CLL Advocates NZ Newsletter Issue 2

CLL Advocates NZ Newsletter Issue 2

A number of you will be familiar with and regularly reading HealthUnlocked and Patient Power, two patient support and networking services (based in the UK and US respectively) that cover CLL in detail.

For those not yet in the habit, I can recommend both websites to CLL patients, and their families and supporters. You can access both through our website on our useful links page here, or go directly to Patient Power here and HealthUnlocked here. Access is free.

HealthUnlocked is published daily, with ten articles in each edition, that are mainly personal stories and discussion among people with CLL, and also occasional reviews of CLL-related clinical studies.

One such study, in the 20 July edition was on CLL and Covid 19. It provided an analysis of the assessment of 190 patients with CLL who had proven Covid 19 infection. Most presenting for analysis (79%) were in the “severe” category (requiring ICU admission and/or oxygen). This is likely to be related to their having had contact with a hospital. One third of these patients died of Covid 19. The severe group were older than the less severe group, so increasing age is a risk. There was a reduced rate of severe disease in those patients who had had treatment recently as opposed to those who had treatment remotely, or never.

Patient Power (PP) sends email updates to subscribers, generally weekly. Their CLL articles tend to have more of a scientific and medical focus. They also regularly post videos of interviews conducted by the PP CEO, Andrew Schorr, who is a long-term CLL survivor. He interviews well known clinicians on aspects of CLL, including the latest research and developments in the understanding and treatment of CLL. His wife, Esther, also writes regularly for PP.

An interesting recent PP article discussed CAR T-cell treatment, which is being trialled for CLL in research centres globally, including the Malaghan Institute in Wellington (Dr Rob Weinkove).

As an aside on CAR T-cell therapy, I recently enjoyed a book by NZ comedian David Downs on his experience with cancer (in his case, lymphoma). The book is entitled “A Mild Touch of the Cancer”. It is humorous and insightful on living with a serious health issue, and I commend it to you.

Finally, if you haven’t already seen it, check out our message on Facebook and on our website about our first CLL education event, to be held in Auckland, on Wednesday 14 October 2020.  The event will be jointly hosted with Leukaemia & Blood Cancer. For those unable to be there in person, you’ll be able to join us via Zoom, to hear talks by and discussion with three of our country’s foremost CLL clinicians. As well as providing the latest information on CLL we hope to extend our reach and ability to support people living with CLL, and I warmly encourage you to help spread the word and attend the event with your family and supporters. More detail on the event including how to register will be circulated soon.

 

With best wishes

Neil Graham FRACP, FRCP
Executive Director
CLL Advocates NZ


Genetic Prognostic Factors in CLL Treated With Novel Compounds

Genetic Prognostic Factors in CLL Treated With Novel Compounds

This article was originally published by Cancer Therapy Advisor


CLL Experts Favor Social Distancing, but Vary on Treatment Continuation Amid Pandemic

CLL Experts Favor Social Distancing, but Vary on Treatment Continuation Amid Pandemic

This article was originally published by AJMC


Dr. Davids on the Potential Utility of Frontline Ibrutinib/Umbralisib in CLL and MCL

Dr. Davids on the Potential Utility of Frontline Ibrutinib/Umbralisib in CLL and MCL

This article was originally published by OncLive


A 79-Year-Old Man With Relapsed Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia

A 79-Year-Old Man With Relapsed Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia

This article was originally published by Targeted Oncology


Age, Recent Treatment, Appear to Influence Severity of COVID-19 in Patients With CLL

Age, Recent Treatment Appear to Influence Severity of COVID-19 in Patients With CLL

This article was originally published by AJMC


Dr. Ghia on the Shift From Chemotherapy to Novel Agents in CLL

Dr. Ghia on the Shift From Chemotherapy to Novel Agents in CLL

This article was originally published by Onc Live

 


Tool appears to predict need for treatment in asymptomatic, early-stage CLL

Tool appears to predict need for treatment in asymptomatic, early-stage CLL

This article was originally published by Healio

A novel prognostic tool appeared to predict the need for treatment among patients with asymptomatic, early-stage, chronic lymphocytic leukemia, according to research published in Blood.

“CLL is an indolent disease that is treated only if symptomatic. Currently, between 70% and 80% of newly diagnosed [patients with CLL] are asymptomatic and therefore are offered a wait-and-see approach to management consisting of regular visits every 3 to 12 months. However, this approach is not easily accepted by patients, who often ask whether, when and how they will be treated,” Davide Rossi, MD, researcher at Oncology Institute of Southern Switzerland, told Healio. “So far, the eventual disease course cannot be predicted for patients after they have been offered wait and see, which in turn causes anxiety and uncertainty. Having a tool that accurately forecasts leukemia course will help patients in planning their life with the disease.”

Rossi and colleagues developed and tested the international prognostic score, IPS-E, to predict time to first treatment among 4,933 patients with early-stage, asymptomatic CLL included in 11 global cohort studies.

Among a training cohort of 333 patients, investigators observed three consistent and independent covariates that appeared associated with time to first treatment: unmutated IGHV genes, absolute lymphocyte count greater than 15 x 109/l and the presence of palpable lymph nodes. They used data from this cohort to develop a prognostic score with each factor counting as one point. Patients with zero factors were considered at low risk for requiring treatment within the first 5 years of diagnosis, those with one factor were considered at intermediate risk, and those with two or three factors were considered at high risk.

Investigators validated the score in nine cohorts staged by the Binet system and in one study staged by the Rai system. They observed C-index scores of 0.74 in the training series and 0.7 in the aggregate of validation series.

Overall, approximately 30% of patients were categorized as low risk, 35% as intermediate risk and 35% at high risk.

Moreover, meta-analysis of the cohorts showed 5-year cumulative risk for treatment initiation of 8.4% among patients considered low risk, 28.4% for those in the intermediate-risk group and 61.2% for those at high risk.

Davide Rossi, MD

Davide Rossi

“In a time where the treatment paradigm of asymptomatic CLL may change if a survival benefit is proven by early intervention with novel agents, our international prognostic score could help in defining the early-stage population where treatment can be appropriate,” Rossi said. “Moreover, it could be helpful for the treating physician to better allocate medical resources, such as deciding on the interval between clinical assessments according to risk group. Health care professionals will be supported in the discussion while explaining CLL to patients — many of whom have never heard about the rare tumor. Physicians can also safely plan and advise in advance the proper timing of surveillance visits according to the predicted risk of leukemia progression.”

The international prognostic score warrants prospective evaluation, according to Rossi, and can be regarded as a building block on which newly discovered independent outcome predictors for patients with early-stage CLL could be added.

“In this sense, a prospective study could be designed to further assess and eventually strengthen this prognostic tool,” Rossi said.

For more information:

Davide Rossi, MD, can be reached at Oncology Institute of Southern Switzerland, Via Ospedale, 6500 Bellinzona, Switzerland; email: davide.rossi@eoc.ch.


CLL and MCL Survival Benefit From Umbralisib Plus Ibrutinib Holds Up in 4-Year Follow-Up

CLL and MCL Survival Benefit From Umbralisib Plus Ibrutinib Holds Up in 4-Year Follow-Up

This article was originally published by Targeted Oncology

Initial results for the combination of umbralisib plus ibrutinib (Imbruvica) showed high rates of response in early 2019, but longer-term follow-up presented during the 2020 European Hematology Association (EHA) Congress demonstrated that complete responses increased over time in patients with relapsed/refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) and mantle cell lymphoma (MCL).

For patients with MCL, the median progression-free survival (PFS) was around 11 months, and the overall survival (OS) was around 2.5 years, which is not much different than what has been observed with ibrutinib monotherapy. However, in the CLL cohort, the 4-year PFS rate was 80%, and the 4-year OS rate was 90%, which was a big difference compared with historical controls.

Many patients are still receiving treatment with ibrutinib and umbralisib on the study, but this dataset highlights the continued efficacy and safety of dual B-cell receptor blockade. Umbralisib remains an investigational agent at this time, but more positive findings for this agent were recently presented from the phase 3 UNITY-CLL trial, which evaluated umbralisib in combination with ublituximab (TGTX-1101) in patients with CLL.

In an interview with Targeted Oncology, Matthew Davids, MD, MMSc, an associate director with the Center for Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia; director of clinical research, Lymphoma Program; and medical oncologist, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and an assistant professor of medicine with Harvard Medical School, discussed the long-term follow-up results of ibrutinib in combination with umbralisib as treatment of patients with CLL and MCL.

TARGETED ONCOLOGY: For patients with CLL and MCL, could you discuss the prognosis we see in this relapsed/refractory patient population?

Davids: With the advent of the BTK inhibitor ibrutinib, the outlook for patients with relapsed/refractory CLL and MCL certainly improved quite a bit. The drug is very active, and yet, particularly for high-risk patients and for CLL that means, especially patients with TP53 dysfunction, the durability of these responses is usually relatively short, so in that CLL high-risk population, looking at median PFS of only about 2 to 3 years in the relapsed setting with ibrutinib as a monotherapy. In MCL, even though the response rates are high, actually, the PFS is only a little over one year with a bruit nib as a monotherapy. That provided a rationale to try to develop combination approaches for this population, and there’s a number of them that are being evaluated right now.

The 1 combination that we focused on was looking at dual blockade of the B-cell receptor pathway. We know that the CLL cells and MCL cells depend heavily on this B-cell receptor pathway for survival and that there’s actually another arm of the pathway that has Pi3K as a key node. We were really interested in going after this other arm of the pathway to see if we could try to prevent resistance to ibrutinib as a monotherapy agent. That was the rationale for the study design.

TARGETED ONCOLOGY: What were the methods of design used for this study, and what did the patient population look like?

Davids: One of the challenges with this study is that there was a previous study that combined a SICK inhibitor drug with a Pi3K inhibitor and showed significant toxicity. That was the first time that there was a dual targeting of the B-cell receptor pathway, so we decided to take a different approach and rather than targeting SICK to target BTK, and rather than using an older delta-specific inhibitor of Pi3K, we used a newer molecule called umbralisib, which is a selective Pi3K inhibitor. It also targets casein kinase 2.

The idea here was to use 2 very well-tolerated drugs to target these 2 different parts of the pathway and try to prove that this could be a safe and effective strategy. We were able to accrue 42 patients to the study, 21 with CLL and 21 with MCL. These were all relapsed/refractory patients, generally with at least 1 to 2 lines of prior therapy. Few of them had had prior ibrutinib as mono therapy, but they weren’t refractory to ibrutinib; they had maybe started it but were still in the first few months of treatment. It was a pretty high-risk population as well, about 70% of the CLL patients had the unmutated IGhV and about 20% of the CLL patients had deletion 17p or TP53 mutation. This is generally quite a high-risk population. Many of the MCL patients had also relapsed already after autologous stem cell transplantation and were in desperate need of effective treatment options.

TARGETED ONCOLOGY: What were the results from this study?

Davids: We had published the initial results of this study early last year with around 2 years of follow up, and we did find the high rates of response in both CLL and MCL. We saw very good tolerability. We were able to identify the recommended phase 2 dose of umbralisib drug as 800 mg in combination with standard dose ibrutinib. The challenge with that early report was that the follow up was quite short, and so really the idea with our update at the EHA meeting is now with around closer to 4 years of follow up, looking at the progression-free and open overall survival for these very high-risk patients.

The other thing that we looked at actually was the rates of complete remission, which did increase a bit over time as we’ve seen with B-cell receptor pathway inhibitors. That was the case in our study as well. What we thought were the key updates from this poster were the PFS and OS data. Now with MCL, these didn’t change too much. The median PFS was only around 11 months in this very high-risk population, although the median OS was about 2 and a half years. To us, this didn’t look too different from ibrutinib a monotherapy, so it was hard to know if there’s a difference there. Where we are really seeing a difference is with the CLL patients. Obviously, we’re comparing to historical controls. There’s no there’s no randomized comparator here, but we did see a 4-year PFS in this high-risk CLL population of close to 80% and a 4-year OS of 90% in the CLL population with many patients still on the to drug combination, doing very well. Our data set here really highlights both the efficacy and the safety of dual B-cell receptor blockade, and I think this really does warrant further study.

TARGETED ONCOLOGY: Now that we’ve seen these promising results in the relapsed/refractory setting, is their evidence you think just for moving this up in the treatment landscape or in another patient population?

Davids: I think 1 patient population where this could be a useful approach is in the post-venetoclax (Venclexta) setting. Particularly in CLL, now we’re using venetoclax in earlier lines of therapy, including in the frontline setting. This type of approach might be very useful to use, for example, in the second-line setting; I think that needs to be explored. I think there have been challenges with moving other Pi3K inhibitor drugs into the frontline setting. We’ve seen more immune-mediated toxicities in those studies, but I do think with umbralisib being a very well-tolerated Pi3K inhibitor drug and ibrutinib being such a popular regimen for frontline CLL, certainly this type of approach could be studied in the frontline setting prospectively.

TARGETED ONCOLOGY: How do you see this combination potentially impacting the treatment landscape for CLL and MCL?

Davids: As of right now, umbralisib remains an investigational agent, although we did recently hear a press release about a positive result in the CLL UNITY study. I think that this is a drug that’s headed toward a label in CLL and possibly in MCL as well. Although right now, this is not a regimen that could be utilized, I do think it’s potentially a regimen that could be utilized off label in the future for a select group of patients. However, I would feel more comfortable as there’s more data accumulating in larger datasets to make this as more of a recommendation for patients. I think we need larger studies and ideally, a randomized study where we can compare a doublet like this to perhaps singlet therapy with ibrutinib.

Nonetheless, I think our study is the first time that we’ve shown the feasibility of combining a BTK inhibitor with a Pi3K inhibitor. We showed it in these 2 non-Hodgkin lymphomas, but I think this is the type of approach that could also be studied in other non-Hodgkin lymphomas and may be promising there as well.

Continue Reading Click here 


Long-Term Results of Ibrutinib/Umbralisib Show Efficacy in CLL and MCL

Long-Term Results of Ibrutinib/Umbralisib Show Efficacy in CLL and MCL

This article was originally published by Targeted Oncology

Matthew S. Davids, MD, associate director of the Center for Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia, director, Clinical Research for the Lymphoma Program at the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, and associate professor of Medicine at Harvard Medical School, discusses the long-term follow-up of a phase 1/1b trial (NCT02268851) for patients with relapsed/refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) or mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) receiving ibrutinib (Imbruvica) and umbralisib.

The initial results were presented early in 2019 with about 2 years of follow-up, showing high rates of response in patients with CLL and MCL, according to Davids. There was good tolerability observed for these patients, and the investigators were able to identify the recommended phase 2 dose for umbralisib of 800 mg combined with the standard dose of ibrutinib.

The challenge with the initial report was that the follow-up for these patients was short, Davids says. The goal of the update at the 2020 European Hematology Association Congress was to present about 4 years of follow-up of the progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) of the high-risk patients. The investigators also looked at the rates of complete remission, which increased over time.

For patients with MCL, the median PFS was around 11 months, and the median OS was about 2 and a half years. Davids thinks that this didn’t look much different than ibrutinib monotherapy, and it is hard to tell if there is a difference between monotherapy and this combination.

Davids says the investigators saw the bigger difference in the patients with CLL compared to historical control studies. There was about an 80% 4-year PFS in the high-risk CLL population and a 4-year OS of 90%. There are still many patients on the ibrutinib and umbralisib combination. The data set highlights the efficacy and safety of dual B-cell receptor blockade and warrants further study, he believes.