Back to Authors

Connors, Joseph M.

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1361-7531

Mayo Clinic

BC Cancer, Centre for Lymphoid Cancer, Vancouver, BC, Canada

Citations 46

Brentuximab Vedotin Combined with ABVD or AVD for Patients with Newly Diagnosed Advanced Stage Hodgkin Lymphoma: Long Term Outcomes
Ansell, Stephen, Park, Steven I., Fanale, Michelle A. , Younes, Anas , Connors, Joseph M.

Blood | November 17, 2019 | Volume: 124 | Issue: 21 | Pages: 292-292

10.1182/blood.v124.21.292.292 Get It

Background: The ABVD regimen containing doxorubicin, bleomycin, vinblastine, and dacarbazine is a common standard of care for the frontline treatment of advanced stage Hodgkin lymphoma (Santoro 1987; Duggan 2003) and is curative for the majority of patients; however, up to 30% of patients require a secondary therapy. Hodgkin Reed-Sternberg cells of classical HL (cHL) typically express CD30. In a pivotal phase 2 trial brentuximab vedotin (A, ADCETRIS®), comprised of an anti-CD30 monoclonal antibody conjugated by a protease-cleavable linker to a microtubule-disrupting agent, monomethyl auristatin E (MMAE) induced an objective response rate (ORR) of 75% and complete response rate (CR) of 34% in highly treatment-refractory patients with cHL (Younes 2012). Methods: We conducted a phase 1, open-label, multicenter study to evaluate the safety and efficacy of A when administered in combination with standard therapy (ABVD) or the same regimen without bleomycin (AVD) (Younes 2013). Adult patients with newly diagnosed advanced stage (II bulky, II B, III or IV; 80% stage III or IV) received doses of 0.6, 0.9, or 1.2 mg/kg A with standard doses of ABVD or 1.2 mg/kg with AVD, depending on cohort assignment on Days 1 and 15 of each 28-day cycle for up to 6 cycles of therapy. Previously we reported that among patients assessable for response 95% of patients given ABVD+A achieved a CR, as did 96% of patients given AVD+A. None of 26 patients given AVD+A but 11 of 25 (44%) given ABVD+A experienced pulmonary toxicity, including 2 deaths, establishing that A cannot be safely combined with bleomycin. In this current study we provide the long term survival and safety data on patients enrolled in the phase 1 trial. Results: In total 51 patients were assigned to either ABVD+A (n=25) or AVD+A (n=26). 1 patient who withdrew from the trial during the first cycle of ABVD+A is excluded from this analysis and 1 patient who received 3 cycles of ABVD+A, then withdrew, then received 3 cycles of ABVD alone and 2 patients who died during treatment (pulmonary toxicity) are included (total n=50). Median follow-up from diagnosis for the 24 patients treated with ABVD+A is 41 months (range 9-51 months) and for the 26 patients treated with AVD+A, 31 months (range 9-35 months). All 26 patients treated with AVD+A have been followed longer than the longest time to relapse (7 months). 45 patients remain in first CR and 5 treatment failures have occurred: 4 in the ABVD+A cohort (2 toxic deaths; 2 relapses (9 and 23 months from diagnosis)) and 1 after AVD+A (7 months from diagnosis). 3y-failure-free survival (3y-FFS) is 83% and 96% for ABVD+A and AVD+A, respectively, and 3y-overall survival (3y-OS), is 92% and 100%. No additional toxic deaths have occurred in follow-up. Conclusions: These updated outcomes reflecting the impact of adding brentuximab vedotin (1.2 mg/kg) to standard doses of AVD for classical Hodgkin lymphoma, demonstrating 96% 3y-FFS and 100% 3y-OS with no major unexpected toxicity, strongly support the current large international trial comparing AVD-A (AVD+1.2mg/kg brentuximab vedotin) to standard ABVD (ECHELON-1, clinicaltrials.gov NCT01712490), which may identify a new, less toxic gold standard treatment for advanced stage classical Hodgkin lymphoma. Disclosures Connors: Seattle Genetics: Research Funding. Off Label Use: brentuximab vedotin in phase 1 trial. Ansell:Seattle Genetics: Research Funding. Park:Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Millennium/Takeda: Research Funding. Fanale:Seattle Genetics: Research Funding. Younes:Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Millennium/Takeda: Research Funding.
Brentuximab Vedotin with Chemotherapy for Stage 3/4 Classical Hodgkin Lymphoma (cHL): 4-Year Update of the Echelon-1 Study
Straus, David J. , Alekseev, Sergey , Lech‐Marańda, Ewa , Feldman, Tatyana , Ramchandren, Radhakrishnan , Hutchings, Martin , Muñoz, Javier, Kim, Won-Seog, Advani, Ranjana H. , Ansell, Stephen M. , Younes, Anas , Gallamini, Andrea , Miao, Harry , Fenton, Keenan , Forero-Torres, Andres , Picardi, Marco, Advani, Ranjana H , Lech-Maranda, Ewa , Bartlett, Nancy L. , Długosz‐Danecka, Monika , Illés, Árpád , Smolewski, Piotr , Savage, Kerry J. , Walewski, Jan , Zinzani, Pier Luigi , Connors, Joseph M. , Radford, John , Liu, Rachael

Blood | November 14, 2019 | Volume: 134 | Issue: Supplement_1 | Pages: 4026-4026

10.1182/blood-2019-124116 Get It

Introduction: As previously reported, the combination of brentuximab vedotin with doxorubicin, vinblastine and dacarbazine (A+AVD) demonstrated a statistically significant improvement in modified progression free survival (modified PFS) compared with doxorubicin, bleomycin, vinblastine and dacarbazine (ABVD) in patients with newly diagnosed Stage III or IV classical HL in the phase 3 ECHELON-1 trial (NCT01712490). The benefit of A+AVD in the ITT population observed in the primary analysis was maintained at 3-years median follow-up [3-year PFS: A+AVD: 83.1% (79.9-85.9), ABVD: 76% (72.4-79.2)] and appears independent of interim PET status, disease stage, and prognostic risk factors. Here we present the efficacy and safety results of longer follow-up at a median 43.3 months. Methods: Newly diagnosed patients with Stage III or IV cHL were randomized 1:1 to receive A+AVD (n=664) or ABVD (n=670) intravenously on days 1 and 15 of each 28-day cycle for up to 6 cycles. The primary endpoint of the study was modified PFS per independent central review. The present follow-up PFS analysis is exploratory and per investigator assessment, with a cutoff date of June 17th, 2019. Patients with ongoing peripheral neuropathy (PN) at end of treatment were followed for resolution or improvement (defined as improved by ≥1 grade from worst grade as of the latest assessment) during the post-treatment follow-up period. Results: With a median follow-up of 43.3 months, the 42-month PFS per investigator for all patients was 82.4% (95% CI, 79.1-85.2) on the A+AVD arm and 76.2% (95% CI, 72.6-79.4) on the ABVD arm [overall HR 0.697 (95% CI, 0.547-0.890)]. Exploratory subgroup analyses of PET2(+) and PET2(-) patients showed a treatment effect in favor of A+AVD. The 42-month PFS in PET2(-) patients was 85.0% (95% CI, 81.6-87.7) for A+AVD and 79.6% (95% CI, 75.9-82.8) for ABVD [overall HR 0.695 (95% CI, 0.526-0.919)]; in PET2(+) patients 42-month PFS was 68.3% (95% CI, 54.5-78.7) for A+AVD and 51.5% (95% CI, 38.2-63.4) for ABVD [overall HR 0.552 (95% CI, 0.308-0.989)]. Upon continued follow-up, 81% (356/442) of patients with PN in the A+AVD arm had either complete resolution (64%, 283/442) or improvement (17%, 73/442) of their PN events compared with 83% (236/286) with either complete resolution (74%, 212/286) or improvement (8%, 24/286) in the ABVD arm. Among patients with ongoing PN after continued follow-up, the majority were Grade 1/2 events, with 89% (141/159; 59% Grade 1) and 95% (70/74; 65% Grade 1) on the A+AVD and ABVD arms, respectively. Overall survival data are not yet mature; per protocol, the final analysis will be performed after 112 deaths have occurred. Additional follow-up at an estimated median of ~4 years, including data from prespecified subgroups, will be presented. Conclusions: With a median follow-up of 43.3 months, A+AVD continues to provide a robust, durable benefit for patients with previously untreated Stage III or IV cHL compared with ABVD; the benefit is evident regardless of patient status at interim PET [PET2(+) or PET2(-)] and without the need for treatment intensification. PN continued to completely resolve or improve in patients on the A+AVD and ABVD arms. Together, these data further support the clinical advantages of A+AVD versus ABVD as treatment for patients with previously untreated Stage III or IV cHL. Disclosures Bartlett: Affimed Therapeutics: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Dynavax: Research Funding; Forty-Seven: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; Immune Design: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Kite Pharma: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Medimmune: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Millennium: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Straus:Elsevier (PracticeUpdate): Consultancy, Honoraria; Hope Funds for Cancer Research: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria. Dlugosz-Danecka:Servier: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Macrogenomics: Research Funding; Roche: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Illes:Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Feldman:Takeda: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Cell Medica: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Viracta: Research Funding; Bayer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Kite Pharma: Honoraria, Other: Travel expenses, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Pharmacyclics: Honoraria, Other: Travel expenses, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Research Funding; Portola Pharma: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; Eisai: Research Funding; Corvus: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; AbbVie: Honoraria, Other: Travel expenses, Speakers Bureau; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel expenses, Speakers Bureau; Kyowa Hakko Kirin: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding. Smolewski:Roche: Other: Travel Expenses. Savage:Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; BMS, Merck, Novartis, Verastem, Abbvie, Servier, and Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria. Walewski:Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel Expenses, Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria, Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Servier: Honoraria; Gilead: Other: Travel Expenses; Amgen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; GlaxoSmithKline: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Zinzani:Portola: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Immune Design: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Sandoz: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Servier: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celltrion: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Sanofi: Consultancy; Eusapharma: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; MSD: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Verastem: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Kyowa Kirin: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; TG Therapeutics: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Hutchings:Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel Expenses, Research Funding; Genmab: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel Expenses, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel Expenses, Research Funding. Radford:AstraZeneca: Equity Ownership, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria; ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria; GSK: Equity Ownership. Munoz:AstraZeneca: Speakers Bureau; Kite Pharma: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Pharmacyclics LLC an AbbVie Company: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Fosunkite: Speakers Bureau; Kyowa: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Bayer: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Portola: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding. Kim:Roche: Research Funding; Kyowa-Kirin: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; J&J: Research Funding; Mundipharma: Research Funding; Celltrion: Research Funding; Donga: Research Funding. Advani:Cell Medica, Ltd: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Kura: Research Funding; Infinity Pharma: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Bayer: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Research Funding; Celmed: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Autolus: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Agensys: Research Funding; Stanford University: Employment, Equity Ownership; Takeda: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Kyowa Kirin Pharmaceutical Developments, Inc.: Consultancy; Regeneron: Research Funding; Millennium: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Roche/Genentech: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Gilead Sciences, Inc./Kite Pharma, Inc.: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Forty-Seven: Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Ansell:Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; Affimed: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; Trillium: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; Regeneron: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; Trillium: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; Regeneron: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; Regeneron: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment. Younes:Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Curis: Honoraria, Research Funding; Merck: Honoraria, Research Funding; Abbvie: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Biopath: Consultancy; Xynomics: Consultancy; Epizyme: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; HCM: Consultancy; BMS: Research Funding; Syndax: Research Funding. Gallamini:Takeda: Consultancy; Roche: Consultancy. Miao:Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Cambridge, MA, a wholly owned subsidiary of Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited: Employment, Equity Ownership. Liu:Takeda: Employment. Fenton:Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Forero-Torres:Seattle Genetics: Employment, Equity Ownership, Honoraria, Research Funding.
Older Patients (pts) with Previously Untreated Classical Hodgkin Lymphoma (cHL): A Detailed Analysis from the Phase 3 ECHELON-1 Study
Younes, Anas , Ansell, Stephen M. , Kim, Won Seog , Feldman, Tatyana , Oki, Yasuhiro , Grigg, Andrew , Pocock, Christopher, Fenton, Keenan , Engley, Gerald, Miao, Harry , Jolin, Hina, Gautam, Ashish , Gallamini, Andrea , Evens, Andrew M. , Connors, Joseph M. , Radford, John , Tuscano, Joseph M. , Savage, Kerry J. , Długosz‐Danecka, Monika , Liu, Rachael

Blood | October 14, 2019 | Volume: 132 | Issue: Supplement 1 | Pages: 1618-1618

10.1182/blood-2018-99-112178 Get It

Abstract Background Survival rates for older pts with advanced HL (aged ≥60 yrs) were historically poor with doxorubicin, bleomycin, vinblastine and dacarbazine (ABVD). Reasons may include decreased tolerance of therapy, increased toxicity (particularly with bleomycin), comorbidities, and disease biology. The pivotal phase 3 ECHELON-1 study demonstrated superior 2-yr modified progression-free survival (mPFS) with frontline brentuximab vedotin + doxorubicin, vinblastine and dacarbazine (A+AVD) vs ABVD in pts with stage III/IV cHL (Connors JM et al, NEJM 2018). The study allowed entry of older pts, with no upper age limit. Alternative dosing schedules of the A+AVD regimen have been studied (e.g., sequential brentuximab vedotin before and after AVD; NCT01476410, Evens AM et al, J Clin Oncol 2018). We report efficacy and safety results from ECHELON-1 for older pts with cHL and compare these with those for pts aged <60 yrs. Methods mPFS per independent review facility (IRF) for pts ≥60 years was a prespecified subgroup analysis of ECHELON-1. Additional exploratory safety and efficacy analyses were also assessed and compared with younger pts (<60 yrs). The study was not powered for age-based subgroup analyses; p-values are descriptive without multiplicity adjustment. Results 14% (186/1334) of pts in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population were aged ≥60 yrs (A+AVD, n=84; ABVD, n=102) and included in the sub analyses. Median age (range) of older pts was: A+AVD, 68.0 yrs (60-82); ABVD, 66.0 yrs (60-83). Baseline pt and disease characteristics in older pts were similar in both arms. ECOG PS scores were 0 (36% vs 36%), 1 (52% vs 54%), and 2 (12% vs 10%) in A+AVD and ABVD arms, respectively. Pts received a median of 6 cycles with mean relative dose intensities for each drug (%) in older pts of: A+AVD, 92.3, 96.6, 93.3, and 97.9; ABVD, 97.3, 88.7, 93.3, and 95.9. With median follow-up of ~25 months, 2-yr mPFS per IRF was similar in both arms for older ITT pts (A+AVD 70.3% [95% CI: 58.4, 79.4] vs ABVD 71.4% [95% CI: 60.5, 79.8]; HR=1.00 [95% CI: 0.58, 1.72]; p=0.993). An exploratory analysis of standard PFS per investigator (INV) showed HR=0.85 ([95% CI: 0.49, 1.48]; p=0.576) (Table 1). For older pts with stage IV cHL (A+AVD n=51; ABVD n=67), there was an increase in 2-yr PFS per INV with A+AVD vs ABVD (74.0% [95% CI: 59.5, 84.0] vs 59.9% [95% CI: 45.6, 71.5]; HR, 0.66 [95% CI: 0.34, 1.26]; p=0.20); mPFS per IRF improvement with A+AVD in older stage IV pts was lower (HR=0.80; [95% CI: 0.42, 1.53]). In younger stage III/IV pts (<60 yrs) 2-yr mPFS per IRF and PFS per INV were also higher compared with older pts in both arms (Table 1). 66 of 83 older A+AVD pts required ≥1 dose modification of brentuximab vedotin, reasons were: dose reduction (n=27), dose held (n=4), dose delayed (n=51), brentuximab vedotin discontinued (n=17). In older pts, grade (G) 3/4 AEs occurred in 88% of A+AVD pts vs 80% ABVD pts; for younger pts, rates were 82% (A+AVD) vs 63% (ABVD) (Table 2). In older pts there were 3 (4%) on-study deaths in the A+AVD arm (1 each: hemophagocytosis, neutropenic sepsis, and myocardial infarction) and 5 (5%) with ABVD (all pulmonary-related). In pts <60 yrs, there were 6 on-study deaths (1%) with A+AVD vs 8 (1%) with ABVD. G3 neutropenia in older pts was (70%) A+AVD pts vs (59%) ABVD pts, and febrile neutropenia (FN) in 31 (37%) vs 17 (17%) pts. In older pts who had G-CSF primary prophylaxis (PP) neutropenia was seen in 4/10 (40%) A+AVD pts vs 1/9 (11%) ABVD pts (on-study FN in 3 [30%] vs 2 [22%] pts). In older pts, treatment-emergent peripheral neuropathy (PN) was reported in 54 (65%) of A+AVD pts vs 42 (43%) of ABVD pts (G≥3 in 15 [18%] vs 3 [3%] pts), respectively. In pts <60 yrs PN was reported in 388 (67%) A+AVD pts vs 244 (43%) ABVD pts (G≥3 in 55 [9%] vs 8 [1%] pts), respectively. In older pts at last follow-up, 65% (35/54) of A+AVD pts and 60% (25/42) of ABVD pts had complete resolution (A+AVD, 39%; ABVD, 38%) or improvement (A+AVD, 26%; ABVD, 21%) of PN events. 2% older A+AVD pts had pulmonary AEs (both G1/2 pulmonary infiltration) vs 13% older ABVD pts. Conclusions For older ECHELON-1 pts, mPFS and PFS were similar in both arms. In the larger subgroup of younger pts, mPFS and PFS were improved vs older pts. As expected, incidence of treatment-emergent AEs was higher in older pts, with regimen-specific AEs seen, including fatal pulmonary events in ABVD pts. The high incidence of FN in older A+AVD pts points to the need for G-CSF PP. Disclosures Evens: Acerta: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics International DMC: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Affimed: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bayer: Consultancy; Tesaro: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy. Connors:Merck: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Roche Canada: Research Funding; NanoString Technologies: Patents & Royalties: Named Inventor on a patent licensed to NanoString Technologies, Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; F Hoffmann-La Roche: Research Funding; Bayer Healthcare: Research Funding; Cephalon: Research Funding; Bristol Myers-Squibb: Research Funding; Lilly: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding. Younes:Sanofi: Honoraria; Merck: Honoraria; Astra Zeneca: Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria; Incyte: Honoraria; Seattle Genetics: Honoraria; Bayer: Honoraria; Novartis: Research Funding; Curis: Research Funding; J&J: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria, Research Funding; Abbvie: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; BMS: Honoraria, Research Funding. Ansell:Merck & Co: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Celldex: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding. Radford:Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; GlaxoSmithKline: Equity Ownership; AstraZeneca: Equity Ownership; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Feldman:Seattle Genetics: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Speakers Bureau; Pharmacyclics: Speakers Bureau; Johnson and Johnson: Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Speakers Bureau; Portola: Research Funding; KITE: Speakers Bureau. Tuscano:Takeda: Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding; Amgen: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Seattle Genetics: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding. Oki:Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Takeda Millenium: Honoraria, Research Funding; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Employment. Grigg:Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Pocock:Kent & Canterbury Hospital: Employment. Dlugosz-Danecka:Roche: Consultancy; Servier: Consultancy. Fenton:Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Engley:Seattle Genetics: Employment. Liu:Millennium Pharmaceuticals Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited: Employment. Miao:Millennium Pharmaceuticals Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited: Employment. Jolin:Takeda Pharmaceuticals International Co.: Employment. Gautam:Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Cambridge, MA, USA, a wholly owned subsidiary of Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited: Employment. Gallamini:Takeda: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau.
Resolution of Peripheral Neuropathy (PN) in Patients Who Received A+AVD or ABVD in the Phase 3 ECHELON-1 Trial
Younes, Anas , Gallamini, Andrea , Ansell, Stephen M. , Kim, Won Seog , Kaminski, Mark , Kalakonda, Nagesh , Pettengell, Ruth , Engley, Gerald, Fenton, Keenan , Purevjal, Indra, Miao, Harry , Gautam, Ashish , Radford, John , Connors, Joseph M. , Gopal, Ajay K. , Cheong, June‐Won , Flinn, Ian W. , Długosz‐Danecka, Monika , Liu, Rachael , Kuruvilla, John

Blood | October 14, 2019 | Volume: 132 | Issue: Supplement 1 | Pages: 2921-2921

10.1182/blood-2018-99-111893 Get It

Abstract Background: The pivotal phase 3 ECHELON-1 study demonstrated superior efficacy of brentuximab vedotin plus doxorubicin, vinblastine and dacarbazine (A+AVD) versus doxorubicin, bleomycin, vinblastine and dacarbazine (ABVD) in patients with previously untreated advanced stage classical Hodgkin lymphoma (cHL) with a 2-year modified progression-free survival (mPFS) of 82.1% in the A+AVD group versus 77.2% in the ABVD group (Hazard Ratio=0.77; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.60, 0.98; p=0.04). PN is a known toxicity associated with anti-mitotic agents, including vinblastine and the MMAE component of brentuximab vedotin. In the ECHELON-1 study, the incidence of any-grade PN events was 67% (442 of 662 patients) and 43% (286 of 659 patients) in the A+AVD and ABVD arms, respectively; the incidence of grade ≥3 PN was 11% and 2%, respectively. At the time of the initial analysis, 67% of A+AVD-treated patients had either resolution (43%) or improvement (24%) of PN events. A total of the 92% of ongoing PN events were grade 1 (64%) or grade 2 (29%). Here, we report rates of PN resolution and improvement in patients participating in the ECHELON-1 study after long-term follow-up. Methods: Patients with Stage III or IV cHL were randomized 1:1 to receive up to six cycles of A+AVD (n=664) or ABVD (n=670). Pre-existing PN was an exclusion factor at study entry. Peripheral neuropathy was determined on the basis of a standardized MedDRA query; patients who developed PN were monitored throughout the study and those with ongoing PN at end of treatment were followed for resolution or improvement during the post-treatment follow-up period; follow-up visits were scheduled for every 12 weeks ±1 week until 36 months, then every 6 months until study closure. PN resolution was defined as completely resolved and improvement was defined as improved by ≥1 grade from worst grade as of the latest assessment. Results: At the time of the primary analysis, 51% (226/442) and 61% (174/286) of patients in the A+AVD and ABVD arms, respectively, had resolution or improvement of PN events at EOT. Upon continued follow-up (~10 additional months) for approximately 30 months (range 0-78.5) after end of treatment, 76% (335/442) of patients with PN in the A+AVD arm had either complete resolution (59%, 260/442) or improvement (17%, 75/442) of their PN events compared with 82% (234/286) with either resolution (72%) or improvement (10%) in the ABVD arm. In the A+AVD arm, 90% of ongoing PN cases (n=182) were grade 1/2; grade 1=58% (n=106), grade 2=32% (n=58). Residual grade 3 PN was reported in 9% (n=17) of patients (1 patient with grade 4 PN died before resolution). In the ABVD arm, residual PN (n=81) was grade 1 (65%; n=53), grade 2 (30%; n=24), and grade 3 (5%; n=4). For the subset of patients with PN that had not resolved by end of treatment, the median time to resolution of all PN events from AE start date was 28 weeks for A+AVD and 14 weeks for ABVD, the median time to improvement of PN was 39 weeks for A+AVD and 18.5 weeks for ABVD. Conclusions: After approximately 2.5 years of continued follow-up, PN continues to resolve and improve for patients who were treated with A+AVD or ABVD in the ECHELON-1 study. In both study arms, the majority of ongoing PN cases are grade 1 or grade 2. Further follow-up is ongoing. Disclosures Radford: Celgene: Research Funding; ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; GlaxoSmithKline: Equity Ownership; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; AstraZeneca: Equity Ownership. Connors:Takeda: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Honoraria, Research Funding; Roche Canada: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Cephalon: Research Funding; Bristol Myers-Squibb: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Bayer Healthcare: Research Funding; NanoString Technologies: Patents & Royalties: Named Inventor on a patent licensed to NanoString Technologies, Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; F Hoffmann-La Roche: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Lilly: Research Funding. Younes:Astra Zeneca: Research Funding; J&J: Research Funding; Curis: Research Funding; BMS: Honoraria, Research Funding; Bayer: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria; Sanofi: Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Merck: Honoraria; Seattle Genetics: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Incyte: Honoraria; Abbvie: Honoraria; Novartis: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding. Gallamini:Takeda: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Ansell:Affimed: Research Funding; Merck & Co: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Celldex: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding. Gopal:Aptevo: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Gilead: Consultancy, Research Funding; Brim: Consultancy; Spectrum: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy; Teva: Research Funding; Asana: Consultancy. Flinn:Trillium: Research Funding; Calithera: Research Funding; Forma: Research Funding; Portola: Research Funding; Verastem: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Infinity: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Forty Seven: Research Funding; Constellation: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Curis: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; ArQule: Research Funding; Verastem: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Agios: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Research Funding; Kite: Research Funding; BeiGene: Research Funding. Pettengell:CTI: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria; Servier: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria. Dlugosz-Danecka:Servier: Consultancy; Roche: Consultancy. Engley:Seattle Genetics: Employment. Fenton:Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Liu:Millennium Pharmaceuticals Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited: Employment. Purevjal:Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Cambridge, MA, USA, a wholly owned subsidiary of Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited: Employment. Miao:Millennium Pharmaceuticals Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited: Employment. Gautam:Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Cambridge, MA, USA, a wholly owned subsidiary of Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited: Employment. Kuruvilla:Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Princess Margaret Cancer Foundation: Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria; Abbvie: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria; Lundbeck: Honoraria; Merck: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria; Leukemia and Lymphoma Society Canada: Research Funding.
Brentuximab Vedotin Plus Chemotherapy in Patients with Advanced-Stage Classical Hodgkin Lymphoma (cHL): Evaluation of Modified Progression-Free Survival (mPFS) and Traditional PFS in the Phase 3 ECHELON-1 Study
Younes, Anas , Gallamini, Andrea , Ansell, Stephen M. , Kim, Won-Seog, Straus, David J. , Sureda, Anna , Engley, Gerald, Fenton, Keenan , Miao, Harry , Jolin, Hina, Gautam, Ashish , Connors, Joseph M. , Advani, Ranjana H. , Bartlett, Nancy L. , Hutchings, Martin , Długosz‐Danecka, Monika , Liu, Rachael , Radford, John

Blood | October 14, 2019 | Volume: 132 | Issue: Supplement 1 | Pages: 2904-2904

10.1182/blood-2018-99-118828 Get It

Abstract Background: The phase 3 ECHELON-1 study assessed frontline brentuximab vedotin administered with doxorubicin, vinblastine, and dacarbazine (A+AVD) vs doxorubicin, bleomycin, vinblastine, and dacarbazine (ABVD) in patients (pts) with advanced cHL (NCT01712490). The primary endpoint of ECHELON-1, modified PFS (mPFS) per independent review facility (IRF), is defined as (1) progressive disease, (2) death, or (3) subsequent anticancer therapy (chemotherapy [chemo] and/or radiotherapy [RT]) following detection of a non-complete response (non-CR = Deauville score 3-5) at end of frontline therapy. A+AVD was superior to ABVD (hazard ratio [HR]=0.77; p=0.035) with 2-year mPFS rates of 82.1% and 77.2%; as previously reported. In pts with newly diagnosed cHL, the aim of frontline therapy is curative. Pts who do not achieve a satisfactory response to frontline therapy may initiate subsequent anticancer therapy prior to response criteria-defined progression. The measurement of traditional PFS becomes confounded, as pts may effectively be rescued from criteria-defined progression by subsequent treatment, resulting in an overestimation of PFS with frontline therapy (Connors et al. Haematologica 2016;101[s5]:22-3[P007]). To further evaluate modified and traditional PFS in the ECHELON-1 study, two sensitivity analyses were conducted. Methods: 1334 pts with Stage III (36%) or IV (64%) cHL were randomized 1:1 to receive A+AVD (n=664) or ABVD (n=670) on days 1 and 15, for up to six 28-day cycles. In addition to mPFS per IRF, mPFS per investigator (INV) was collected. A sensitivity analysis (mPFS-chemo) was performed in which RT following a non-CR at the completion of frontline therapy was not counted as an event: in this case, mPFS-chemo was defined as (1) progression, (2) death, or (3) receipt of additional anticancer chemo excluding RT for pts who are not in CR after completion of frontline therapy. A second sensitivity analysis of traditional PFS (PFS-traditional), defined as (1) progression or (2) death, was also performed. All analyses were performed per INV as, per protocol, IRF follow up of pts was not conducted after the initiation of subsequent therapy. Results: At 2 years, the rates of mPFS per INV (95% CI) for A+AVD vs ABVD were 81.0% (77.6-83.9%) vs 74.4% (70.7-77.7%), respectively; HR=0.72 (95% CI: 0.573, 0.914; p=0.006). Concordance between IRF and INV mPFS assessments was high among all pts in both arms, at 91%. A total of 123 mPFS events per INV were observed among pts treated with A+AVD, including 73 pts with PD, 15 deaths, and 35 who received additional anticancer therapy following evidence of non-CR at the end of frontline therapy, vs 164 per INV mPFS events among pts treated with ABVD, of which 103 were PD, 22 were deaths, and 39 were additional anticancer therapy following evidence of non-CR at the end of frontline therapy. Of the 35 (A+AVD) and 39 (ABVD) additional anticancer therapy events, chemo/RT following evidence of non-CR at the end of frontline therapy accounted for 11/24 and 17/22 of these events, respectively. For mPFS-chemo, a larger benefit in favor of A+AVD vs ABVD, with a HR=0.687 (95% CI: 0.534, 0.885; p=0.003), was observed. The 2-year mPFS-chemo (95% CI) was estimated as 84.0% (80.9-86.7%) for pts treated with A+AVD vs 77.3% (73.7-80.4%) for pts treated with ABVD. A total of 103 events were observed among pts in the A+AVD arm, including 78 pts with PD, 15 deaths, and 10 who received additional chemo following evidence of a non-CR at the end of frontline therapy, vs 145 events among pts treated with ABVD, of which 106 were PD, 22 were deaths, and 17 were additional chemo following evidence of non-CR at the end of frontline therapy. For PFS-traditional, an advantage in favor of A+AVD vs ABVD was also observed: HR=0.70 (95% CI: 0.54-0.91; p=0.006). The 2-year PFS estimate (95% CI) was 84.2% (81.1-86.9%) for A+AVD vs 78.0% (74.4-81.1%) for ABVD. In total, there were 101 PFS events in the A+AVD arm, including 86 pts with PD and 15 deaths; vs 140 PFS events in the ABVD arm, including 118 pts with PD and 22 deaths. Conclusions: Consistent with the primary outcome of ECHELON-1, a benefit in favor of A+AVD vs ABVD was observed independent of the inclusion of additional anticancer RT or chemo as survival events, in addition to progression or death. A traditional PFS assessment including only progression or death events demonstrated that A+AVD resulted in a 30% reduction in the risk of progression or death compared to ABVD. Figure. Figure. Disclosures Connors: Lilly: Research Funding; Bayer Healthcare: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Bristol Myers-Squibb: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; NanoString Technologies: Patents & Royalties: Named Inventor on a patent licensed to NanoString Technologies, Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Honoraria, Research Funding; Roche Canada: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; F Hoffmann-La Roche: Research Funding; Cephalon: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding. Younes:J&J: Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria; BMS: Honoraria, Research Funding; Sanofi: Honoraria; Abbvie: Honoraria; Curis: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Merck: Honoraria; Bayer: Honoraria; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Incyte: Honoraria; Seattle Genetics: Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria, Research Funding; Astra Zeneca: Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria. Gallamini:Takeda: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Ansell:Pfizer: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Merck & Co: Research Funding; Celldex: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding. Kim:J&J: Research Funding; Kyowa-Kirin: Research Funding; Mundipharma: Research Funding; Celltrion: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Roche: Honoraria, Research Funding; Eisai: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding. Advani:Janssen: Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Cell Medica: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Participated in an advisory board; Roche/Genentech: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Participated in an advisory board, Research Funding; Forty Seven Inc.: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Participated in an advisory board, Research Funding; Kura: Research Funding; Kyowa: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Participated in an advisory board; Merck: Research Funding; Astra Zeneca: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Participated in an advisory board; Celgene: Research Funding; Autolus: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Participated in an advisory board; Millenium: Research Funding; Agensys: Research Funding; Infinity: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Gilead/Kite: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Participated in an advisory board; Bristol Myers Squibb: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Participated in an advisory board, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Bayer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Participated in an advisory board. Bartlett:KITE: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; ImaginAB: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Acerta: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Millennium: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Bristol-Meyers Squibb: Research Funding; Immune Design: Research Funding; Astra Zeneca: Research Funding; Forty Seven: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Gilead: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Merck & Co: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding. Straus:Onco Tracker: Consultancy; Roch China: Speakers Bureau; Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center: Employment; JUNO: Consultancy; Medical Crossfire: Speakers Bureau; DAVA Oncology: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bayer: Consultancy; InPractice Elselvier: Consultancy; Millenium (Takeda): Consultancy, Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy. Sureda:BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria; Sanofi: Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Merck: Consultancy, Honoraria. Hutchings:Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Roche/Genentech: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Dlugosz-Danecka:Servier: Consultancy; Roche: Consultancy. Engley:Seattle Genetics: Employment. Fenton:Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Liu:Millennium Pharmaceuticals Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited: Employment. Miao:Millennium Pharmaceuticals Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited: Employment. Jolin:Takeda Pharmaceuticals International Co.: Employment. Gautam:Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Cambridge, MA, USA, a wholly owned subsidiary of Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited: Employment. Radford:Novartis: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; GlaxoSmithKline: Equity Ownership; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; AstraZeneca: Equity Ownership; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding.
Frontline Therapy with Brentuximab Vedotin Combined with ABVD or AVD in Patients with Newly Diagnosed Advanced Stage Hodgkin Lymphoma
Younes, Anas , Park, Steven I., Hunder, Naomi, Ansell, Stephen M. , Connors, Joseph M.

Blood | October 14, 2019 | Volume: 118 | Issue: 21 | Pages: 955-955

10.1182/blood.v118.21.955.955 Get It

Abstract Abstract 955 Background: Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) is a lymphoid neoplasm defined by the presence of CD30-positive Hodgkin Reed-Sternberg (HRS) cells in a background of inflammatory cells. Frontline treatment is generally ABVD alone or in combination with other chemotherapy regimens or radiation. Although a standard ABVD regimen is curative for the majority of patients with advanced stage HL, up to 30% of patients will require a second-line therapy. Brentuximab vedotin (SGN-35) comprises an anti-CD30 antibody conjugated by a protease-cleavable linker to the potent antimicrotubule agent, monomethyl auristatin E (MMAE). In a phase 2 study, an objective response rate of 75% and multiple durable complete remissions (CRs) (34%) were obtained with single-agent brentuximab vedotin in highly treatment-refractory patients with HL. Methods: A phase 1, open-label, multicenter study is being conducted to evaluate the safety of brentuximab vedotin when administered in combination with standard therapy (ABVD) or a modified standard (AVD) (ClinicalTrials.gov #NCT01060904). Patients received doses of 0.6, 0.9, or 1.2 mg/kg brentuximab vedotin with standard doses of ABVD or 1.2 mg/kg brentuximab vedotin with AVD, depending upon cohort assignment. The combination regimens were administered on Days 1 and 15 of each 28-day cycle for up to 6 cycles of therapy. Each regimen evaluated a dose limiting toxicity (DLT) period, defined as any Cycle 1 toxicity requiring a delay of ≥7 days in standard ABVD or AVD therapy. Determination of antitumor activity is based on investigator assessment of objective response according to the Revised Response Criteria for Malignant Lymphoma (Cheson 2007). Results: Interim data are presented for the first 31 patients treated. Six patients received 0.6 mg/kg, 13 received 0.9 mg/kg, and 6 received 1.2 mg/kg with ABVD; 6 patients received 1.2 mg/kg with AVD. Baseline characteristics included: Stage IV, 55%; IPI score ≥4, 29%; male, 77%; median age, 35 years (range, 19–59). Combination treatment was generally well tolerated, with no DLT observed up to 1.2 mg/kg in either regimen. Overall, AEs reported in ≥45% of patients, regardless of severity, were nausea and neutropenia (77% each); peripheral sensory neuropathy (48%); and fatigue (45%). Infusion-related reactions occurred in 23% of patients. Grade 3/4 AEs observed in >10% of patients were neutropenia (74%), febrile neutropenia (16%), and anemia (13%). No Grade 5 events were observed. Overall, 6 patients discontinued combination treatment due to an AE. In the ABVD cohorts (n=25), AEs of pulmonary toxicity, dyspnea, and interstitial lung disease that could not be distinguished from bleomycin toxicity led to discontinuation of bleomycin in 7 patients. Five of these 7 patients continued treatment with AVD and brentuximab vedotin. All 10 patients who had a response assessment available after completion of frontline therapy achieved CR. Currently, an expansion cohort of approximately 20 patients is enrolling to explore 1.2 mg/kg brentuximab vedotin combined with AVD therapy. Conclusions: In this interim analysis of 31 patients with newly diagnosed HL, the maximum tolerated dose in combination with ABVD or AVD was not reached; no DLT was observed up to 1.2 mg/kg, the maximum planned dose. Brentuximab vedotin treatment was associated with manageable AEs; the most frequent AEs in the study were nausea and neutropenia. The safety profile observed thus far in this study suggests that brentuximab vedotin has potential for combination therapy with ABVD or AVD. Updated safety and response data will be presented at the meeting. Disclosures: Younes: Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau, Travel Expenses; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Sanofi-Aventis: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Genentech: Research Funding; SBIO: Research Funding; Syndax: Research Funding; Celgene: Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Honoraria; Pharmacyclic: Honoraria. Off Label Use: Brentuximab vedotin (SGN-35) comprises an anti-CD30 antibody conjugated by a protease-cleavable linker to the potent antimicrotubule agent, monomethyl auristatin E (MMAE). It is an investigational agent that is being studied in CD30+ malignancies. Connors:Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Research Funding. Park:Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Research Funding. Hunder:Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Ansell:Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Research Funding.
Results of a Pivotal Phase 2 Study of Brentuximab Vedotin (SGN-35) in Patients with Relapsed or Refractory Hodgkin Lymphoma
Chen, Robert , Smith, Scott E. , Ansell, Stephen M. , Klasa, Richard, Engert, Andreas , Larsen, Emily K., Kennedy, Dana A., Younes, Anas , Gopal, Ajay K. , Rosenblatt, Joseph D. , Connors, Joseph M. , Sievers, Eric L.

Blood | October 12, 2019 | Volume: 116 | Issue: 21 | Pages: 283-283

10.1182/blood.v116.21.283.283 Get It

Abstract Abstract 283 Background: Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) is characterized by the presence of CD30-positive Hodgkin Reed-Sternberg cells. The antibody-drug conjugate (ADC) brentuximab vedotin (SGN-35) delivers the highly potent antimicrotubule agent monomethyl auristatin E (MMAE) to CD30-positive malignant cells by binding specifically to CD30 on the cell surface and releasing MMAE inside the cell via lysosomal degradation. Binding of MMAE to tubulin disrupts the microtubule network within the cell, induces cell cycle arrest, and results in apoptotic death of the CD30-expressing tumor cell. In a previous phase 1 study with brentuximab vedotin dosing every third week, 11 of 12 patients (92%) treated at the maximum tolerated dose of 1.8 mg/kg had tumor reductions and 6 of 12 patients (50%) achieved an objective response (complete remission [CR] + partial remission [PR]). Methods: A pivotal, phase 2, single-arm, multicenter study was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of brentuximab vedotin in patients with relapsed or refractory HL post autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT). Brentuximab vedotin 1.8 mg/kg was administered every 3 weeks as a 30-minute outpatient IV infusion for up to 16 cycles of treatment. The primary endpoint was the overall objective response rate (ORR) as assessed by an independent review facility according to the Revised Response Criteria for Malignant Lymphoma (Cheson 2007). Results: A total of 102 patients with relapsed or refractory HL were treated at 26 study centers. Median age was 31 years (range 15–77) and approximately half of the patients were female (53%). Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status at baseline was 0 (41%) or 1 (59%). All patients had previously received an ASCT and the median number of prior chemotherapy regimens was 4 (range 1–13). More than 70% of the patients had primary refractory disease, defined as failure to achieve a CR or progression within 3 months of completing frontline therapy. In addition, 39% of patients had lymphoma that was refractory to the most recent salvage therapy excluding ASCT. The median duration of brentuximab vedotin treatment on this study was 27 weeks (range 3–54) and the median number of cycles was 9 (range 1–16). The most common (>15%) treatment-related adverse events (AEs) of any grade were peripheral sensory neuropathy (43%), fatigue (40%), nausea (35%), neutropenia (19%), diarrhea (18%), and pyrexia (16%); most events were Grade 1 or 2. Grade 3 treatment-related AEs reported in >1 patient were neutropenia (14%), peripheral sensory neuropathy (5%), thrombocytopenia and hyperglycemia (3% each), and fatigue (2%). The only Grade 4 treatment-related events were neutropenia (4%), and thrombocytopenia, abdominal pain, and pulmonary embolism (1% each). No related Grade 5 events were observed. 18 patients discontinued treatment due to an AE. Consistent with findings from the phase 1 study, 97 patients (95%) had a reduction in tumor size per investigator assessment. Of the 35 patients who had B symptoms at baseline, 29 (83%) experienced resolution of these symptoms. The median time to B symptom resolution was 3 weeks (range <1–16 weeks). To date, 5 patients have received an allogeneic stem cell transplant as their first therapy after discontinuing treatment in the study; all of these patients remain in follow up. Per protocol, no interim analyses were planned for the primary endpoint of ORR by independent review. Independent assessment of ORR is being conducted and final efficacy results will be presented at the meeting. Conclusions: Brentuximab vedotin was associated with manageable adverse events and, based on investigator assessment, demonstrated encouraging activity in heavily pretreated patients with relapsed or refractory HL. Tumor shrinkage was observed in 95% of patients and the B symptom resolution rate was 83%. Final results of the independent assessment of ORR, as well as duration of response, progression-free survival, and updated safety data, will be presented at the meeting. Disclosures: Chen: Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Research Funding. Off Label Use: This clinical trial uses the investigational drug, brentuximab vedotin (SGN-35). Gopal:Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Research Funding. Smith:Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Research Funding. Ansell:Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Research Funding. Rosenblatt:Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Research Funding. Klasa:Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Research Funding. Connors:Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Research Funding. Engert:Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Larsen:Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Kennedy:Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Sievers:Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Younes:Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Honoraria, Research Funding; Genentech: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; SBIO: Honoraria, Research Funding.
Targeted Sequencing Reveals Novel Gene Mutations Associated with Transformation and Early Progression in Follicular Lymphoma
Kridel, Robert , Chan, Fong Chun , Boyle, Merrill, Farinha, Pedro , Tan, King, Meissner, Barbara , Bashashati, Ali , Giné, Eva , Ennishi, Daisuke , Mungall, Andrew J. , Johnson, Nathalie A. , Tousseyn, Thomas , Gascoyne, Randy D. , Farinha, Pedro , Mungall, Andrew J , Kridel, Robert , Mottok, Anja , Ben‐Neriah, Susana , Morin, Ryan D , Sehn, Laurie H. , Doǧan, Ahmet , Connors, Joseph M. , Scott, David W. , Steidl, Christian , Marra, Marco A. , Shah, Sohrab P.

Blood | October 12, 2019 | Volume: 128 | Issue: 22 | Pages: 2919-2919

10.1182/blood.v128.22.2919.2919 Get It

Abstract Introduction : Follicular lymphoma (FL) remains an incurable malignancy as patients eventually experience progressive disease. A subset of patients is at risk of early lymphoma-related mortality due to histological transformation (TFL) to aggressive lymphoma (2-3% of patients per year) or early progression after immuno-chemotherapy, each of which leads to shortened survival. Mutations associated with transformation and/or early progression have been reported in the literature (e.g. CDKN2A, TP53, B2M) and the m7-FLIPI clinico-genetic risk model defines a high-risk patient group with poor failure-free survival after first-line treatment. However, the current knowledge of genetic alterations underlying transformation and/or early progression is inadequate to explain the majority of transformed cases and accurately predict early progressive disease. Materials and Methods: We performed targeted capture-based sequencing of 94 genes in a large cohort of fresh-frozen and formalin-fixed and paraffin-embedded patient specimens (402 samples in total). This cohort comprised 277 samples from 159 patients that experienced transformation (including 128 samples at T1 (the time of FL) and 149 samples at T2 (the time of transformation) with 118 paired biopsies) and 125 samples from 125 patients (pre-treatment samples only) presenting with either early progression within 2.5 years after starting immunochemotherapy (n=41) or late or never progression for at least 5 years after starting immunochemotherapy or observation (n=84). Mutations were called using MutationSeq and putative single nucleotide polymorphisms were filtered out using either matching germline samples (n=84) or dbSNP (v147). Bayesian proportion tests were used to compare the prevalence of gene mutations between groups. Results : We first compared T1 (n=128) and T2 (n=149) samples from 159 patients experiencing transformation. Eleven genes were more commonly altered in transformed lymphoma. These included genes that had previously been associated with transformation, such as TP53, B2M, MYC and EBF1, as well as genes that have not yet been implicated as contributing to this process, for example EZH2, CCND3, PIM1 and ITPKB. Moreover, mutations in GNA13, S1PR2 and P2RY8, that have been implicated in dissemination of germinal centre B cells, were enriched in T2 samples. In addition, cell-of-origin classification was available for 108 of the TFL cases with DLBCL histology, 18 and 90 of which were of the ABC and GCB subtype, respectively. Although the number of ABC-TFL cases was small, we observed higher percentages of BCL10 (16% versus 1%, Fisher P=0.004), CD79B (22% versus 4%, Fisher P=0.005) and MYD88 mutations (28% versus 9%, P=0.006) in ABC-TFL than in GCB-TFL, suggesting that B-cell receptor signaling and NF-κB signaling are important contributors to the ABC phenotype in TFL. Next, we assessed the association of gene mutations with patient outcomes contrasting early progressers (n=41) and late or non-progressers (n=84). Eleven genes were mutated more commonly in early progressers than in late progressers, including KMT2C, TP53, BTG1, MKI67, XBP1 and SOCS1. Overall, 32 out of 41 early progressers (78%) had mutations in at least one of the 11 early progression-associated genes, but none of the individual early progression-associated genes were mutated at a frequency > 22%. Thus, early progression appears to be related to relatively infrequent genetic alterations. None of the early progression-associated gene mutations form part of the m7-FLIPI outcome predictor. Furthermore, in our cohort that was enriched for clinical extremes, the m7-FLIPI was similarly associated with early progression when compared to the FLIPI but it was not superior, having higher specificity (89% versus 76%), but lower sensitivity (36% versus 63%). Conclusions: We found novel associations of gene mutations with transformation and showed that TFL is molecularly heterogeneous, with the ABC subtype being characterized by differential gene mutation when compared to the GCB subtype. With regards to progressive disease after immuno-chemotherapy, our approach identified early progression as a distinct clinico-genetic disease category that is imperfectly captured by traditional prognostic tools. Disclosures Connors: Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squib: Research Funding; F Hoffmann-La Roche: Research Funding; NanoString Technologies: Research Funding; Millennium Takeda: Research Funding. Scott:NanoString Technologies: Patents & Royalties: named inventor on a patent for molecular subtyping of DLBCL that has been licensed to NanoString Technologies.
A Randomized Phase III Trial of ABVD Vs. Stanford V +/− Radiation Therapy In Locally Extensive and Advanced Stage Hodgkin's Lymphoma: An Intergroup Study Coordinated by the Eastern Cooperatve Oncology Group (E2496)
Hong, Fanxing, Fisher, Richard I., Gascoyne, Randy D. , Wagner, Henry, Stiff, Patrick J. , Cheson, Bruce D. , Gospodarowicz, Mary , Friedberg, Jonathan W. , Blum, Kristie A. , Horning, Sandra J., Gordon, Leo I. , Bartlett, Nancy L. , Connors, Joseph M. , Advani, Ranjana H. , Kahl, Brad S. , Habermann, Thomas M. , Tuscano, Joseph M. , Hoppe, Richard T.

Blood | October 12, 2019 | Volume: 116 | Issue: 21 | Pages: 415-415

10.1182/blood.v116.21.415.415 Get It

Abstract Abstract 415 Background: The ability to cure patients (pts) with advanced Hodgkin's Lymphoma (HL) with combination chemotherapy (CC) (MOPP and variants, ABVD and variants) represented a major milestone in oncology research, and CC became a paradigm for other malignancies. Further, the rationale for combined modality therapy (CMT) (radiation (RT) and CC) in HL evolved based on the high frequency of relapse in initially involved sites. As response rates and survival improved, newer treatments such as the combined modality Stanford V regimen were developed to shorten the duration of chemotherapy, add RT to sites of disease and reduce toxicity while maintaining or improving the cure rate. Indeed, the Stanford V regimen was tested and validated in a Phase II co-operative group trial (E1492) (J Clin Oncol 2000; 18:972). In order to investigate this approach against “standard” therapy, we conducted a randomized Phase III Intergroup trial of ABVD vs. the Stanford V regimen for patients with locally extensive or advanced HL. Objectives: The trial was designed to detect a 33% reduction in the failure free survival (FFS) hazard rate with Stanford V compared with ABVD, which corresponds to a difference in five-year FFS of 64% vs. 74%. Method: Patients with locally extensive (defined as clinical Ann Arbor Stage I-IIA/B and bulky mediastinal disease (BMD) (mass > 1/3 maximum intrathoracic diameter on standing postero-anterior chest x-ray or >/−10 cm on computerized tomography) or advanced (Ann Arbor Stage III or IV) HL were randomized to receive either ABVD × 6–8 cycles (C) (51% had 6 C, 35% had 8 C, 14% had <6 C) + 36 Gy (only in pts with BMD) or Stanford V × 12 weeks (95% had 12 weeks) + 36 Gy (for sites >5cm or for macroscopic splenic disease). The log-rank test was used to compare FFS for all eligible patients stratified on extent of disease (locally extensive vs. advanced), and number of International Prognostic Factor Project (IPFP) risk factors (0–2 vs. 3–7). An extended Cox model was also used to address non-proportional hazard between the two arms. Results: 854 pts enrolled from April, 1999 to June, 2006 and 812 were eligible for analysis. 404 pts were randomized to ABVD and 408 to Stanford V. Median age was 33 yrs in both arms (range 16–83). 53% were men and 47% women; 4% had Stage I, 31% had Stage II, 39% had Stage III and 25% had Stage IV disease by Ann Arbor criteria. 35% of pts on ABVD and 35% on Stanford V had BMD. Three % of pts had nodular lymphocyte predominant HL, 77% of pts had nodular sclerosis HL, 14% had mixed cell HL. Age, stage, pathology and risk factors (0–2 vs. 3–7) were similar in both arms. In total, 65% were IPFP score 0–2 and 33% were 3–6. Response rate. There was no difference in response rates (RR) between the two arms (ABVD=72% CR+ CCR, 7.7% PR, 7.9% SD; Stanford V= 69 % CR +CCR, 7% PR and 10 % SD. 8% were not evaluable for response on ABVD and 9% on Stanford V. Toxicity was similar in both groups. The most frequent Grade 3 + 4 toxicity was neutropenia, and was similar between the 2 groups (76% Grade 3 + 4 in ABVD and 70% Grade 3+ 4 in Stanford V). Grade 5 toxicity was <1% in both groups. There was, however, more Grade 3 lymphopenia in Stanford V (78% vs. 42%, p< 0.0001) and more Grade 3 +4 sensory neuropathy in Stanford V (10%) than in ABVD (3%) (p< 0.0001). A total of 26 second primary cancers developed, 12 after ABVD and 14 after Stanford V (p=NS). FFS and OS. For 812 eligible patients, with a median follow up of 5.25 years, 5-year FFS was 73% for ABVD and 71% for Stanford V (p=0.29 by log rank) (Figure left); 5-year OS was 88% for ABVD and 87% for Stanford V (p=0.87 by log-rank, HR=0.97, 95% CI: 0.65 to 1.44) (Figure right) indicating no significant difference in either FFS or OS between the 2 arms. Conclusion: In the largest Phase III intergroup trial of HL in North America, there was no significant difference in RR, FFS, OS, and 5-year toxicity when ABVD (+ RT for BMD) is compared with Stanford V (+RT for nodal sites >5 cm and macroscopic splenic disease). There was more Grade 3 lymphopenia (p< 0.0001) and more Grade 3 + 4 sensory neuropathy (p< 0.0001) on Stanford V. Thus ABVD (plus RT for BMD) remains the standard of care because Stanford V did not meet the objective of 33% improvement in FFS. For some patients, Stanford V, when given as described with RT, remains an acceptable alternative. Disclosures: Friedberg: Genentech: Honoraria. Blum:Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Horning:Genentech: Employment.
Five-Year Survival Data Demonstrating Durable Responses from a Pivotal Phase 2 Study of Brentuximab Vedotin in Patients with Relapsed or Refractory Hodgkin Lymphoma
Chen, Robert , Smith, Scott E. , Ansell, Stephen M. , Engert, Andreas , Larsen, Emily K., Huebner, Dirk, Fong, Abraham, Younes, Anas , Gopal, Ajay K. , Rosenblatt, Joseph D. , Savage, Kerry J. , Connors, Joseph M.

Blood | October 12, 2019 | Volume: 126 | Issue: 23 | Pages: 2736-2736

10.1182/blood.v126.23.2736.2736 Get It

Abstract Background: Classical Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) is characterized by the presence of CD30-positive Hodgkin Reed-Sternberg cells. The standard of care for patients (pts) with relapsed or refractory (R/R) HL is salvage chemotherapy followed by high dose chemotherapy and autologous stem cell transplant (auto-SCT). Approximately 50% of these pts will experience relapse or progression of HL after auto-SCT. For these individuals, outcomes have historically been poor, with median overall survival (OS) from time of relapse ranging from 10.5 to 27.6 mos (Crump, 2008; Fanale, 2013). A pivotal phase 2 study evaluated brentuximab vedotin, a CD30-directed antibody-drug conjugate, in pts with R/R HL after auto-SCT (ClinicalTrials.gov #NCT00848926). Primary results and 3-year follow-up data have been previously reported (Younes, 2012; Gopal, 2015). Here, we summarize final data from the 5-year follow-up period. Methods: Pts received 1.8 mg/kg brentuximab vedotin once every 3 wks as a 30-min outpatient IV infusion for up to 16 cycles. The primary endpoint was the objective response rate (ORR) per independent review according to the Revised Response Criteria for Malignant Lymphoma (Cheson 2007). Assessments of response and durability of response per an independent review facility (IRF) have been previously reported. Following a protocol amendment that removed the requirement for routine CT scanning during the follow-up period, disease status was only assessed per the investigator. Survival and disease status were assessed every 3 mos for 2 yrs and then every 6 mos through Year 5. CT scans were required if progression was suspected clinically. At the time of the amendment, 18 patients were still being assessed for progression; these patients had been in long-term follow-up for a median of over 30 months. Results: The enrolled population of 102 pts (53% female) was heavily pretreated and had a median age of 31 yrs (range, 15-77 yrs). Pts received a median of 9 cycles (range, 1-16) of brentuximab vedotin. Per investigator, the ORR to brentuximab vedotin was 72% and complete remission (CR) rate was 33%. The most common treatment-related adverse events were peripheral sensory neuropathy, nausea, fatigue, neutropenia, and diarrhea. Adverse events of Grade 3 or higher that occurred in ≥5% of pts were neutropenia, peripheral sensory neuropathy, thrombocytopenia, and anemia. At study closure, which occurred approximately 5 yrs after the last patient's end-of-treatment visit, the median observation time for all enrolled patients from first dose was 35.1 mos (range, 1.8 to 72.9). The estimated 5-year overall survival rate was 41% (95% CI: 31 %, 51%) and the median OS was 40.5 mos (95% CI: 28.7, 61.9 [range, 1.8 to 72.9+]). Median OS by best clinical response was CR (n=34): median not reached; partial remission (PR, n=39): 39.4 mos; and stable disease (SD, n=28): 18.3 mos. The median PFS was 9.3 months overall, but was not reached in CR pts. Of the 102 enrolled patients, 15 remained in follow-up and in remission at study closure. Among these 15 pts, 6 received consolidative allo-SCT and 9 have received no further therapy since completing brentuximab vedotin. Conclusions: These end-of-study results demonstrate that single agent brentuximab vedotin can induce durable remissions and long-term survival in a subset of heavily pretreated patients with relapsed/refractory HL, particularly in pts that achieve CR. A randomized phase 3 study is being conducted to evaluate brentuximab vedotin in combination with AVD (doxorubicin, vinblastine, and dacarbazine) versus ABVD (A, bleomycin, VD) for frontline treatment of advanced HL (ECHELON-1 trial, ClinicalTrials.gov #NCT01712490). Figure 1. Overall Survival Figure 1. Overall Survival Disclosures Chen: Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy. Gopal:BMS: Research Funding; Piramal: Research Funding; Emergent/Abbott: Research Funding; Millenium: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy; Spectrum: Consultancy, Research Funding; BioMarin: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria; Gilead: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sanofi-Aventis: Honoraria; Merck: Research Funding. Smith:Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Ansell:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Celldex: Research Funding. Rosenblatt:Seattle Genetics: Research Funding. Savage:Seattle Genetics: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Honoraria; Infinity: Honoraria; Roche: Other: Institutional research funding. Connors:Roche: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding. Engert:Takeda Millenium: Honoraria, Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Honoraria, Research Funding. Larsen:Seattle Genetics Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Huebner:Takeda Pharmaceuticals International Co.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Fong:Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Younes:Janssen: Honoraria; Novartis: Research Funding; Incyte: Honoraria; Takeda Millenium: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Bristol Meyer Squibb: Honoraria; Curis: Research Funding; Bayer: Honoraria; Seattle Genetics: Honoraria, Research Funding; Sanofi-Aventis: Honoraria; Johnson and Johnson: Research Funding.