Advertisement


Jennifer A. Woyach, MD, on New Findings on CLL, COVID-19, and Treatment With Obinutuzumab Plus Venetoclax

2023 ASCO Annual Meeting

Advertisement

Jennifer A. Woyach, MD, of The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, discusses results of a phase III study showing that progression-free survival with ibrutinib plus obinutuzumab plus venetoclax is not superior to ibrutinib plus obinutuzumab for treatment-naive older patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) in the setting of the COVID-19 pandemic. Long-term follow-up will determine whether there are advantages to obinutuzumab plus venetoclax, with special attention to measurable residual disease and therapy discontinuation (Abstract 7500).



Transcript

Disclaimer: This video transcript has not been proofread or edited and may contain errors.
The Alliance A041702 trial is an NCTN phase III clinical trial looking at initial therapy for older patients with previously untreated chronic lymphocytic leukemia, or CLL. The study was investigating the regimen of ibrutinib plus venetoclax plus obinutuzumab compared with the doublet of ibrutinib plus obinutuzumab. The study is actually the successor trial to the A041202 study, which demonstrated a superior progression-free survival for either ibrutinib given alone or in combination with rituximab compared with chemoimmunotherapy with bendamustine plus rituximab. So even though ibrutinib does produce long-term durable remissions for many patients, patients do have trouble sometimes with the indefinite administration of therapy in terms of long-term toxicity and sometimes financial implications of a continuous treatment as well. So the purpose of this study was to see whether adding venetoclax to this doublet might allow more patients to have undetectable minimal residual disease and complete responses and thus be able to discontinue therapy. So the way the trial is designed is patients were randomized to the triplet, again ibrutinib, venetoclax, obinutuzumab, or IVO, or the doublet ibrutinib plus obinutuzumab. After a year of treatment, and this included just six months of the antibody, all patients underwent a response evaluation. Those patients that were on the doublet arm all then continued ibrutinib indefinitely, and the patients on the triplet arm underwent a response-adapted either discontinuation of ibrutinib or continuation of therapy. The reason this study is being presented so early is because it actually did meet its futility boundary, meaning that IVO is not superior to IO. However, importantly, we do think that this study may have been confounded somewhat by the COVID-19 pandemic, where the death rate from COVID-19 was higher in patients treated on the triplet arm than those treated on the doublet arm. Outside of this, the toxicity profile between the two regimens was actually relatively similar. There was a little bit higher a risk of hematologic toxicity with the additional of venetoclax, but non-hematologic toxicity in general was fairly similar on the two arms. So when we look at progression-free survival at this time, which we have about 14 months of follow-up right now, it actually is very similar between the triplet and the doublet with the PFS trending towards favoring the doublet a little bit over the triplet. However, when we censor patients who died of COVID-19, we actually see that trend reversed, where there is a trend towards improved PFS with the triplet versus the doublet. Because of this, we think it's going to be really important to follow this study long-term. Though we are not ever going to be able to conclude that IVO is a better therapy than IO in this patient population, it may be that some patients would benefit from the discontinuation of therapy. And we really will only see that when we have much longer follow-up and many more patients who have actually discontinued the treatment. In addition to long-term follow-up on this study, we are going to continue, in the Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology, to investigate frontline therapy for older patients with CLL, with the goal of really trying to determine what is the optimal therapy for this patient group.

Related Videos

Myelodysplastic Syndromes
Supportive Care

Aaron T. Gerds, MD, on Anemia in Myelofibrosis: New Data on Treatment With Luspatercept

Aaron T. Gerds, MD, of Cleveland Clinic Taussig Cancer Institute, talks about treating the anemia many patients with myelofibrosis experience because of JAK inhibitor therapy. The ACE-536-MF-001 study showed that luspatercept improved anemia and transfusion burden in this population, with a safety profile consistent with that in previous studies (Abstract 7016).

Colorectal Cancer

Smitha Krishnamurthi, MD, and Deb Schrag, MD, MPH, on Rectal Cancer: New Findings on Chemoradiation, Chemotherapy, and Excision

Smitha Krishnamurthi, MD, of the Cleveland Clinic, and Deb Schrag, MD, MPH, of Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, discuss phase III findings from the PROSPECT trial, which showed FOLFOX chemotherapy with selective use of radiation therapy and sensitizing fluoropyrimidine (5FUCRT) is noninferior to 5FUCRT for the neoadjuvant treatment of patients with locally advanced rectal cancer, prior to low anterior resection with total mesorectal excision (Abstract LBA2).

Bladder Cancer

Arlene O. Siefker-Radtke, MD, on Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma: New Data on Erdafitinib vs Chemotherapy From the THOR Study

Arlene O. Siefker-Radtke, MD, of The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, discusses phase III findings showing that for patients with advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma and FGFR alteration who already had been treated with a PD-(L)1 inhibitor, erdafitinib significantly improved overall and progression-free survival, as well as overall response rate, compared with investigator’s choice of chemotherapy (LBA4619).

Gynecologic Cancers

Marie Plante, MD, on Cervical Cancer: New Data on Hysterectomy and Pelvic Node Dissection

Marie Plante, MD, of Canada’s Université Laval and the CHUQ Hotel Dieu de Québec, discusses phase III results from a study that compared radical hysterectomy and pelvic node dissection vs simple hysterectomy and pelvic node dissection in patients with low-risk early-stage cervical cancer. The pelvic recurrence rate at 3 years in the women who underwent simple hysterectomy is not inferior to those who had radical hysterectomy. In addition, fewer surgical complications and better quality of life were observed with simple hysterectomy (LBA5511).

Gynecologic Cancers
Immunotherapy

Bobbie J. Rimel, MD, Isabelle L. Ray-Coquard, MD, PhD, on Cervical Squamous Carcinoma: Neoadjuvant Nivolumab Plus Ipilimumab

Bobbie J. Rimel, MD, of Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, and Isabelle L. Ray-Coquard, MD, PhD, of Centre Léon Bérard and the University Claude Bernard Lyon Est, discuss findings from the COLIBRI trial, which showed that, for patients with cervical squamous cell carcinoma, neoadjuvant nivolumab plus ipilimumab is safe and orchestrates de novo immune responses. The 82.5% complete response rate for primary tumors 6 months after standard chemoradiation therapy suggests favorable clinical outcomes (Abstract 5501). 

Advertisement

Advertisement




Advertisement