A retrospective comparison of venetoclax alone or in combination with an anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody in R/R CLL

Anthony R. Mato(Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center), Lindsey E. Roeker(Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center), Toby A. Eyre(Oxford University Hospitals NHS Trust), Chadi Nabhan, Nicole Lamanna(Columbia University Irving Medical Center), Brian T. Hill(Cleveland Clinic), Danielle M. Brander(Duke University), Paul M. Barr(University of Rochester), Frederick Lansigan(Dartmouth College), Bruce D. Cheson(Georgetown University), Arun K. Singavi(Medical College of Wisconsin), Maryam Sarraf Yazdy(Georgetown University), Nirav N. Shah(Medical College of Wisconsin), John N. Allan(Cornell University), Erica B. Bhavsar(Cornell University), Joanna Rhodes(University of Pennsylvania), Kaitlin Kennard(University of Pennsylvania), Stephen J. Schuster(University of Pennsylvania), AnnaLynn M. Williams(University of Rochester), Alan P Skarbnik(Hackensack University Medical Center), André Goy(Hackensack University Medical Center), Julie M. Goodfriend(Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center), Colleen Dorsey(Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center), Catherine C. Coombs(University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill), Hande H. Tuncer(Tufts Medical Center), Chaitra S. Ujjani(University of Washington), Ryan Jacobs(Carolinas Medical Center), Allison Winter(Cleveland Clinic), John M. Pagel, Neil A. Bailey, Anna Schuh(Oxford University Hospitals NHS Trust), Mazyar Shadman(University of Washington), Andrea Sitlinger(Duke University), Hanna Weissbrot(Columbia University Irving Medical Center), Sivraj Muralikrishnan(Dartmouth College), Andrew D. Zelenetz(Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center), Amy A. Kirkwood(Cancer Research UK), Christopher P. Fox(Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust)
Blood Advances
May 17, 2019
Cited by 26Open Access
Full Text

Abstract

Abstract 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.


Related Papers

No related papers found

Powered by citation graph analysis