatment (9% vs. 4%) due to adverse events. An analysis of quality of life (QoL) instruments demonstrated a trend towards greater improvement in the zanubrutinib arm, particularly in the subgroup of patients who achieved VGPR. These QoL improvements were most notable in validated instrument subscales encompassing appetite, dyspnea, fatigue, physical functioning and role functioning. The ASPEN trial formed the basis for recent approval of zanubrutinib for WM by HC. Although provincial funding is not yet in place, clinicians in Quebec can access zanubrutinib through the Patient d’exception mechanism. As Canadian hematologists will be able to choose a BTKi for their patient with R/R WM, it is important to review the toxicities reported in trials. Toxicities of BTKis and their management will be discussed in this article.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.257 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Hematology TodaySame topicChronic Lymphocytic Leukemia ResearchFrench-language works237,207