Ibrutinib delays disease progression for asymptomatic patients but has no overall survival (OS) benefit; hence, still watch and wait in those patients.
The CLL12 trial reassesses the watch-and-wait consensus for early-stage chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) in the context of targeted therapies.
The German CLL Study Group conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase III trial with 363 patients with asymptomatic, treatment-naïve Binet stage A CLL at increased risk of progression to receive ibrutinib (n = 182) at a daily dose of 420 mg or placebo (n = 181). Additionally, 152 low-risk patients were allocated to the watch-and-wait group. The final analysis included event-free survival, progression-free survival, time to next treatment, overall survival, and safety assessments.
Ibrutinib significantly delayed progression to symptomatic disease (P < .001; hazard ratio, 0.276 [95% CI, 0.188 to 0.407]), but no survival benefit was observed with 26 death cases (P = .562) at a median observation time of 69.3 months. Five-year survival rates were excellent: 93.3% (95% CI, 89.3 to 97.3) in the ibrutinib group, 93.6% (95% CI, 89.5 to 97.7) in the placebo group, and 97.9% (95% CI, 95.6 to 100) in the watch-and-wait cohort. Estimated 10-year survival rates from diagnosis were 86.5% (95% CI, 78.7 to 94.3, placebo), 89.8% (95% CI, 83.3 to 96.3, ibrutinib), and 95.3% (95% CI, 91.1 to 99.4, watch and wait). In the ibrutinib group, one of 12 deaths was CLL-associated, compared with four of 14 fatal cases of CLL progression or Richter transformation in the placebo group. Adverse and serious adverse events occurred in 99.4% and 60% of both treatment groups, respectively. The safety profile indicated increased cardiovascular toxicity in the ibrutinib group.
Ibrutinib treatment in early-stage CLL delayed disease progression compared with placebo. However, with the given observation time and few deaths, no survival benefit was demonstrated. In the era of targeted therapies, watch and wait remains the standard of care irrespective of risk factors.
This study was done with and without obinutuzumab, both arms beat obinutuzumab and chlorambucil. There were more deaths in the obinutuzumab arm even though it was superior because of COVID, so it is immunosuppressive.
This study compared double induction vs. standard induction and a reduced dose of daunorubicin 90mg/m2 vs. 60mg/m2. The reduced dose was just as efficacious and double inductions do not seem to be beneficial. Probably less is more in this setting and once you get the CR, one can move forward with consolidation and start planning for transplant.
Compelling study showing Asciminib vs. investigator’s choice TKi. Asciminib was better tolerated and with deeper molecular responses. This may become a preferred option for many new chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) patients. Cost may be an issue.
Sorafenib did not help in newly diagnosed AML (with FLT-ITD) patients as maintenance therapy. MRD testing can also predict survival outcome.
A small number of patients in this study, but it is an interesting test to predict who can be off therapy in CML. Patients who are high risk probably should to be taken off therapy, but this gives us something to build on.
FCS Hematology Oncology Review creates a platform for our physician network to observe the most recent articles and studies available in the oncology and hematology world. By sharing these articles we are building our wealth of knowledge of new observations and treatments as they come available.
