Moore, Timothy D.

8560 Background: Lenalidomide has shown activity in a wide range of hematological malignancies. We conducted a phase II trial of single-agent lenalidomide in indolent non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL). Methods: Patients with relapsed or refractory indolent NHL were eligible, with no limit on the number of previous therapies. Oral lenalidomide 25 mg was self-administered once-daily on days 1–21 of every 28-day cycle for up to 52 weeks as tolerated, or until disease progression. The primary endpoint was overall response rate (ORR), with secondary endpoints of response duration, progression-free survival (PFS), and safety. Results: Forty-three patients were enrolled and were evaluable for response and safety. Patients had received a median of 3 prior systemic therapies (1–17) and half of all patients were refractory to their last therapy. The ORR was 23% (10/43), including a complete response (CR) or unconfirmed CR (CRu) rate of 7%. The median time to first response was 3.6 months (1.7–4.2) and the median time to CR or CRu was 4.2 months (1.9–11.1). Twenty-seven percent (6/22) of patients with follicular lymphoma grade 1 or 2, and 22% (4/18) of patients with small lymphocytic lymphoma responded to therapy. The median duration of response has not reached, but is longer than 16.5 months with 7 of 10 responses ongoing at 15–28 months. Median PFS was 4.4 months (2.5–10.4). Adverse events were consistent with the known safety profile of lenalidomide and manageable; the most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events were neutropenia (30% and 16%, respectively) and thrombocytopenia (14% and 5%, respectively). Conclusions: Oral lenalidomide monotherapy produces durable responses with manageable side effects in relapsed or refractory indolent NHL and warrants further investigation in the treatment of indolent NHL. [Table: see text]

Abstract Background: Indolent non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma (NHL) has a median survival as long as 10 years but is rarely cured. Lenalidomide (Revlimid®), an immunomodulatory drug, is approved in the US for treatment of myelodysplastic syndromes associated with a del[q5] cytogenetic abnormality and is approved both in the US and the EU for the treatment of relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma. Lenalidomide also has activity in chronic lymphocytic leukemia and cutaneous T-cell lymphoma. Aim: This study was designed to assess the safety and efficacy of lenalidomide monotherapy in patients with relapsed/refractory indolent NHL. Methods: Patients with relapsed/refractory indolent NHL with measurable disease ≥ 2cm after at least 1 prior treatment regimen were eligible. Patients received 25 mg lenalidomide orally once daily on Days 1–21 every 28 days and continued therapy for 52 weeks as tolerated or until disease progression. Response and progression were evaluated using the IWLRC methodology. Results: Forty-three patients were enrolled in the study and included in this analysis. The median age was 63 (43–89) and 17 were female. Histology was small lymphocytic lymphoma [SLL] (n=18), follicular center lymphoma grades 1, 2 [FCL] (n=22), nodal marginal B-cell lymphoma (n=2) and extranodal marginal zone B-cell lymphoma of MALT type (n=1). Median time from diagnosis to lenalidomide treatment was 4.5 (0.4–24) years and median number of prior treatment regimens was 3 (1–15). Eleven of the 43 patients (26%) exhibited an objective response (2 complete responses (CR), 1 complete response unconfirmed (CRu), 8 partial responses (PR)), 15 had stable disease (SD), 13 had progressive disease (PD) and 4 were not evaluated. Responses included 4/18 SLL (22%) and 7/22 FCL (32%). Median time to response was 3.6 months (range 1.7–4.1). Progression free survival is 4.6 months for all patients, > 7.7 months (range 4.4 - > 13.5) for responding patients and ongoing. Sixteen patients (37%) required at least one dose reduction with a median time to first dose reduction of 2 months (0.5–9.6). The most common Grade 4 adverse event was neutropenia (14%) and the most common Grade 3 adverse events were neutropenia (21%) and thrombocytopenia (12%). Conclusion: Lenalidomide oral monotherapy is active with manageable side effects in relapsed/refractory indolent NHL.

CRA1008 The full, final text of this abstract will be available at abstract.asco.org at 7:30 AM (EDT) on Monday, June, 3, 2013, and in the Annual Meeting Proceedings online supplement to the June 20, 2013, issue of Journal of Clinical Oncology. Onsite at the Meeting, this abstract will be printed in the Monday edition of ASCO Daily News.

521 Background: S0221 investigated weekly vs q 2 week dosing of doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide (AC) and paclitaxel (P) in patients (pts) with high risk early breast cancer as previously reported (JCO 33:58-64, 2015). After enrollment of 2716 pts randomization to the two AC arms was stopped for futility and an additional 578 pts received 4 cycles of q 2 week AC and were randomized to P weekly (Pw) or P q 2 weeks (P2). We report updated results of the original trial design and the first report of the 578 pts treated with AC x 4 and Pw x 12 or P2 x 6. Methods: Between December 2003 and November 2010, 2716 pts were randomized in a 2x2 factorial design to 1) 15 weeks of weekly AC (A 24 mg/m2/week and C 60 mg/m2/day po) vs 6 cycles of q 2 week AC (A 60 mg/m2 and C 600 mg/m2) and 2) Pw (paclitaxel 80 mg/m2/week x 12) vs P2 (paclitaxel 175 mg/m2 q 2 weeks x 6), with growth factor support as previously described. After study amendment 578 patients received 4 cycles of q 2 week AC followed by Pw or P2. Updated survival was assessed using log-rank tests and Cox regression models. Results: At a median follow-up of 8.5 years, among the pts treated in the original protocol, there were no significant differences among the four treatments for DFS (p=0.21) or OS (p=0.08). The triple-negative subset had worse DFS (P<0.001) than the HER2-positive or ER/PR+/HER2- subsets, with 5 year DFS of 75% vs 83% and 84%, respectively. While we previously found in the triple negative subset that the arm using q 2 weeks for both AC and paclitaxel was marginally superior, the differences among the arms are no longer significant for DFS (p=0.12) or OS (p=0.11). Among the 578 pts assigned ACx4 and randomized to Pw v P2 there were no overall differences in DFS (p=0.70) or OS (p=0.63) after 4.4 years median follow-up. Conclusions: There were no significant differences in DFS or OS between any of the schedules with extended follow-up in the original cohort and no difference in outcome by paclitaxel schedule for the 578 additional patients in the revised protocol. Either paclitaxel schedule may be recommended, with selection based on toxicity, cost, or patient preference rather than efficacy. Support: NCI grants CA32102, CA38926, CA21115, CA21076, CA77597, CA25224, CA77202, CCSRI15469, and Amgen, Inc. Clinical trial information: NCT00070564.

CRA1008 Background: S0221 is a SWOG-coordinated phase III adjuvant chemotherapy intergroup trial in node-positive and high-risk node-negative operable breast cancer which hypothesized that 1) the weekly AC+G regimen is superior to ddAC x 6 and 2) 12 weeks of weekly paclitaxel (wP) is superior to q 2 week paclitaxel x 6 (ddP). Methods: Between December 2003 and November 2010, 2,716 patients were randomized in a 2 x 2 factorial design to 1) AC+G vs ddAC and 2) P 80 mg/m2/week x 12 vs P 175 mg/m2 q 2 weeks x 6. If there was no significant interaction between the factors, the trial was powered to find a disease-free survival hazard ratio (HR) ≤ 0.82 for weekly vs q 2 week for each factor. At the first interim analysis, the AC randomization was halted for futility, and S0221 was closed to accrual 10 November 2010. S0221 reopened 15 December 2010, after which time all patients received 4 cycles of ddAC and randomization to P weekly x 12 and ddP x 6 continued. Accrual halted at a total of 3,294 in January 2012. Results: By September 7, 2012, 487 events and 340 deaths had occurred, prompting the third planned interim analysis. The Data Safety and Monitoring Committee recommended reporting the results since the futility boundary was crossed. A Cox model adjusting for the AC arms had a HR = 1.08 (95% CI 0.90-1.28; p=0.42), with the 99.5% CI excluding the original alternative hypothesis that the HR=0.82. There was no significant interaction of the two factors. Estimated 5-year progression-free survivals were 82% for weekly P and 81% for ddP. Toxicity data were available for 1,385 patients treated with ddP and 1,367 treated with weekly P. Grade 5 toxicity occurred in 4 patients on ddP and 2 on weekly P. Percent grade 3-4 toxicity per arm are shown in the Table. Conclusions: Either ddPx6 or weekly P x 12 are acceptable schedules of P administration. The differences in leukopenia likely reflect ascertainment bias against weekly P. If this is accepted, weekly P x 12 produces less overall toxicity than 6 cycles of ddP. Support: NCI grants CA32102, CA38926, CA21115, CA21076, CA77597, CA25224, CA77202, CCSRI15469, and Amgen, Inc. Clinical trial information: NCT00070564. [Table: see text]

Objectives: The primary objective of NRG Oncology Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 0123 was to test the ability of the angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor captopril to alter the incidence of pulmonary damage after radiation therapy for lung cancer; secondary objectives included analyzing pulmonary cytokine expression, quality of life, and the long-term effects of captopril. Materials and Methods: Eligible patients included stage II-IIIB non–small cell lung cancer, stage I central non–small cell lung cancer, or limited-stage small cell. Patients who met eligibility for randomization at the end of radiotherapy received either captopril or standard care for 1 year. The captopril was to be escalated to 50 mg three times a day. Primary endpoint was incidence of grade 2+ radiation-induced pulmonary toxicity in the first year. Results: Eighty-one patients were accrued between June 2003 and August 2007. Given the low accrual rate, the study was closed early. No significant safety issues were encountered. Eight patients were ineligible for registration or withdrew consent before randomization and 40 patients were not randomized postradiation. Major reasons for nonrandomization included patients’ refusal and physician preference. Of the 33 randomized patients, 20 were analyzable (13 observation, 7 captopril). The incidence of grade 2+ pulmonary toxicity attributable to radiation therapy was 23% (3/13) in the observation arm and 14% (1/7) in the captopril arm. Conclusions: Despite significant resources and multiple amendments, NRG Oncology Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 0123 was unable to test the hypothesis that captopril mitigates radiation-induced pulmonary toxicity. It did show the safety of such an approach and the use of newer angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors started during radiotherapy may solve the accrual problems.

Purpose To determine the optimal dose and schedule of anthracycline and taxane administration as adjuvant therapy for early-stage breast cancer. Patients and Methods A 2 × 2 factorial design was used to test two hypotheses: (1) that a novel continuous schedule of doxorubicin-cyclophosphamide was superior to six cycles of doxorubicin-cyclophosphamide once every 2 weeks and (2) that paclitaxel once per week was superior to six cycles of paclitaxel once every 2 weeks in patients with node-positive or high-risk node-negative early-stage breast cancer. With 3,250 patients, a disease-free survival (DFS) hazard ratio of 0.82 for each randomization could be detected with 90% power with two-sided α = .05. Overall survival (OS) was a secondary outcome. Results Interim analyses crossed the futility boundaries for demonstrating superiority of both once-per-week regimens and once-every-2-weeks regimens. After a median follow-up of 6 years, a significant interaction developed between the two randomization factors (DFS P = .024; OS P = .010) in the 2,716 patients randomly assigned in the original design, which precluded interpretation of the two factors separately. Comparing all four arms showed a significant difference in OS (P = .040) but not in DFS (P = .11), with all treatments given once every 2 weeks associated with the highest OS. This difference in OS seemed confined to patients with hormone receptor–negative/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) –negative tumors (P = .067), with no differences seen with hormone receptor–positive/HER2-negative (P = .90) or HER2-positive tumors (P = .40). Conclusion Patients achieved a similar DFS with any of these regimens. Subset analysis suggests the hypothesis that once-every-2-weeks dosing may be best for patients with hormone receptor–negative/HER2-negative tumors.

PurposeLenalidomide is a novel immunomodulatory agent with antiproliferative activities. Given its efficacy in a wide range of hematologic malignancies, we conducted a phase II trial (NHL-001) of single-agent lenalidomide in indolent non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL).Patients and MethodsPatients with relapsed/refractory indolent NHL were eligible, with no limit on the number of previous therapies. Oral lenalidomide 25 mg was self-administered once daily on days 1 to 21 of every 28-day cycle for up to 52 weeks as tolerated, or until disease progression. The primary end point was objective response rate (ORR), with secondary end points of duration of response (DR), progression-free survival (PFS), and safety.ResultsForty-three enrolled patients were assessable for response and safety. Patients received a median of three prior systemic therapies (range, 1 to 17) and half were refractory to last therapy. ORR was 23% (10 of 43), including a 7% complete response (CR) or unconfirmed CR rate. Twenty-seven percent (six of 22) of patients with follicular lymphoma grade 1 or 2, and 22% (four of 18) with small lymphocytic lymphoma responded to therapy. Median DR was not reached, but was longer than 16.5 months with seven of 10 responses ongoing at 15 to 28 months. Median PFS for the whole group was 4.4 months (95% CI, 2.5 to 10.4 months). Adverse events were predictable and manageable; the most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events were neutropenia (30% and 16%, respectively) and thrombocytopenia (14% and 5%, respectively).ConclusionOral lenalidomide monotherapy produces durable responses with manageable adverse events in patients with relapsed/refractory indolent NHL, warranting further investigation of treatment for indolent NHL.