Rate Of Infusion-related Reactions Research Articles

Daratumumab (DARA) maintenance or observation (OBS) after treatment with bortezomib, thalidomide and dexamethasone (VTd) with or without DARA and autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) in patients (pts) with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM): CASSIOPEIA Part 2.

8004 Background: D-VTd plus ASCT was approved for transplant-eligible (TE) NDMM based on part 1 of CASSIOPEIA. We report a prespecified interim analysis of CASSIOPEIA part 2: DARA maintenance vs OBS in pts with ≥partial response (PR) in part 1, regardless of induction/consolidation (ind/cons) treatment. Methods: CASSIOPEIA is a 2-part, randomized, open-label, phase 3 study in TE NDMM. Pts received 4 cycles ind and 2 cycles cons with D-VTd or VTd. 886 pts who achieved ≥PR were rerandomized to DARA 16 mg/kg IV Q8W for up to 2 yr (n = 442) or OBS (n = 444) until progressive disease per IMWG. Pts were stratified by ind (D-VTd vs VTd) and depth of response (minimum residual disease [MRD] status and post cons response ≥PR). Primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) after second randomization. This interim analysis assessed efficacy and safety after 281 PFS events. A preplanned hierarchical procedure tested key secondary endpoints: time to progression (TTP), ≥complete response (CR), MRD negativity rates by NGS and overall survival (OS). Results: At median follow-up of 35.4 mo, median PFS was not reached (NR) with DARA and 46.7 mo with OBS (HR 0.53; 95% CI 0.42–0.68; P <0.0001). PFS advantage for DARA was consistent across most subgroups. However, a prespecified analysis showed significant interaction with ind/cons treatment arm ( P< 0.0001). PFS HR for DARA vs OBS was 0.32 (95% CI 0.23–0.46) in the VTd arm and 1.02 (0.71–1.47) in the D-VTd arm. Median TTP was NR for DARA vs 46.7 mo for OBS (HR 0.49; 95% CI 0.38–0.62; P <0.0001). More pts in the DARA vs OBS arm achieved ≥CR (72.9% vs 60.8%; OR 2.17; 95% CI 1.54–3.07; P <0.0001). MRD negativity (in ≥CR pts at 10-5) was 58.6% with DARA vs 47.1% with OBS (OR 1.80; 95% CI 1.33–2.43; P= 0.0001). Median OS was NR in either arm. Most common (≥2.5%) grade 3/4 adverse events (AEs) with DARA vs OBS were pneumonia (2.5% vs 1.4%), lymphopenia (3.6% vs 1.8%), and hypertension (3.0% vs 1.6%). Serious AEs occurred in 22.7% (DARA) vs 18.9% (OBS) of pts; the most common (≥2.5%) was pneumonia (2.5% vs 1.6%). 13 (3.0%) pts discontinued DARA due to an AE. The rate of infusion-related reactions was 54.5% (DARA-naïve pts) and 2.2% (prior DARA pts); 90% were grade 1/2.Second primary malignancies occurred in 5.5% (DARA) vs 2.7% (OBS) of pts. Conclusions: CASSIOPEIA part 2 demonstrated a clinical benefit of DARA maintenance in TE NDMM pts, with significantly longer PFS for DARA vs OBS. With current follow-up, maintenance PFS benefit appeared only in pts treated with VTd as ind/cons. Pts who received D-VTd ind/cons with or without DARA maintenance achieved similar PFS; longer follow-up is needed for PFS2 and OS. DARA significantly increased deeper response and MRD negativity rates vs OBS, and was well tolerated with no new safety signals. Clinical trial information: NCT02541383.

Safety of subcutaneous daratumumab in the treatment of plasma-cell disorders: A single-center experience.

e20007 Background: Daratumumab (Dara) is a CD38-directed monoclonal antibody approved for the treatment of patients with multiple myeloma (MM) and light-chain amyloidosis (AL). Infusion-related reactions (IRRs) have been reported in 28-56% of individuals receiving the conventional intravenous (IV) formulation, necessitating slow infusions and frequent use of rescue medications to mitigate complications. Recently subcutaneous (SC) Dara received approval in MM, and randomized data suggests a lower rate of IRRs compared to IV Dara. Guidelines regarding post-injection monitoring with SC Dara are not well established. This retrospective study aims to evaluate the safety of SC Dara in patients with MM and AL, and to suggest guidelines for monitoring following SC Dara administration. Methods: This single-center retrospective study included patients treated with MM or AL receiving SC Dara between June 2020 and December 2020. The primary outcome of the study was incidence of IRRs. Secondary outcomes include timing and severity of IRRs based on CTCAE version 4.0. Results: A total of 82 patients received SC Dara during the study period. Of these 82, forty-nine (60%) had previously received Dara (Dara-exposed), and 33 patients (40%) were Dara-naïve. Eight of the 82 patients (9.8%) experienced an IRR. All were grade 1 (n=5, 63%) or grade 2 (n=3, 38%) in severity. Seven patients in the Dara-naïve group experienced an IRR (21%), and one patient in the Dara-exposed group (2%) experienced injection-site erythema with the second SC dose after transitioning from IV. Three patients experienced reactions immediately after SC Dara administration, and four patients experienced delayed reactions >4 hours after SC Dara administration (median 11.9 hours; range 5-24). Among those with delayed reactions, three experienced reactions after being discharged from the treatment area but symptoms resolved without any intervention. Conclusions: In this single-center study of patients receiving SC Dara, IRRs occurred in about 10% of patients, and were more likely with a patient’s first dose of SC Dara. All reactions were mild to moderate in severity and could be managed in the outpatient setting. We suggest that Dara-naïve patients receiving their 1st SC Dara dose be monitored for one hour after SC Dara administration. Monitoring does not appear necessary for patients transitioning from IV to SC Dara or receiving subsequent doses of SC Dara. [Table: see text]

Infusion Reactions in Persons Receiving the Broadly Neutralizing Antibody VRC01 or Placebo for Reduction of HIV-1 Acquisition: Results From the Phase 2b Antibody Mediated Prevention (AMP) Randomized Trials

Background: The AMP studies (HVTN 703/HPTN 081 and HVTN 704/HPTN 085) are two harmonized Phase 2b randomized controlled trials to assess HIV prevention efficacy and safety of intravenous (IV) infusion of anti-gp120 broadly neutralizing monoclonal antibody (mAb) VRC01. MAbs for other indications elicit significant rates of infusion-related reactions (IRRs), often requiring pre-medication and sometimes limiting their application. We report on IRRs observed in the AMP studies. Methods: From 2016-2018, 2,699 HIV-uninfected, at-risk men and transgender adults in the Americas and Switzerland (704/085) and 1,901 at-risk heterosexual women in sub-Saharan Africa (703/081) were randomized 1:1:1 to VRC01 10 mg/kg, 30 mg/kg, or saline placebo. Participants received infusions every 8 weeks (n=10/participant) over 72 weeks, with 104 weeks of follow-up. Safety assessments were conducted pre- and post-infusion and at non-infusion visits. A total of 40,674 infusions were administered. Findings: Forty-seven participants (1.7%) experienced 49 IRRs in 704/085; 93 (4.8%) experienced 111 IRRs in 703/081 (p<0.01). IRRs occurred more frequently in VRC01 than placebo recipients in 703/081 (p<0.01) but not in 704/085 (p=0.75). Infusion reactions were associated with atopic history (p=0.01 in 704/085 and p<0.01 in 703/081) and, in 703/081, with younger age at enrolment (p<0.01). Four clinical phenotypes of IRRs were observed: urticaria, dyspnea, dyspnea with rash, and “other”. Urticaria was most prevalent, occurring in 25 (0.9%) participants in 704/085 and 41 (2.1%) participants in 703/081. Most IRRs occurred with the initial infusion and incidence diminished through the last infusion. Six (3.8%) IRRs were graded severe, 76 (47.5%) moderate and 78 (48.8%) mild. All reactions were managed successfully without sequelae. Interpretation: IRRs in the AMP studies were uncommon, typically mild or moderate, successfully managed at the research clinic, and resolved without sequelae. Laboratory analysis is ongoing to explore the potential mechanisms of these IRRs. Trial Registration: (NCT02716675) (NCT02568215) Funding Information: AI068614, AI068635, AI068618, AI068619, AI069412. Declaration of Interests: NMM, SE, ST, SK, MJ, MRG, MAA, LN, KM RDLG, LC, CK, PA, MMGL have no COI to declare; SRW has received clinical trial funding from Janssen Vaccines. Ethics Approval Statement: The Institutional Review Boards/Ethic Committees of participating CRSs approved the studies, which were conducted under the oversight of the NIAID Data Safety Monitoring Board (DSMB). All participants gave written informed consent in English or a local language of their preference.

Efficacy of Low-Dose Rituximab on Neuromyelitis Optica-Associated Optic Neuritis.

Purpose: To prospectively investigate the efficacy and tolerance of low-dose rituximab (RTX) for the treatment of neuromyelitis optica-associated optic neuritis (NMO-ON).Methods: Optic Neuritis patients with seropositive aquaporin 4-antibody (AQP4-Ab) were diagnosed with NMO-ON and recruited for treatment with low-dose RTX (100 mg * 4 infusions) and were then followed monthly for a minimum of 3 months. Reinfusion of 100 mg RTX was given when the CD19+ B lymphocyte frequency was elevated to above 1%. The serum AQP4-Ab level was tested by an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA).Results: A total of 43 NMO-ON patients (1 male/42 female, 75 involved eyes) were included in this study. CD19+ B cell clearance in the peripheral blood was induced in 97.7% of patients after induction treatment. A significant decrease in serum AQP4-Ab concentration was observed after induction treatment (P = 0.0123). The maintenance time of B cell clearance was 5.2 ± 2.25 months. The relapse-free rate was 92.3% in patients followed-up for over 12 months, and patients with non-organ-specific autoimmune antibodies tended to relapse within 6 months. A total of 96.2% of patients had stable or improved vision, and a decrease in the average expanded disability status scale (EDSS) score was found. Structural alterations revealed by optic coherence tomography were observed in both ON and unaffected eyes. The rates of infusion-related reactions and long-term adverse events (AEs) were 18.6 and 23.1%, respectively. No severe AEs was observed.Conclusions: Low-dose rituximab is efficient and well-tolerated in treating NMO-ON.

Subcutaneous daratumumab in Asian patients with heavily pretreated multiple myeloma: subgroup analyses of the noninferiority, phase 3 COLUMBA study

The phase 3 COLUMBA study demonstrated noninferiority of subcutaneous daratumumab (DARA SC) to intravenous daratumumab (DARA IV) in relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma. We present a subgroup analysis of Asian patients from COLUMBA. Eligible patients had ≥ 3 prior lines of therapy, including a proteasome inhibitor and an immunomodulatory drug, or were double refractory. Co-primary endpoints were overall response rate (ORR) and maximum trough concentration (Ctrough). Secondary endpoints included rates of infusion-related reactions, progression-free survival, and patient-reported satisfaction with therapy. Sixty-seven Asian patients (DARA SC, n = 30; DARA IV, n = 37) were randomized, including 42 Japanese patients (DARA SC, n = 18; DARA IV, n = 24). Comparable ORRs for DARA SC versus DARA IV were seen in the Asian cohort (66.7% vs 43.2%) and Japanese-only cohort (61.1% vs 54.2%), including patients weighing ≤ 65 kg. Similarity of Ctrough was seen in both Asian and Japanese-only cohorts; the ratio of the geometric mean of the Ctrough concentrations for DARA SC/DARA IV was 143.96% (90% confidence interval (CI), 112.03–185.00%) and 148.02% (90% CI, 113.32–193.34%), respectively. The Asian cohort (both treatment groups) and Japanese-only cohort (DARA SC group) experienced higher rates of grade 3/4 cytopenias compared with the global COLUMBA population, occurring predominantly in patients of low bodyweight; no patients discontinued treatment due to cytopenias. The Cancer Therapy Satisfaction Questionnaire results generally favored DARA SC. In the Asian and Japanese-only cohorts, DARA SC was comparable to DARA IV. The efficacy, pharmacokinetic, safety, and satisfaction results were generally consistent with the global COLUMBA population regardless of patient bodyweight. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03277105

Subcutaneous daratumumab and hyaluronidase-fihj in newly diagnosed or relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma.

Daratumumab, a human immunoglobulin G1 kappa monoclonal antibody that targets CD38, is currently approved as monotherapy and in varying combinations with approved anti-myeloma regimens in both newly diagnosed multiple myeloma and relapsed refractory multiple myeloma. Originally developed for intravenous administration, the subcutaneous formulation of daratumumab (daratumumab and hyaluronidase-fihj) was recently approved by the US Federal Drug Administration and European Commission in 2020. In clinical trials, compared with the intravenous formulation, subcutaneous daratumumab (Dara-SC) has significantly shorter administration time (median first dose 7 h versus 3–5 min, respectively), lower rates of infusion-related reactions (median first dose 50% versus less than 10%, respectively), and lower volume of infusion (median 500–1000 ml versus 15 ml, respectively). Otherwise, the pharmacokinetics, safety profile, and efficacy are comparable. This review summarizes the pivotal trials that led to the approval of Dara-SC, highlights important clinical considerations for the use of Dara-SC, and provides practical guidelines for the administration of Dara-SC in the clinic.

Fast and safe: Optimising multiple sclerosis infusions during COVID-19 pandemic

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic challenges multiple sclerosis services to be innovative in delivering infusible therapies. To reduce time in clinical settings, and potential staff or space losses, we implemented rapid infusion protocols for selected patients.Objective: To analyse the rate of infusion related reactions and patient experience of rapid infusions of natalizumab and ocrelizumab. To document time reduction patients spent in clinical settings during the COVID-19 pandemic.Methods: Patients with prior exposure to at least three natalizumab or two 300mg ocrelizumab infusions were approved for rapid protocols. A retrospective audit and survey were completed.Results: We analysed 269 rapid natalizumab infusions and 100 rapid ocrelizumab infusions. Infusion related reactions during the natalizumab or ocrelizumab infusions occurred in two patients (1.52%) and eight patients (8%), respectively. All infusion related reactions were mild to moderate and did not require infusion discontinuation. No infusion reactions occurred during the post-infusion observation. Patient experience was positive.Conclusion: Frequency or severity of infusion related reactions in rapid infusions were no different compared to published data. In the setting of COVID-19, pandemic rapid infusion protocols could potentially save hospital resources and limit patient exposure to a high-risk clinical setting while still maintaining ongoing treatment of multiple sclerosis.

Daratumumab, Bortezomib, Dexamethasone (D-Vd) Versus Bortezomib and Dexamethasone (Vd) in Relapsed or Refractory (RR) Multiple Myeloma (MM): Pooled Subgroup Analysis of Lepus and Castor

Daratumumab, Bortezomib, Dexamethasone (D-Vd) Versus Bortezomib and Dexamethasone (Vd) in Relapsed or Refractory (RR) Multiple Myeloma (MM): Pooled Subgroup Analysis of Lepus and Castor

Subcutaneous Daratumumab (DARA SC) Plus Standard-of-Care (SoC) Regimens in Multiple Myeloma (MM) across Lines of Therapy in the Phase 2 Pleiades Study: Initial Results of the Dara SC Plus Carfilzomib/Dexamethasone (D-Kd) Cohort, and Updated Results for the Dara SC Plus Bortezomib/Melphalan/Prednisone (D-VMP) and Dara SC Plus Lenalidomide/Dexamethasone (D-Rd) Cohorts

Subcutaneous Daratumumab (DARA SC) Plus Standard-of-Care (SoC) Regimens in Multiple Myeloma (MM) across Lines of Therapy in the Phase 2 Pleiades Study: Initial Results of the Dara SC Plus Carfilzomib/Dexamethasone (D-Kd) Cohort, and Updated Results for the Dara SC Plus Bortezomib/Melphalan/Prednisone (D-VMP) and Dara SC Plus Lenalidomide/Dexamethasone (D-Rd) Cohorts

Apollo: Phase 3 Randomized Study of Subcutaneous Daratumumab Plus Pomalidomide and Dexamethasone (D-Pd) Versus Pomalidomide and Dexamethasone (Pd) Alone in Patients (Pts) with Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma (RRMM)

Apollo: Phase 3 Randomized Study of Subcutaneous Daratumumab Plus Pomalidomide and Dexamethasone (D-Pd) Versus Pomalidomide and Dexamethasone (Pd) Alone in Patients (Pts) with Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma (RRMM)

Long-Term Sustained Responses Following Ibrutinib Discontinuation after Frontline Therapy with Obinutuzumab Plus Ibrutinib in Patients with Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia

Single oral targeted therapies have emerged as a standard of care in chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). However, accessibility, side effects, and financial burden associated with long term administration limit their clinical use. Mainly, it is unclear in what clinical situation discontinuation of oral therapy can be recommended. The combination of type II anti-CD20 antibody obinutuzumab-Gazyva® with ibrutinib (GI) has shown a significant progression-free survival benefit in patients (pts) with CLL, including those with high-risk genomic aberrations. We conducted a phase 1b/2, single-arm, open-label trial to evaluate the safety and efficacy of GI as first-line treatment in 32 CLL pts. We report the outcome in pts that discontinued ibrutinib (either after 3 years of sustained complete response (CR) as stipulated in the clinical protocol, or due to other reasons). CLL pts enrolled in this protocol were ≥65 years old, or unfit/unwilling to receive chemotherapy. Pts received GI for six cycles, followed by daily single-agent ibrutinib. The protocol was designed to ensure that pts with a sustained CR after 36 months were allowed to discontinue ibrutinib. The median age was 66 years (IQR 59-73), and 6% of the evaluated pts had 17p deletion. All pts were able to complete the six planned cycles of obinutuzumab. The combination regimen was well-tolerated, and the most common adverse events (&amp;gt;5% CTCAE grade 3-4) were neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, and hyperglycemia. The rate and severity of infusion-related reactions (IRR) were much lower than expected (Grade≥ 3, 3%), and pts without IRR had lower serum levels of cytokines/chemokines CCL3 (P=0.0460), IFN-γ (P=0.0457), and TNF-α (P=0.0032) after infusion. The overall response rate was 100%, with nine pts (28%) achieving a CR, and four pts (12.5%) with undetectable minimal residual disease (uMRD) in the bone marrow, defined as &amp;lt;10-4 CLL cells on multicolor flow cytometry. At a median follow-up of 35.5 months (IQR 24.5-42.7) after starting treatment, 91% of the enrolled pts remain in remission with a 100% overall survival. Sixteen pts have completed a long-term follow-up of 36 months. Six pts showed CR, with three of them achieving uMRD in the bone marrow. Ten of these pts were in PR, and only one had disease progression and started treatment for symptomatic stage I disease with obinutuzumab plus venetoclax. In total, thirteen pts (41%) have stopped ibrutinib, with a median time on treatment prior to discontinuation of 35 months. Five (16%) of these pts had CRs and discontinued after 36 months. Eight additional pts (25%) had PRs and discontinued ibrutinib without being eligible: three pts discontinued prior to 36 months due to toxicities, and five pts discontinued after 36 months (3 due to side effects, and 2 due to financially driven decision). One patient eligible to discontinue ibrutinib, decided to remain on treatment despite sustained CR. After a median follow up time following ibrutinib discontinuation of 8 months (IQR 3.5-17), only two out of 13 pts have progressed (10 and 17 months after Ibrutinib discontinuation). None of the pts that stopped ibrutinib after achieving a CR have shown signs of disease progression. Of note, the pharmaceutical sponsor provided ibrutinib for the first 36 months, after which pts or their insurer became financially responsible. This particular scenario could bias the discontinuation pattern compared to a real world experience. It also provided us with a perspective about diverse factors affecting the treatment choices of pts. In summary, the obinutuzumab plus ibrutinib combination therapy was well-tolerated, with a much lower IRR rate. Efficacy compares favorably with historical controls with all pts responding to therapy, no deaths associated with treatment or disease progression, and a longer than expected time-to-progression after discontinuation of ibrutinib. The rate of ibrutinib discontinuation was higher than reported in the literature, most likely influenced by the protocol design and financial decisions driven by the switch from sponsor-provided ibrutinib to insurance or self-paid medication. Our observations regarding safety, efficacy and lack of disease progression after ibrutinib discontinuation are encouraging, and warrant confirmation in long-term prospective studies. Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier NCT02315768. Funding: Pharmacyclics LLC. Disclosures Choi: AbbVie: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Amaya-Chanaga:AbbVie: Ended employment in the past 24 months, Other: Research performed while employed as an investigator of this study at UCSD.. Kipps:Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Castro:Kite Pharma: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Fate Therapeutics: Research Funding.

A multicenter review of infusion-related reactions to daratumumab for relapsed multiple myeloma in the real world setting.

Daratumumab is used in the treatment of relapsed multiple myeloma. Daratumumab infusion-related reactions can occur with the highest incidence on the first infusion. A retrospective review of all daratumumab infusions used as part of the DVd and DRd regimens for relapsed multiple myeloma was undertaken. The review of infusion-related reactions was conducted by reviewing the treatment room nursing note on the days that daratumumab was administered. If the patient experienced an infusion-related reaction, then the data captured included if the full dose was administered. Daratumumab infusion-related reactions occurred most frequently on the first dose. The rates of infusion-related reactions using a split dose approach for daratumumab administration were lower than that reported in clinical trials. All of the infusion-related reactions were managed with appropriate interventions in the outpatient setting. The adoption of rapid infusion daratumumab beginning with cycle 2 of DVd and DRd was well tolerated. Our experience of daratumumab infusions using a split dose approach was associated with an infusion-related reaction rate in 28% of patients on cycle 1, day 1 of DVd and DRd regimens. All patients were able to complete full doses of daratumumab by utilizing split dose. The rates of daratumumab infusion-related reactions are highest on the first infusion. In addition, our adoption of rapid infusion daratumumab was safe.

Safety results of administering ocrelizumab per a shorter infusion protocol in patients with primary progressive and relapsing multiple sclerosis

BackgroundOcrelizumab is an approved MS treatment administered as two 300-mg intravenous infusions 2 weeks apart (Dose 1), each lasting approximately 2.5 hours, followed by single 600-mg infusions every 6 months lasting approximately 3.5 hours. Our objective was to evaluate shorter-duration ocrelizumab infusions in the Phase IIIb open-label SaROD study (NCT03606460). MethodsEligible patients received ocrelizumab 600-mg Dose 2 or 3 infused over approximately 2 hours (Cohort 1) or ocrelizumab 300-mg Dose 1, Infusion 2 over approximately 1.5 hours (Cohort 2). The primary endpoint was the number and proportion of patients experiencing Grade 3–4 infusion-related reactions (IRRs) in Cohort 1. Secondary endpoints included Grade 1–4 IRRs in both cohorts and Grade 3–4 IRRs in Cohort 2. ResultsMean infusion times decreased by approximately 1.09 and 0.79 hours in Cohorts 1 and 2, respectively, compared with US prescribing information. IRRs, reported by 36% of 141 patients, were mild-to-moderate, with no observed Grade 3–4 IRRs. No IRR-related discontinuations occurred. No serious AEs, deaths, or new safety signals were observed. ConclusionThe IRR rate with ocrelizumab shorter-duration infusions was similar to that observed in the pivotal Phase III trials. Ocrelizumab can be infused over a shorter time without sacrificing patient safety.

Subcutaneous daratumumab in patients with multiple myeloma who have been previously treated with intravenous daratumumab: A multicenter, randomized, phase II study (LYNX).

TPS8553 Background: The intravenous (IV) formulation of daratumumab (DARA), a human CD38-targeted monoclonal antibody, is approved in many countries for use as monotherapy in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) and in combination with standard-of-care regimens in RRMM or newly diagnosed MM. A subcutaneous (SC) formulation of DARA is under investigation in several ongoing studies. In the phase 3 COLUMBA study, DARA SC was shown to be non-inferior to DARA IV, demonstrating similar efficacy and pharmacokinetics, with a significantly decreased rate of infusion-related reactions and reduced administration time. The phase 2 LYNX (MMY2065) study will evaluate the efficacy and safety of retreatment with DARA. Methods: In this ongoing, multicenter, open-label, randomized phase 2 study, ~230 patients (pts) with prior exposure to DARA will be randomized 1:1 to receive carfilzomib and dexamethasone (Kd) ± DARA. Pts must have received 1 to 2 prior lines of therapy (at least one of which included DARA IV), with DARA-based therapy completed ≥3 months prior to randomization. Eligible pts have achieved a partial response or better (IMWG criteria) to DARA-based therapy, with a duration of response of ≥4 months. Pts must not have discontinued DARA due to a related adverse event or received prior treatment with carfilzomib. Pts will receive 20 mg/m2 carfilzomib IV on Day 1 of Cycle 1, escalated to 70 mg/m2 on Days 8 and 15; carfilzomib 70 mg/m2 will be administered on Days 1, 8, and 15 of each 28-day cycle thereafter. Dexamethasone 40 mg will be administered (IV or PO) QW for Cycles 1-9 and then on Days 1, 8 and 15 from Cycle 10 onwards. Pts in the D-Kd group will also receive DARA SC (1,800 mg co-formulated with recombinant human hyaluronidase PH20 [rHuPH20; Halozyme]) QW in Cycles 1-2, Q2W in Cycles 3-6, and Q4W thereafter. The primary endpoint is the rate of pts achieving a very good partial response or better. Secondary endpoints include overall response rate, rate of pts achieving complete response or better, progression-free survival, overall survival, overall minimal residual disease-negativity rate, time to next treatment, pharmacokinetics, and safety. Clinical trial information: NCT03871829 .

Safety and Cost Benefits of the Rapid Daratumumab Infusion Protocol

IntroductionDaratumumab is approved for the treatment of multiple myeloma in both frontline and relapsed/refractory settings. Its major limitation is the long infusion time, especially with the first dose. Recent data demonstrated the feasibility of infusing daratumumab at an accelerated rate of 90 minutes starting from cycle 1 on day 15. Herein, we report the safety profile and cost associated with rapid daratumumab infusion protocol. Patients and MethodsA chart review was performed to identify patients who completed at least 1 cycle of daratumumab (single agent or in combination) from April 2016 to October 2018. Patients were divided into 2 cohorts: cohort 1 received rapid daratumumab infusion after its implementation in March 2018, whereas cohort 2 included patients treated with daratumumab administered at the standard rate. The primary endpoint was to compare differences in rates of infusion-related reactions (IRRs). An Excel (Microsoft)–based model was developed to estimate cost and productivity. ResultsA total of 100 patients with relapsed/refractory disease were included in this study (53 in cohort 1 and 47 in cohort 2). Of the 53 patients in cohort 1, 18 (34%) received rapid daratumumab infusion starting with cycle 1. Overall, there was no statistically significant difference in rates of IRRs between cohort 1 and 2 (1.9% vs. 4.3%, P = .59); 1 patient in cohort 1 developed an IRR. The total costs estimated for a 52-week regimen of daratumumab infused at standard and rapid rates were $137,200 and $122,200 (P < .001), respectively. ConclusionOur findings indicate that rapid daratumumab infusion is safe and tolerable and provides cost savings for patients with relapsed/refractory disease.

Abstract P1-18-04: Phase 3 SOPHIA study of margetuximab + chemotherapy vs trastuzumab + chemotherapy in patients with HER2+ metastatic breast cancer after prior anti-HER2 therapies: Infusion time substudy results

Abstract Background: Margetuximab (M) is an investigational Fc-engineered anti-HER2 monoclonal antibody that targets the same epitope as trastuzumab (T) and exerts similar antiproliferative effects. Compared with T, M has higher affinity for both the 158V (high-binding) and 158F (low-binding) allotypes of the activating Fc receptor CD16A. M enhances innate immunity, including CD16A-mediated antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity, and does so more effectively than T in vitro. Based on ex vivo experiments with cells collected from patients (pts) before and after treatment, M induces adaptive immunity, including enhanced T-cell clonality and induction of HER2-specific T- and B-cell responses. The SOPHIA trial (NCT02492711) showed that in pts with pretreated HER2+ metastatic breast cancer (MBC), M+chemotherapy improved progression-free survival vs T+chemotherapy, with comparable safety. M is intended to be dosed at 15 mg/kg every 3 weeks, with infusions over 120 min at every cycle (C). A substudy of SOPHIA was conducted to evaluate the safety and tolerability of reduced infusion times from C2 onward. Methods: Eligible pts had HER2+ MBC after ≥4 lines of prior therapy for MBC, including prior T, pertuzumab, and ado-T emtansine. Enrolled pts received a 120-min M infusion, with or without chemotherapy, in C1, then either 60- or 30-min infusions in C2 and beyond. This single-arm substudy was unblinded, with no comparator. The primary objective was incidence of Grade 3 or greater infusion-related reactions (IRRs) by the end of C2. Incidence of all IRRs was a secondary objective. Results: Of 88 pts enrolled, 69 received M+chemotherapy and 19 received M alone. Mean age was 54.5 years; 99% were female and 71% white. The median number of cycles of M received was 3 (range 1-17). Overall, 7 pts were assigned to received 60-min M infusions starting at C2 (range 1-17 cycles), and 76 pts were assigned to received 30-min M infusions starting at C2 (range 1-14 cycles). Five pts did not receive C2 treatment due to non-radiologic progressive disease, unrelated adverse event (AE), patient or physician decision, or loss to follow-up. Eighty (91%) pts had premedication for IRRs. No pt had Grade ≥3 IRR. Overall, 18 (21%) had IRRs (2 Grade 1, 16 Grade 2), all but 1 of which occurred in C1 (120 min). Of the 18 pts with IRRs, 17 (94%) were premedicated and 10 (56%) were treated for IRRs. The overall rate of IRRs in premedicated pts was 21% (17/80) and in non-premedicated pts was 13% (1/8). One pt experienced IRRs in both C1 and C2 (Grade 2 in C1 and Grade 1 in C2); the same patient then received 6 additional cycles of M (30 min) with no IRRs after C2 (C3-8) and had no premedication after C1. No pt discontinued treatment due to an IRR. Of 88 pts enrolled, 85 (97%) pts experienced an AE, and 7 (8%) had Grade ≥3 AEs. Fifty (57%) pts had M-related AEs. The most common (&amp;gt;5% of pts) M-related AEs were IRRs in 17 (19%), fatigue in 9 (10%), diarrhea in 5 (6%), and aspartate aminotransferase increase in 5 (6%). Serious AEs occurred in 13/88 pts (15%), none of which were considered M-related by the investigator. Conclusions: In this heavily pretreated population, shorter M infusion times did not lead to an increase in IRRs. IRRs were most likely to occur during C1 when the infusion time was 120 min. No Grade ≥3 IRRs were observed. Of 18 pts with Grade 1-2 IRRs, only 1 had an IRR after C1. These results showed that the acceptable safety and tolerability profile of M was maintained even after infusion time is reduced to 30-min from C2 onward. Shorter infusion times may reduce the burden of chronic M therapy on pts, caregivers, and clinic staff. Citation Format: William J. Gradishar, Seock-Ah Im, Fatima Cardoso, Javier Cortes, Giuseppe Curigliano, Mark D. Pegram, Antonino Musolino, Rosanna Berardi, Michelino De Laurentiis, Shakeela W. Bahadur, Young-Hyuck Im, Cynthia Lynch, Yelena Novik, Sutton Edlich, Edwin Rock, Shengyan Hong, Hope S. Rugo, SOPHIA Study Group. Phase 3 SOPHIA study of margetuximab + chemotherapy vs trastuzumab + chemotherapy in patients with HER2+ metastatic breast cancer after prior anti-HER2 therapies: Infusion time substudy results [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2019 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2019 Dec 10-14; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2020;80(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P1-18-04.

Subcutaneous Daratumumab Plus Standard Treatment Regimens in Patients with Multiple Myeloma across Lines of Therapy: Pleiades Study Update

Subcutaneous Daratumumab Plus Standard Treatment Regimens in Patients with Multiple Myeloma across Lines of Therapy: Pleiades Study Update

Randomized, Open-Label, Non-Inferiority, Phase 3 Study of Subcutaneous (SC) Versus Intravenous (IV) Daratumumab (DARA) Administration in Patients with Relapsed or Refractory Multiple Myeloma: Columba Update

Randomized, Open-Label, Non-Inferiority, Phase 3 Study of Subcutaneous (SC) Versus Intravenous (IV) Daratumumab (DARA) Administration in Patients with Relapsed or Refractory Multiple Myeloma: Columba Update

Randomized Phase 2 Study of Subcutaneous Daratumumab Plus Carfilzomib/Dexamethasone Versus Carfilzomib/Dexamethasone Alone in Patients with Multiple Myeloma Who Have Been Previously Treated with Intravenous Daratumumab to Evaluate Retreatment (LYNX)

Background: Daratumumab is a human IgGκ monoclonal antibody targeting CD38 with a direct on-tumor and immunomodulatory mechanism of action. The intravenous (IV) formulation of daratumumab is approved in many countries for use as monotherapy in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM), and in combination with standard-of-care regimens in RRMM and patients with NDMM who are transplant ineligible. A subcutaneous (SC) formulation of daratumumab is currently under investigation in several ongoing studies. In the phase 3 COLUMBA study, daratumumab SC was shown to be non-inferior to daratumumab IV, demonstrating similar efficacy and pharmacokinetics, with a significantly decreased rate of infusion-related reactions and reduced administration time. The randomized phase 2 LYNX (MMY2065) study will evaluate the efficacy and safety of retreatment with subcutaneous daratumumab in patients with RRMM who were previously exposed to daratumumab IV therapy. Study Design and Methods: In this ongoing, multicenter, open-label, randomized phase 2 study, approximately 230 patients with prior exposure to daratumumab will be randomized 1:1 to receive daratumumab plus carfilzomib and dexamethasone (D-Kd) or carfilzomib and dexamethasone (Kd) alone. Patients must have received 1 to 2 prior lines of therapy (at least one of which included daratumumab IV) with the daratumumab-based therapy completed ≥3 months prior to randomization. Eligible patients must have achieved a partial response or better (as defined by International Myeloma Working Group [IMWG] criteria) to daratumumab-based therapy, with a duration of response of ≥4 months. Patients must not have discontinued daratumumab due to a daratumumab-related adverse event or received prior treatment with carfilzomib. All patients will receive 20 mg/m2 carfilzomib IV on Day 1 of Cycle 1, escalated to 70 mg/m2 on Days 8 and 15; carfilzomib 70 mg/m2 will be administered on Days 1, 8, and 15 of each 28-day cycle thereafter. Dexamethasone 40 mg will be administered (IV or PO) QW for Cycles 1-9 and then on Days 1, 8, and 15 from Cycle 10 onwards. Patients in the D-Kd group will also receive daratumumab SC (1,800 mg co-formulated with recombinant human hyaluronidase PH20 [rHuPH20; 2,000 U/mL; ENHANZE® drug delivery technology, Halozyme, Inc.]) QW in Cycles 1-2, Q2W in Cycles 3-6, and Q4W thereafter. The primary endpoint is the rate of patients achieving a very good partial response or better. Secondary endpoints include overall response rate, rate of patients achieving complete response or better, progression-free survival, overall survival, overall MRD-negativity rate, time to next treatment, pharmacokinetics, and safety. The ClinicalTrials.gov identifier is NCT03871829. Disclosures Bahlis: Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria. Zonder:Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Intellia: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Caelum: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Alnylam: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Oncopeptides: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Wroblewski:Janssen: Employment, Equity Ownership. Qi:Janssen: Employment. Renaud:Janssen: Employment, Equity Ownership. Jackson:Janssen: Employment, Equity Ownership. Facon:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Sanofi: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. OffLabel Disclosure: This presentation/paper includes information/discussion of a subcutaneous formulation of daratumumab, which is currently under investigation in several clinical trials, but has not yet been approved. The intravenous formulation of daratumumab is approved as monotherapy and in combination with standard-of-care regimens for the treatment of MM.

Daratumumab (DARA) Subcutaneous (SC) Delivery in Relapsed or Refractory Multiple Myeloma (RRMM): Population Pharmacokinetics (PPK) and Exposure-Response (E-R) Analysis

Daratumumab (DARA) Subcutaneous (SC) Delivery in Relapsed or Refractory Multiple Myeloma (RRMM): Population Pharmacokinetics (PPK) and Exposure-Response (E-R) Analysis