Jennifer A. Woyach, MD, on New Findings on CLL, COVID-19, and Treatment With Obinutuzumab Plus Venetoclax
2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
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
The ASCO Post Staff
Nagla Abdel Karim, MD, of the Inova Schar Cancer Institute, University of Virginia, discusses phase II data showing that maintenance atezolizumab plus talazoparib improved progression-free survival in Schlafen-11–selected patients with extensive-stage small cell lung cancer. This study demonstrated the feasibility of conducting biomarker-selected trials in this disease, paving the way for future evaluation of novel therapies in selected populations (Abstract 8504).
The ASCO Post Staff
Rami Manochakian, MD, of Mayo Clinic Florida, offers his perspective on the new phase III findings on osimertinib, a third-generation, central nervous system EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor, which demonstrated an unprecedented overall survival benefit for patients with EGFR-mutated, stage IB–IIIA non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) after complete tumor resection, with or without adjuvant chemotherapy (Abstract LBA3).
The ASCO Post Staff
Alicia K. Morgans, MD, MPH, and Praful Ravi, MRCP, MBBChir, both of Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, discuss an individual patient-data analysis of randomized trials from the ICECAP collaborative. A PSA nadir of ≥ 0.1 ng/mL within 6 months after radiotherapy completion was prognostic for prostate cancer–specific, metastasis-free, and overall survival in patients receiving radiotherapy plus androgen-deprivation therapy for localized prostate cancer. These findings may help identify patients for therapy de-escalation trials (Abstract 5002).
The ASCO Post Staff
Allison Betof Warner, MD, PhD, of Stanford University Medical Center, and Adnan Khattak, MBBS, FRACP, PhD, of Australia’s Hollywood Private Hospital & Edith Cowan University, discuss the use of the mRNA-4157 vaccine in combination with pembrolizumab as adjuvant therapy for resected high-risk melanoma, which prolonged distant metastasis–free survival compared with pembrolizumab alone. These results provide further evidence that a personalized neoantigen approach is potentially beneficial (Abstract LBA9503).
The ASCO Post Staff
Rana R. McKay, MD, of the University of California, San Diego, and Toni K. Choueiri, MD, of Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and Harvard Medical School, discuss results from the phase III CONTACT-03 study, showing that, for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC), adding the PD-L1 inhibitor atezolizumab to cabozantinib did not improve clinical outcomes compared with treatment with cabozantinib alone. In addition, higher toxicities were observed in the combination arm (Abstract LBA4500).