Barr, Paul M.

TPS7577 Background: Nivolumab (nivo) is a PD-1 immune checkpoint inhibitor that augments T-cell activation and host anti-tumor responses. PD-1 blockade has shown promise in B- and T-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL),1 but many patients (pts) with NHL do not respond or progress after response. Combination therapy using anti-tumor agents with complementary mechanisms of action and low immunosuppressive impact may result in more frequent and durable responses. Brentuximab vedotin (BV) is an anti-CD30 antibody–drug conjugate that induces cell cycle arrest and apoptosis, with activity in a range of NHL tumors.2,3 Tumor cells undergoing BV-induced apoptosis have shown subsequent immune-mediated anti-tumor cytotoxicity.4 Therefore, nivo and BV may synergize if combined for relapsed/refractory (RR) NHL. Methods: CheckMate 436 (NCT02581631) is a phase 1–2, open-label, international, single-arm study evaluating nivo + BV for CD30-expressing RR NHL (study start: Dec 2015) in pts with RR diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, peripheral T-cell lymphoma (excluding anaplastic large cell lymphoma), and cutaneous T-cell lymphoma (mycosis fungoides/Sézary syndrome); cohorts with primary mediastinal B-cell lymphoma (PMBL) and mediastinal gray zone lymphoma were made eligible in Sept 2016. Pts with PMBL must be aged ≥15 y (≥18 y for other histologies). All pts must have CD30-expressing disease, defined by CD30 on ≥1% of tumor cells or tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes by immunohistochemistry. In the phase 1 component, 6 pts will receive nivo and BV until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. In the phase 2 component, ~130 more pts across the 5 histologies will be enrolled and treated at the recommended dose. Primary endpoints: safety, tolerability, and investigator-assessed objective response rate; secondary endpoints: duration of response and complete response (CR), CR rate, and progression-free and overall survival. Accrual is ongoing. References: 1. Lesokhin A et al. JCO 2016;34:2698–704 2. Jacobsen E et al. Blood 2015;125:1394–402 3. Horwitz S et al. Blood 2014;123:3095–100 4. Gardai S et al. Cancer Res 2015;75(15 Suppl):2469 [abstract]. Clinical trial information: NCT02581631.

Key PointsINCB040093 was active across lymphoma subtypes, and the addition of itacitinib provided substantial activity in classic Hodgkin lymphoma. INCB040093 ± itacitinib had a manageable safety and tolerability profile; severe hepatic adverse effects were less common with the combination.

AbstractLoss of major histocompatibility Class II expression (MHCII) in diffuse large B‐cell lymphoma (DLBCL) correlates with decreased survival. MHCII transcription is in part regulated by histone acetylation. We tested the hypothesis that combination of histone deacetylase inhibitor (HDACI) with standard chemotherapy would improve outcomes in DLBCL in part through increased MHCII expression. S0806 was a single arm phase I/II trial of vorinostat given at 400 mg po daily on days 1‐9 (subsequently amended to days 1‐5 due to toxicity), combined with R‐CHOP given on day 3 of a 21‐day cycle for 8 cycles, with primary phase II endpoint of 2‐year progression free survival (PFS). With 72 evaluable patients, at median follow up of 3 years, 2‐year PFS estimate was 73%, and OS estimate was 86%. Considering that the regimen fell short of predefined efficacy improvement and was associated with high rates of febrile neutropenia (38%) and sepsis (19%), it cannot be recommended for general use. Consistent with our hypothesis, patients with low MCHII expression on S0806 had numerically superior outcomes compared to those from trial S0433 which did not use an HDACI, but the difference was not statistically significant. Current studies are focused on finding biomarkers of response to HDACI.

Abstract Background: Patients (pts) with CLL/SLL who use unmutated IGHV (u-CLL) have a less favorable outcome with standard chemotherapy than pts who use mutated IGHV (m-CLL). Ibrutinib (ibr) inhibits B-cell receptor signaling through Bruton’s tyrosine kinase and has robust clinical activity against CLL. This integrated analysis of 3 phase 3 studies examined the impact of IGHV status on ibr- and comparator (comp)-treated pts. Methods: Pooled data from 3 studies of ibr (420 mg/d) in CLL/SLL pts (RESONATE: relapsed/refractory [R/R] pts, ibr vs ≤ 24 weeks ofatumumab; RESONATE-2: treatment-naïve [TN] pts ≥ 65 yrs of age [no del17p], ibr vs ≤ 12 cycles chlorambucil; HELIOS: R/R pts [no del17p], ≤ 6 cycles bendamustine-rituximab with ibr vs placebo) were analyzed by IGHV status. Analyses included Kaplan-Meier method (overall survival [OS]; progression-free survival [PFS]); log-rank test (group comparisons); and Cox multivariate analysis (prognostic factors; Table). Results: For 491 ibr- (366 u-CLL, 125 m-CLL) and 494 comp-treated (351 u-CLL, 143 m-CLL) pts with IGHV data, baseline characteristics were similar for u-CLL vs m-CLL, except for the proportions of pts who were TN (17 vs 31%), had bulky disease (60 vs 37%), or had CLL cells with del11q (32 vs 16%). Median follow up was 21.4 mos for ibr and 20.6 mos for comp. PFS and OS were similar for u-CLL and m-CLL ibr-treated pts; u-CLL had poorer outcomes than m-CLL in comp-treated pts, which remained after adjustment for prognostic factors (Table). Ibr treatment was more effective than comp regardless of IGHV status. Incidence of adverse events (AEs) was similar between groups. For ibr vs comp pts (u-CLL/m-CLL): serious AEs: 49% (50%/47%) vs 36.5% (37%/35%); AEs that led to discontinuation: 12% (11%/15%) vs 13% (13%/14%); death within 30 days of last dose: 5% (6%/3%) vs 5% (6%/2%). Conclusions: U-CLL was an adverse predictor of outcome for comp-treated, but not for ibr-treated pts. Table.Efficacy Outcomes in Ibr- and Comparator-Treated Patients by IGHV Mutation StatusIbrutinib (N=491)Comparator (N =494)u-CLL (n=717)m-CLL (n=268)u-CLL(n=366): m-CLL(n=125)u-CLL(n=351): m-CLL(n=143)Ibr(n=366): Comp(n=351)Ibr (n=125): Comp (n=143)PFS24-month rate HR78%:81%10%:32%78%:10%81%:32%0.93a1.99a0.12b0.21bp = 0.78p < 0.0001p < 0.0001p <0.0001Adjusted HRc1.02a1.94a0.11b0.17bp = 0.93p < 0.0001p < 0.0001p < 0.0001OS24-month rate HR88%:89%78%:87%88%:78%89%:87%0.95a1.96a0.49b0.85b,ep = 0.86p = 0.02p < 0.01p = 0.66Adjusted HRc1.21a2.10a0.49bNAp =0.57p = 0.01p < 0.001Response ratesu-CLLm-CLLu-CLLm-CLLIbrCompIbrCompORR, %d8990475189479051p = 0.96p = 0.36p < 0.0001p < 0.0001CR, %d221546224156p = 0.10p = 0.44p < 0.0001p = 0.01CI, confidence interval; CR, complete response; HR, hazard ratio; ORR, overall response rate; NA, not applicable. aHR < 1 favors unmutated. bHR < 1 favors ibrutinib. cMultivariate Cox model adjusted for age, sex, current Rai stage, baseline ECOG performance status score, del11q, del17p, number of prior therapies, and cytopenias. dp value is from a Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel chi-square test. eInsufficient number of events prevents meaningful analysis, only 13 and 16 events observed in ibr and comp groups, respectively, and 46 (32%) pts in comp arm crossed over to ibr arm; interpret results with caution. Citation Format: Thomas J. Kipps, Graeme Fraser, Steven Coutre, Jennifer R. Brown, Jacqueline C. Barrientos, Paul M. Barr, John C. Byrd, Susan M. O'Brien, Marie-Sarah Dilhuydy, Stephen Devereux, Ulrich Jaeger, Carol Moreno, Paula Cramer, Stephan Stilgenbauer, Asher A. Chanan-Khan, Michelle Mahler, Mariya Salman, Mei Cheng, Anil Londhe, Joi Ninomoto, Angela Howes, Danelle James, Michael Hallek. Unmutated IGHV is not an adverse predictor of outcome to therapy with ibrutinib in patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia/small lymphocytic lymphoma (CLL/SLL) [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2017; 2017 Apr 1-5; Washington, DC. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2017;77(13 Suppl):Abstract nr CT158. doi:10.1158/1538-7445.AM2017-CT158