Yao, Xiaopan

Abstract Background: Immunomodulatory therapy has been shown to be of benefit for the improvement of anemia, thrombocytopenia and splenomegaly in patients with myelofibrosis (MF) initially with thalidomide (Blood2000;96:4007), and further enhanced by combination therapy with corticosteroids (Blood2003;101:2534). We sought to further enhance our previously reported efficacy of single agent lenalidomide for MF patients (Blood2006;108:1158) by combination therapy with prednisone. Methods: Symptomatic patients with MF (all with baseline anemia, hemoglobin <10g/dL or transfusion dependent) were enrolled in the single arm Phase II trial. Adequate neutrophils (>1 x 109/L) and platelets (>100 x 109/L) were required for trial entry. Lenalidomide was administered at 10 mg daily with a 3 month prednisone taper (30mg/daily, 15 mg daily, 15 mg every other day months 1,2, and 3, respectively). Patients with at least stable disease remained on single agent lenalidomide for an additional 3 months. Responses were assessed by the International Working Group for Myelofibrosis Research and Treatment (IWG-MRT) Response Criteria (Blood2006;108:1498). Results: Patients 28 patients were enrolled in the first step of the trial, and a total of 48 patients were enrolled (3 were ineligible because of proximity of prior therapy with 43 deemed evaluable). The enrolled eligible patients (56 % males) had a median age of 64 (range 18–83). At baseline, 52% were red cell transfusion dependent, and the median hemoglobin amongst those non transfusion dependent patients was 8.8 g/dL (range 5.9–12.4). By entry criteria neutrophils (median 5.1 x 109/L (range 1.0–79.4)) and platelets (median 234 x 109/L (range 40–1253)) were adequate. Therapy and Toxicity: A median of 6 cycles of therapy was administered, 10 patients received 3 months, and 25 patients the full 6 months of therapy. Premature discontinuation of therapy occurred in 19 patients; progressive disease (3), toxicity (7), patient withdrawal (5), death from disease (1), comorbidities (2), or seeking alternative therapy other (1). Myelosuppression was the main toxicity with 45% experiencing ≥ grade 3 hematologic toxicity (16%/2% and 23%/26%, grade 3/4 thrombocytopenia and/or neutropenia, respectively) and with 34% of patients having ≥ grade 3 non-hematologic toxicity. Less severe toxicities (< grade 3) were again mainly secondary to myelosuppression (34%) or gastrointestinal (i.e. diarrhea). No significant steroid induced toxicities were observed. Response: Among 43 patients eligible for response assessment the best confirmed response observed was a partial response in 11 (26%), stable disease (54%), and progression during trial in 8 (18%), 1 was not evaluable because no medication was taken. Among the latter responses improvement in anemia was seen in 9 (21%) (IWG-MRT clinical improvement (CI)-sustained normalization of hemoglobin, >2 g/dL increase, or transfusion independence for >2 months), and major reductions in spleen size in 4 (9%) (IWG-MRT CI - sustained >50% decrease). Serial marrow analysis was available in a subset which did not show any significant resolution of disease related fibrosis, hypercellularity or increased angiogenesis typical of MF. Conclusions: 1) Lenalidomide plus a corticosteroid taper was active in patients with MF primarily in those who suffer from anemia, but myelosuppression (particularly neutropenia is common) 2) Response rates observed with combination therapy are almost identical to our previously reported response rate seen with single agent lenalidomide (22% single agent, 21% in this trial), 3) Current results would suggest that given the myelosuppression observed, and rates of efficacy, thalidomide and prednisone would be first line for treating MF associated cytopenias with lenalidomide being considered second line (first line if a del(5q) present).

Abstract Results from clinical trials may change with time. Data presented in initial abstracts or early reports are often different from what appears in subsequent publications, sometimes due to a more rigorous analysis (as in initial response rates) or to maturity of data (as in reports of survival). Survival curves usually provide projected data based on Kaplan-Meier analyses. Such data may change with time when unexpected events occur (as, for example, relapse after T-cell depleted allogeneic transplants) or more patients advance to the initially projected time point. For AML, several groups have reported that there are very few relapses beyond 3 years. At issue is the optimal time for reporting these survival data. Table 1 reports data from 6 consecutive clinical trials addressing induction and post-remission questions in AML patients performed by ECOG. These data compare the 3-year overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) for the identical cohorts of patients as presented at 1 year and at 3 years after completion of the study accrual. PC 486 was a phase II study of induction therapy followed by allogeneic or autologous transplant without prior consolidation. E 3489 was a US intergroup study in which patients received post-induction therapy using an allogeneic transplant (allo), an autologous transplant (auto) or chemotherapy (chemo). E1490 was a study in older adults of induction and consolidation with GM-CSF or placebo. E2491 was an intergroup study comparing ATRA induction versus standard chemotherapy in patients with APL. After consolidation, patients were randomized to maintenance with ATRA versus observation (obs). E3993 was a study in older adults comparing priming with GMCSF or placebo. E4995 was a phase II study of intensified induction and consolidation followed by an autologous transplant. For the same cohorts of patients the 3-year OS tends to decrease as the time from completion of study accrual increases. When looking at the DFS, while a decrease may also occur, in several studies there was an improved DFS with time (for example, in E2491, chemo to ATRA, or in E3993 with GM-CSF priming). There were no changes in either OS or DFS beyond 3 years (data not shown). Table 1: Three-year OS and DFS Presented at Different Time Points OS (%) DFS (%) Study One year Three years One year Three years PC 486 auto or allo HSCT 42 → 38 45 → 39 E 3489 allo HSCT 50 → 50 48 → 47 auto HSCT 47 → 46 39 → 39 chemo 56 → 51 36 → 36 E 1490 Induction / consolidation GM-CSF 23 → 22 23 → 24 placebo 15 → 12 16 → 15 E2491 APL induction+ maintenance ATRA + ATRA 87 → 84 72 → 73 ATRA + obs 83 → 80 61 → 60 chemo + ATRA 81 → 75 43 → 58 chemo + obs 54 → 45 16 → 18 E 3993 Induction/consolidation GM-CSF priming 13 → 11 5 → 10 placebo 14 → 14 9 → 9 E 4995 Induction / consolidation / auto HSCT 54 → 48 63 → 53 In conclusion: For large cooperative group studies, treatment results in AML presented one year from conclusion of study accrual are unlikely to dramatically alter the overall results. Nonetheless, some differences may occur, both in OS and DFS, warranting caution in interpreting the data and comparing with other published reports. Such differences are likely to be even greater if data are presented upon completion of study accrual, prior to one year - although, in a cooperative group setting, this should be balanced against the need to release data for future planning. Publication of interim data, before conclusion of the study accrual, may be misleading and are to be strongly discouraged. Three years appear to be the appropriate time for the publication of definitive survival data.

Abstract Abstract 702 Background: Large granular lymphocyte (LGL) leukemia is characterized by clonal expansion of cytotoxic T cells. Prominent clinical features include neutropenia, anemia, and rheumatoid arthritis. The terminal effector memory phenotype (CD3+/CD8+/CD57+/CD45RA+/CD62L-) of leukemic LGL suggest a pivotal chronic antigen driven immune response. LGL survival is then promoted by PDGF and IL-15 (Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 105:16308, 2008), resulting in global dysregulation of apoptosis and resistance to normal pathways of activation-induced death (Blood 112:770, 2008). These pathogenic features explain why treatment of LGL leukemia is based on immunosuppression therapy. However, no standard therapy has been established due to the absence of large prospective trials. Methods: Eligibility criteria included increased number of LGL (CD3+CD57+ cells > 400/ul or CD8+ cells >650/ul) plus evidence of clonal rearrangement of T cell receptor gene. Treatment indications included the following categories: a) severe neutropenia (ANC < 500/ul); b) neutropenia associated with recurrent infections; c) symptomatic anemia; and, d) transfusion-dependent anemia. Initial Treatment: (Step 1) consisted of methotrexate (MTX) at 10 mg/m2 po in divided doses once weekly. Prednisone was given at 1 mg/kg po × 30 days and then tapered off in the subsequent 24 days. Patients not responding to MTX received cyclophosphamide (CY) at 100 mg po daily with the same prednisone schedule (Step 2). Treatment response was assessed after four months of therapy as: complete remission (CR): normal CBC (ANC ≥ 1,500/ul, lymphocyte count <4,000/ul, hemoglobin ≥ 11 g/dl, and platelet count > 100,000/ul. In addition, LGL counts needed to be within normal range. Partial response (PR) was defined as improvement in hematologic parameters in the absence of CR: 1) ANC > 500, as long as this represented 50% increase (category a); 2) improvement in ANC ≥ 50% over baseline (category b); 3) increase in hemoglobin by ≥ 1 g/dl for at least four months duration (category c); and, 4) decrease in monthly transfusion requirement of > 50% for at least four months (category d). Progressive disease (PD) was defined as worsening of hematologic parameters in patients previously achieving PR/CR. No response (NR) was defined as lack of CR/PR. Results: Response data are shown for Step 1 (Table 1) and for Step 2 (Table 2). Overall response rate (CR/PR) for MTX was 37%. In patients failing MTX, the overall response to CY was 64%. There were two infectious deaths during Step 1 therapy. Conclusion: Data documenting efficacy of immunosuppressive therapies commonly utilized in LGL leukemia (MTX, CY, Cyclosporine) are limited to 300 patients published primarily as small retrospective studies. Such data show an overall response rate to MTX of 58% (56/96 patients). Here in the only large prospective trial we observed an overall response rate of 37%. Overall response rate of 64% for CY was not statistically different than MTX. However, given that CY response rate was observed in MTX failures, future studies should consider evaluation of CY as initial therapy. Disclosures: Off Label Use: Immunosuppressive therapies for LGL leukemia including Methotrexate and Cyclophosphamide.

Abstract Abstract 3315 The Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) trial, E2902, was a randomized phase III intergroup trial of the Farnesyl Transferase Inhibitor, R115777(Tipifarnib), as maintenance therapy for acute myeloid leukemia (AML). Patients (pts) with AML in remission after requiring salvage therapy (primary induction failure or second or subsequent remission) or over the age of 60 in first remission were eligible. A confirmatory bone marrow exam was required within 2 weeks prior to randomization. Pts were eligible if they were in a complete remission (CR) or morphologic remission (MR). Consolidation or post remission therapy prior to enrollment was allowed but not required. Pts who had received an allogeneic transplant in this remission were ineligible. Adequate blood counts (absolute neutrophil count >= 1000/mm3 and platelet count >=50,000/mm3), and normal renal, and hepatic function were required within 2 weeks of randomization. Pts were randomized to either receive tipifarnib twice daily (BID) or to observation. The main objective of this study was to compare disease free survival in the two groups. Although the study has completed accrual, an insufficient number of events have been recorded at this point to allow for evaluation of the survival data. However, toxicity data are now available. Between August 2004 and December 2009, 144 pts were accrued to the study. The median age of the pts is 70 (range 28–86). Seventy-three pts (51%) were male and 135 pts (94%) were white. Seventy-three pts were enrolled onto the treatment arm (Arm A) and 71 pts were enrolled onto the observation arm (Arm B). When the study was initially opened, pts on Arm A were treated with tipifarnib at a dose of 400 mg BID with dose reductions and interruptions defined per protocol for toxicity. After the first planned interim analysis, based on toxicity data, the ECOG Data Monitoring Committee recommended that the starting dose be decreased to 300 mg BID. The majority of pts enrolled on the study were in first CR (CR1) (Table 2). Among the 30 pts treated with the initial 400 mg BID dose, 23 pts (77%) had their dose held or reduced to a lower dose in the subsequent treatment cycles. For the 41 pts whose initial dose was 300 mg BID, 61% required either dose modification (n=19) or discontinued (n=6) due to toxicity. Table 1: Baseline characteristics Arm A 400 mg BID n=31 Arm A 300 mg BID n=42 Arm B Observation n=71 CR1 16 (52%) 34 (81%) 47 (66%) >CR1 10 (32%) 8 (19%) 16 (23%) Unknown 5 (16%) 16 (11%) Table 2: Toxicity Toxicity Type Arm A 400 mg n=31 Arm A 300 mg n=41 Arm B Observation n=69 Grade (n) Grade (n) Grade (n) 3 4 3 4 3 4 Hemoglobin 1 1 6 1 1 2 Leukocytes 2 4 16 4 3 Neutrophils 5 8 3 7 1 Platelets 4 10 11 11 1 5 Cardiac-ischemia 1 Fatigue 1 Diarrhea 1 Nausea 1 Febrile neutropenia 1 1 Infection w/gr 3-4 neutrophils (ANC) 1 Infection Gr0-2 ANC 1 1 3 GGT 1 Hypokalemia 1 Confusion 1 Agitation 1 Neuropathy-sensory 1 Back pain 1 Worst degree Non Hematologic 4 2 9 1 1 While non-hematologic toxicity was acceptable, significant hematologic toxicity was seen in pts treated at an initial dose of either 400 mg or 300 mg BID (Table 2). Of note, hematologic toxicity was also seen on the observation arm although less frequently than with both treatment doses. Non-hematologic toxicity was much less frequent overall and there were no significant non-hematologic toxicities in the observation arm. Reduction of the initial dose did not ameliorate either the hematologic or non-hematologic toxicity seen on the treatment arms. There was however no fatal toxicity at either dose level. Results of the randomization with respect to efficacy remain essential to determining the utility of this agent as maintenance therapy in AML. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

A multicenter Eastern Cooperative Group (ECOG) phase 2 trial assessed whether adding prednisone to lenalidomide would improve previously reported responses in persons with myelofibrosis (MF). Forty-eight subjects with anemia (42 evaluable) received lenalidomide, 10 mg/d, with a 3-month low-dose prednisone taper. Ten subjects received 3 months, and 25 received 6 months of therapy. Myelosuppression was the main toxicity with 88% with ≥ grade 3 hematologic toxicity and 45% ≥ grade 3 nonhematologic toxicity. There were responses in 10 subjects (23%) using the International Working Group for Myelofibrosis Research and Treatment (IWG-MRT)–defined clinical improvement of anemia in 8 (19%) and/or decreased spleen size in 4 (10%). Serial bone marrow analysis showed no resolution of disease-related fibrosis or angiogenesis. With a median follow-up of 2.3 years, 23 subjects are alive. Lenali-domide and prednisone for myelofibro-sis evaluated through a multicentered-cooperative group mechanism is only modestly active and myelosuppre-sive. This study was registered at http://clinicaltrials.gov as NCT00227591.