PURPOSE: The CAPTIVATE study investigated first-line ibrutinib plus venetoclax for chronic lymphocytic leukemia in 2 cohorts: minimal residual disease (MRD)-guided randomized discontinuation (MRD cohort) and Fixed Duration (FD cohort). We report outcomes of fixed-duration ibrutinib plus venetoclax in patients with high-risk genomic features [del(17p), TP53 mutation, and/or unmutated immunoglobulin heavy chain (IGHV)] in CAPTIVATE. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients received three cycles of ibrutinib 420 mg/day then 12 cycles of ibrutinib plus venetoclax (5-week ramp-up to 400 mg/day). FD cohort patients (n = 159) received no further treatment. Forty-three MRD cohort patients with confirmed undetectable MRD (uMRD) after 12 cycles of ibrutinib plus venetoclax received randomized placebo treatment. RESULTS: Of 195 patients with known status of genomic risk features at baseline, 129 (66%) had ≥1 high-risk feature. Overall response rates were >95% regardless of high-risk features. In patients with and without high-risk features, respectively, complete response (CR) rates were 61% and 53%; best uMRD rates: 88% and 70% (peripheral blood) and 72% and 61% (bone marrow); 36-month progression-free survival (PFS) rates: 88% and 92%. In subsets with del(17p)/TP53 mutation (n = 29) and unmutated IGHV without del(17p)/TP53 mutation (n = 100), respectively, CR rates were 52% and 64%; uMRD rates: 83% and 90% (peripheral blood) and 45% and 80% (bone marrow); 36-month PFS rates: 81% and 90%. Thirty-six-month overall survival (OS) rates were >95% regardless of high-risk features. CONCLUSIONS: Deep, durable responses and sustained PFS seen with fixed-duration ibrutinib plus venetoclax are maintained in patients with high-risk genomic features, with similar PFS and OS to those without high-risk features. See related commentary by Rogers, p. 2561.

Purpose

The phase II CAPTIVATE study investigated first-line treatment with ibrutinib plus venetoclax for chronic lymphocytic leukemia in two cohorts: minimal residual disease (MRD)-guided randomized treatment discontinuation (MRD cohort) and fixed duration (FD cohort). We report tumor debulking and tumor lysis syndrome (TLS) risk category reduction with three cycles of single-agent ibrutinib lead-in before initiation of venetoclax using pooled data from the MRD and FD cohorts.

Patients and methods

In both cohorts, patients initially received three cycles of ibrutinib 420 mg/day then 12 cycles of ibrutinib plus venetoclax (5-week ramp-up to 400 mg/day).

Results

In the total population (N = 323), the following decreases from baseline to after ibrutinib lead-in were observed: percentage of patients with a lymph node diameter ≥5 cm decreased from 31% to 4%, with absolute lymphocyte count ≥25 × 109/L from 76% to 65%, with high tumor burden category for TLS risk from 23% to 2%, and with an indication for hospitalization (high TLS risk, or medium TLS risk and creatinine clearance <80 mL/minute) from 43% to 18%. Laboratory TLS per Howard criteria occurred in one patient; no clinical TLS was observed.

Conclusions

Three cycles of ibrutinib lead-in before venetoclax initiation provides effective tumor debulking, decreases the TLS risk category and reduces the need for hospitalization for intensive monitoring for TLS.

The Materials Genome Initiative (MGI) advanced a new paradigm for materials discovery and design, namely that the pace of new materials deployment could be accelerated through complementary efforts in theory, computation, and experiment. Along with numerous successes, new challenges are inviting researchers to refocus the efforts and approaches that were originally inspired by the MGI. In May 2017, the National Science Foundation sponsored the workshop “Advancing and Accelerating Materials Innovation Through the Synergistic Interaction among Computation, Experiment, and Theory: Opening New Frontiers” to review accomplishments that emerged from investments in science and infrastructure under the MGI, identify scientific opportunities in this new environment, examine how to effectively utilize new materials innovation infrastructure, and discuss challenges in achieving accelerated materials research through the seamless integration of experiment, computation, and theory. This article summarizes key findings from the workshop and provides perspectives that aim to guide the direction of future materials research and its translation into societal impacts.

Purpose

CAPTIVATE (NCT02910583), a randomized phase II study, evaluates minimal residual disease (MRD)-guided treatment discontinuation following completion of first-line ibrutinib plus venetoclax treatment in patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL).

Methods

Previously untreated CLL patients age < 70 years received three cycles of ibrutinib and then 12 cycles of combined ibrutinib plus venetoclax. Patients in the MRD cohort who met the stringent random assignment criteria for confirmed undetectable MRD (Confirmed uMRD) were randomly assigned 1:1 to double-blind placebo or ibrutinib; patients without Confirmed uMRD (uMRD Not Confirmed) were randomly assigned 1:1 to open-label ibrutinib or ibrutinib plus venetoclax. Primary end point was 1-year disease-free survival (DFS) rate with placebo versus ibrutinib in the Confirmed uMRD population. Secondary end points included response rates, uMRD, and safety.

Results

One hundred sixty-four patients initiated three cycles of ibrutinib lead-in. After 12 cycles of ibrutinib plus venetoclax, best uMRD response rates were 75% (peripheral blood) and 68% (bone marrow). Patients with Confirmed uMRD were randomly assigned to receive placebo (n = 43) or ibrutinib (n = 43); patients with uMRD Not Confirmed were randomly assigned to ibrutinib (n = 31) or ibrutinib plus venetoclax (n = 32). Median follow-up was 31.3 months. One-year DFS rate was not significantly different between placebo (95%) and ibrutinib (100%; arm difference: 4.7% [95% CI, -1.6 to 10.9]; P = .15) in the Confirmed uMRD population. After ibrutinib lead-in tumor debulking, 36 of 40 patients (90%) with high tumor lysis syndrome risk at baseline shifted to medium or low tumor lysis syndrome risk categories. Adverse events were most frequent during the first 6 months of ibrutinib plus venetoclax and generally decreased over time.

Conclusion

The 1-year DFS rate of 95% in placebo-randomly assigned patients with Confirmed uMRD suggests the potential for fixed-duration treatment with this all-oral, once-daily, chemotherapy-free regimen in first-line CLL.

Elderly chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (CLL) patients treated outside of trials have notably greater toxicity with the Brutons tyrosine kinase inhibitor ibrutinib compared to younger patients. It is not known whether the same holds true for the B-cell lymphoma 2 inhibitor venetoclax. We provide a comprehensive analysis of key safety measures and efficacy in 342 patients comparing age categories ≥75 and <75 years treated in the relapsed, refractory non-trial setting. We demonstrate that venetoclax has equivalent efficacy and safety in relapsed/refractory CLL patients who are elderly, the majority of whom are previous ibrutinib-exposed and therefore may otherwise have few clear therapeutic options.

7009 Background: The phase 2 CAPTIVATE study evaluated first-line ibrutinib (Ibr) + venetoclax (Ven) for CLL/SLL in 2 cohorts: minimal residual disease (MRD)-guided randomized discontinuation (MRD cohort) and Fixed Duration (FD cohort). Ibr±Ven retreatment was allowed in patients (pts) who had progressive disease (PD). Here, we report outcomes for pts with high-risk genomic features from the FD cohort and retreatment outcomes in pts from the FD cohort and MRD cohort placebo arm. Methods: Pts aged ≤70 y with previously untreated CLL/SLL without restriction on genomic risk factors received 3 cycles of Ibr, then 12 cycles of Ibr+Ven (Ibr, 420 mg/d orally; Ven, 5-wk ramp up to 400 mg/d orally). On-study retreatment included single-agent Ibr (FD cohort or MRD cohort placebo arm); pts with PD >2 y after end of treatment (EOT) could be retreated with FD Ibr+Ven (FD cohort). Results: In the FD cohort (n=159) with a median follow-up of 61.2 mo (range, 0.8–66.3), 5-y PFS and OS rates (95% CI) were 67% (59–74) and 96% (91–98), respectively. 5-y PFS rates were higher in pts with undetectable MRD at 3 mo after EOT in peripheral blood (83%) or bone marrow (84%) vs those without (48% and 50%, respectively). 5-y PFS rates (95% CI) in pts with genomic risk factors were: del(17p)/mutated TP53 41% (21–59), complex karyotype 57% (37–72), del(11q) 64% (30–85), and unmutated IGHV 68% (50–80) (Table). In total, 18 second malignancies occurred in 13 pts (10 events in 8 pts during FD Ibr+Ven, 6 events in 4 pts after EOT and before retreatment, and 2 events in 2 pts during retreatment). Of 202 pts who completed Ibr+Ven (FD cohort, n=159; MRD cohort placebo arm, n=43), 63 have had PD to date; PD occurred >2 y after EOT in 43/63 pts (68%). 32/63 (51%) pts initiated retreatment with Ibr (n=25) or Ibr+Ven (n=7). With a median time on Ibr retreatment of 21.9 mo (range, 0.03–50.4), ORR was 86% in 22 evaluable pts (best response: 1 CR; 1 nodular PR; 17 PR; 2 SD; 1 PD [Richter transformation]). With a median time on Ibr+Ven retreatment of 13.8 mo (range, 3.7–15.1), ORR was 71% in 7 evaluable pts (best response: 1 CR; 4 PR; 1 PR with lymphocytosis; 1 SD). Conclusions: With up to 5.5 y of follow-up, FD Ibr+Ven continues to provide clinically meaningful PFS in pts with high-risk genomic features, as well as in the overall population. Ibr-based retreatment provides promising responses in pts needing subsequent therapy after the all-oral FD regimen of Ibr+Ven. Clinical trial information: NCT02910583 . [Table: see text]

PURPOSE: Clinical trials of venetoclax reported negligible rates of clinical tumor lysis syndrome (TLS) in patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) when using an extended dose escalation schedule. We aimed to understand TLS prophylaxis, rates of select adverse events (AE), and impact of dosing modifications in routine clinical practice. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: This retrospective cohort study included 297 CLL venetoclax-treated patients outside of clinical trials in academic and community centers. Demographics, baseline disease characteristics, venetoclax dosing, TLS risk and prophylaxis, and AEs were collected. RESULTS: The group was 69% male, 96% had relapsed/refractory CLL, 45% had deletion chromosome 17p, 84% had unmutated IGHV, 80% received venetoclax monotherapy, and median age was 67. TLS risk was categorized as low (40%), intermediate (32%), or high (28%), and 62% had imaging prior to venetoclax initiation. Clinical TLS occurred in 2.7% of patients and laboratory TLS occurred in 5.7%. Pre-venetoclax TLS risk group and creatinine clearance independently predict TLS development in multivariable analysis. Grade 3/4 AEs included neutropenia (39.6%), thrombocytopenia (29.2%), infection (25%), neutropenic fever (7.9%), and diarrhea (6.9%). Twenty-two patients (7.4%) discontinued venetoclax due to an AE. Progression-free survival was similar regardless of number of dose interruptions, length of dose interruption, and stable venetoclax dose. CONCLUSIONS: These data provide insights into current use of venetoclax in clinical practice, including TLS rates observed in clinical practice. We identified opportunities for improved adherence to TLS risk stratification and prophylaxis, which may improve safety.

Venetoclax (VEN) is approved for relapsed/refractory (R/R) chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) as monotherapy (VENmono) or in combination with rituximab. Whether VEN plus anti-CD20 (VENcombo) is superior to VENmono is unknown. We conducted a multicenter, retrospective cohort analysis comparing 321 CLL patients treated with VENmono vs VENcombo across the United States and the United Kingdom. We examined demographics, baseline characteristics, dosing, adverse events, response rates, and outcomes. The primary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS), estimated by Kaplan-Meier method, in patients treated with VENmono vs VENcombo. Univariate and bivariate analyses were performed with COX regression. Three hundred twenty-one CLL patients were included (3 median prior treatments, 78% prior ibrutinib). The overall response rates (ORRs) were similar (VENmono, 81% ORR, 34% complete remission [CR] vs VENcombo, 84% ORR, 32% CR). With a median follow-up of 13.4 months, no differences in PFS and OS were observed between the groups. In unadjusted analyses, the hazard ratios (HRs) for PFS and OS for VENmono vs VENcombo were HR 1.0 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.6-1.8; P = .7) and HR 1.2 (95% CI, 0.6-2.3; P = .5), respectively. When adjusting for differences between the cohorts, the addition of an anti-CD20 antibody in combination with VEN did not impact PFS (HR, 1.0; 95% CI, 0.5-2.0; P = .9) or OS (HR, 1.1; 95% CI, 0.4-2.6; P = .8). We demonstrate comparable efficacy between VENmono and VENcombo in a heavily pretreated, high-risk, retrospective cohort, in terms of both response data and survival outcomes. Prospective studies are needed to validate these findings.

Purpose

Venetoclax-based therapy is a standard-of-care option in first-line and relapsed/refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). Patient management following venetoclax discontinuation remains nonstandard and poorly understood.

Experimental design

To address this, we conducted a large international study to identify a cohort of 326 patients who discontinued venetoclax and have been subsequently treated. Coprimary endpoints were overall response rate (ORR) and progression-free survival for the post-venetoclax treatments stratified by treatment type [Bruton's tyrosine kinase inhibitor (BTKi), PI3K inhibitor (PI3Ki), and cellular therapies].

Results

We identified patients with CLL who discontinued venetoclax in the first-line (4%) and relapsed/refractory settings (96%). Patients received a median of three therapies prior to venetoclax; 40% were BTKi naïve (n = 130), and 81% were idelalisib naïve (n = 263). ORR to BTKi was 84% (n = 44) in BTKi-naïve patients versus 54% (n = 30) in BTKi-exposed patients. We demonstrate therapy selection following venetoclax requires prior novel agent exposure consideration and discontinuation reasons.

Conclusions

For BTKi-naïve patients, selection of covalently binding BTKis results in high ORR and durable remissions. For BTKi-exposed patients, covalent BTK inhibition is not effective in the setting of BTKi resistance. PI3Kis following venetoclax do not appear to result in durable remissions. We conclude that BTKi in naïve or previously responsive patients and cellular therapies following venetoclax may be the most effective strategies.See related commentary by Rogers, p. 3501.