Jennifer R. Brown, MD, PhD, on CLL/SLL: New Findings on Zanubrutinib vs Ibrutinib for Relapsed or Refractory Disease
2022 ASH Annual Meeting and Exposition
Jennifer R. Brown, MD, PhD, of Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, discusses phase III findings of the ALPINE study, which showed that zanubrutinib is more efficacious and better tolerated than ibrutinib as a treatment for patients with relapsed or refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) and small lymphocytic lymphoma (SLL). In this first head-to-head comparison of the two BTK inhibitors, the superior progression-free survival of zanubrutinib was observed across all major subgroups, including high-risk patients (Abstract LBA-6).
Disclaimer: This video transcript has not been proofread or edited and may contain errors.
The Alpine study is a randomized phase-three trial comparing zanubrutinib to ibrutinib in relapsed/refractory CLL patients. As a reminder, ibrutinib is our first-in-class BTK inhibitor, which has been transformative for CLL therapy but has significant adverse events. Zanubrutinib is a next-generation drug, which is more specific for BTK and also maintains drug levels throughout the dosing interval, potentially allowing greater BTK occupancy. Alpine was designed to assess the efficacy and safety of zanubrutinib in comparison to ibrutinib. The population was an all-comer relapsed/refractory population with a median of one prior therapy, which was chemoimmunotherapy by and large. The randomization was stratified by age, geographic area relapsed/refractory disease, and deletion 17p or TP53 aberrancy. The findings that I presented at ASH this year demonstrated that zanubrutinib has a superior progression-free survival compared to ibrutinib in this setting with a hazard ratio of 0.65 and a two-year landmark of 79% progression-free survival for zanubrutinib versus 67% for ibrutinib, so a 12% improvement.
This was seen across all subgroups of disease, but in particular, the high-risk deletion 17p/TP53 aberrant patients had a 22% improvement in their two-year landmark PFS. The median PFS with ibrutinib was reached at 36 months, but not reached with zanubrutinib. In addition to this, zanubrutinib continues to have a higher overall response rate than ibrutinib, which was actually the primary endpoint of the study, but PFS was a key secondary endpoint that we reported here. It was event-driven after 205 events.
In terms of safety, zanubrutinib was also safer than ibrutinib. There were fewer drug discontinuations, fewer drug holds, fewer drug interruptions for toxicity. Perhaps most importantly, the cardiac safety was significantly improved with fewer cardiac serious adverse events. Only one drug discontinuation for a cardiac adverse event with zanubrutinib versus 14 for ibrutinib, and perhaps most notably, no cardiac death with zanubrutinib versus six with ibrutinib.
In terms of other toxicities, the most common toxicity was neutropenia, which was 23% grade three or higher with zanubrutinib versus 22% with ibrutinib, so pretty comparable, although there were fewer associated infections with zanubrutinib at 9% versus 13% with ibrutinib. COVID-19 was the next most common adverse event and the most common adverse event leading to death at about 4% in zanubrutinib and 5% in ibrutinib. Hypertension was balanced between the arms.
So in summary, the Alpine study demonstrated that zanubrutinib has a superior progression-free survival to ibrutinib in relapsed/refractory CLL patients and is also better tolerated with a particularly better cardiac profile, which is one of our key points we worry about with BTK inhibitors. The results of this study are potentially practice-changing, demonstrating that zanubrutinib is a new standard of care for CLL.
Are there any follow-up studies you want to mention?
Although this was the final analysis of progression-free survival, there will be ongoing analysis and we'll certainly be interested in more mature data as this is about 30 month follow up. We're also interested in studies that are evaluating combination of zanubrutinib and venetoclax, or zanubrutinib and other Bcl-2 inhibitors looking potentially at time limited therapy similar to what's been done with other BTK inhibitors, mostly ibrutinib to date, but also acalabrutinib.
Francesco Maura, MD, of the University of Miami, Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center, discusses his team’s findings in which they defined a comprehensive catalogue of genomic determinants of response to DKRd (carfilzomib, lenalidomide, dexamethasone) in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. The researchers have identified a number of new genomic alterations that explain resistance to the agents currently used in combination regimens (Abstract 470).
Anand P. Jillella, MD, of Georgia Cancer Center at Augusta University, discusses results from the ECOG-ACRIN EA9131 Trial, which showed that using a simplified treatment algorithm and management recommendations made by a group of specialists, resulted in a dramatic improvement in 1-year survival of patients with acute promyelocytic leukemia (Abstract 421).
Tycel J. Phillips, MD, of the City of Hope National Medical Center, discusses data that showed fixed-duration glofitamab monotherapy induced high and durable complete response rates in patients with mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) who received obinutuzumab pretreatment. This is one of the largest data sets and longest follow-ups reported with a CD20/CD3 bispecific monoclonal antibody for patients with relapsed or refractory MCL (Abstract 74).
Elias Jabbour, MD, of The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, discusses an analysis confirming that olverembatinib is a potentially viable treatment option for patients with chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) and Philadelphia chromosome–positive acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL), including those with CML whose disease did not respond to ponatinib or asciminib, or who had a T315I mutation (Abstract 82).
Jia Ruan, MD, PhD, of Meyer Cancer Center, Weill Cornell Medicine, and NewYork-Presbyterian Hospital, discusses trial results demonstrating that the triple chemotherapy-free combination of acalabrutinib, lenalidomide, and rituximab is well tolerated, highly effective, and produces high rates of minimal residual disease (MRD)-negative complete response as an initial treatment for patients with mantle cell lymphoma, including those with TP53 mutations. Real-time MRD analysis may enable treatment de-escalation during maintenance to minimize toxicity, which warrants further evaluation. An expansion cohort of acalabrutinib/lenalidomide/obinutuzumab is being launched (Abstract 73).