Real world risk of infusion reactions and effectiveness of front-line obinutuzumab plus chlorambucil compared with other frontline treatments for chronic lymphocytic leukemia.
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized
/ administration & dosage
Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols
/ administration & dosage
Chlorambucil
/ administration & dosage
Female
Humans
Injection Site Reaction
/ epidemiology
Leukemia, Lymphocytic, Chronic, B-Cell
/ drug therapy
Male
Manitoba
Middle Aged
Retrospective Studies
Treatment Outcome
CLL
Chronic lymphocytic leukemia
Front-line therapy
Obinutuzumab
Retrospective cohort study
Journal
BMC cancer
ISSN: 1471-2407
Titre abrégé: BMC Cancer
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100967800
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
06 Feb 2022
06 Feb 2022
Historique:
received:
15
06
2021
accepted:
31
01
2022
entrez:
6
2
2022
pubmed:
7
2
2022
medline:
11
3
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) is the most common type of leukemia in North America. Previous studies have shown improved progression free survival (PFS) and response rates in unfit patients treated with obinutuzumab compared to other regimens. The aim of this study was to evaluate the obinutuzumab-chlorambucil regimen in the context of historical treatments and first-dose infusion reactions at CancerCare Manitoba (CCMB). A retrospective chart review was conducted for patients treated with obinutuzumab from January 1, 2014 to December 31, 2017 at CCMB. A minimum data set was extracted for patients treated with other front-line therapies. Descriptive statistics were used to evaluate patient demographics, toxicity, duration and dosing of obinutuzumab treatment. Kaplan-Meier curves were used to evaluate time-to-next-treatment (TTNT), overall survival (OS) and PFS for patients treated with obinutuzumab. A multivariable logistic regression model was used to investigate associations between infusion related reactions (IRRs) and age at treatment, pre-treatment lymphocyte count, cumulative illness rating scale (CIRS) and receipt of prior chemotherapy. Forty seven percent of patients receiving frontline therapy received chlorambucil and obinutuzumab. Sixty-seven patients were treated with obinutuzumab and consisted of 36 males (53.7%) and 31 females (46.3%) with 29 patients (43.3%) over age 75 years. Rates of grade 3 and 4 obinutuzumab IRRs were lower (6%) compared to the CLL11 clinical trial (20%) due to local practices including slower infusion rates and using chlorambucil before starting obinutuzumab treatment. Many patients had difficulty tolerating the full dosage of chlorambucil. Only 26 patients (38.8%) had their dose of chlorambucil escalated to the full dose of 0.5 mg/kg. In addition, only 18 patients (26.9%) received all doses of obinutuzumab and all 12 doses of chlorambucil. In summary, first dose infusion reactions with obinutuzumab can be markedly reduced by using chlorambucil to decrease the lymphocyte count before obinutuzumab and by using a very slow initial obinutuzumab infusion rate. Modifications in chlorambucil dosing and obinutuzumab administration can improve tolerance without significant loss in efficacy.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) is the most common type of leukemia in North America. Previous studies have shown improved progression free survival (PFS) and response rates in unfit patients treated with obinutuzumab compared to other regimens. The aim of this study was to evaluate the obinutuzumab-chlorambucil regimen in the context of historical treatments and first-dose infusion reactions at CancerCare Manitoba (CCMB).
METHODS
METHODS
A retrospective chart review was conducted for patients treated with obinutuzumab from January 1, 2014 to December 31, 2017 at CCMB. A minimum data set was extracted for patients treated with other front-line therapies. Descriptive statistics were used to evaluate patient demographics, toxicity, duration and dosing of obinutuzumab treatment. Kaplan-Meier curves were used to evaluate time-to-next-treatment (TTNT), overall survival (OS) and PFS for patients treated with obinutuzumab. A multivariable logistic regression model was used to investigate associations between infusion related reactions (IRRs) and age at treatment, pre-treatment lymphocyte count, cumulative illness rating scale (CIRS) and receipt of prior chemotherapy.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Forty seven percent of patients receiving frontline therapy received chlorambucil and obinutuzumab. Sixty-seven patients were treated with obinutuzumab and consisted of 36 males (53.7%) and 31 females (46.3%) with 29 patients (43.3%) over age 75 years. Rates of grade 3 and 4 obinutuzumab IRRs were lower (6%) compared to the CLL11 clinical trial (20%) due to local practices including slower infusion rates and using chlorambucil before starting obinutuzumab treatment. Many patients had difficulty tolerating the full dosage of chlorambucil. Only 26 patients (38.8%) had their dose of chlorambucil escalated to the full dose of 0.5 mg/kg. In addition, only 18 patients (26.9%) received all doses of obinutuzumab and all 12 doses of chlorambucil.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
In summary, first dose infusion reactions with obinutuzumab can be markedly reduced by using chlorambucil to decrease the lymphocyte count before obinutuzumab and by using a very slow initial obinutuzumab infusion rate. Modifications in chlorambucil dosing and obinutuzumab administration can improve tolerance without significant loss in efficacy.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35123433
doi: 10.1186/s12885-022-09256-2
pii: 10.1186/s12885-022-09256-2
pmc: PMC8818183
doi:
Substances chimiques
Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized
0
Chlorambucil
18D0SL7309
obinutuzumab
O43472U9X8
Types de publication
Evaluation Study
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
148Informations de copyright
© 2022. The Author(s).
Références
Lancet. 2010 Oct 2;376(9747):1164-74
pubmed: 20888994
Cancer Med. 2016 Jun;5(6):971-9
pubmed: 26889755
N Engl J Med. 2019 Jun 06;380(23):2225-2236
pubmed: 31166681
Leuk Res. 2015 Oct;39(10):1066-70
pubmed: 26307523
Lancet. 2018 Apr 14;391(10129):1524-1537
pubmed: 29477250
Leuk Lymphoma. 2019 Apr;60(4):894-903
pubmed: 30277102
Blood. 2012 Apr 12;119(15):3523-33
pubmed: 22354003
Hematol Oncol. 2020 Oct;38(4):509-516
pubmed: 32400885
Lancet. 2020 Apr 18;395(10232):1278-1291
pubmed: 32305093
Hematol Oncol. 2019 Dec;37(5):641-643
pubmed: 31604368
Haematologica. 2020 Jan;105(1):e22-e25
pubmed: 31048356
Pol Arch Intern Med. 2018 Aug 31;128(7-8):414-415
pubmed: 30174324
Intern Med J. 2017 Jul;47 Suppl 4:5-10
pubmed: 28685928
Pol Arch Intern Med. 2018 Aug 31;128(7-8):421-426
pubmed: 30057377
Blood. 2018 Jun 21;131(25):2745-2760
pubmed: 29540348
Clin J Oncol Nurs. 2016 Apr;20(2):E41-8
pubmed: 26991722
Blood. 2005 Jan 1;105(1):49-53
pubmed: 15138165
Lancet Oncol. 2019 Jan;20(1):43-56
pubmed: 30522969
CA Cancer J Clin. 2020 Jan;70(1):7-30
pubmed: 31912902
Jpn J Clin Oncol. 2018 Aug 1;48(8):736-742
pubmed: 30060000
N Engl J Med. 2014 Mar 20;370(12):1101-10
pubmed: 24401022
Blood. 2016 Jan 7;127(1):79-86
pubmed: 26472752
Am J Hematol. 2019 Nov;94(11):1266-1287
pubmed: 31364186
Lancet Oncol. 2016 Jul;17(7):928-942
pubmed: 27216274
Am J Hematol. 2020 Jun;95(6):604-611
pubmed: 32096887