First-line venetoclax combinations versus chemoimmunotherapy in fit patients with chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (GAIA/CLL13): 4-year follow-up from a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial.
Humans
Bridged Bicyclo Compounds, Heterocyclic
/ administration & dosage
Sulfonamides
/ administration & dosage
Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols
/ therapeutic use
Leukemia, Lymphocytic, Chronic, B-Cell
/ drug therapy
Male
Female
Aged
Middle Aged
Follow-Up Studies
Piperidines
/ administration & dosage
Vidarabine
/ analogs & derivatives
Rituximab
/ administration & dosage
Adenine
/ analogs & derivatives
Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized
/ administration & dosage
Progression-Free Survival
Cyclophosphamide
/ administration & dosage
Pyrazoles
/ administration & dosage
Pyrimidines
/ administration & dosage
Immunotherapy
Adult
Journal
The Lancet. Oncology
ISSN: 1474-5488
Titre abrégé: Lancet Oncol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100957246
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Jun 2024
Jun 2024
Historique:
received:
10
01
2024
revised:
12
03
2024
accepted:
02
04
2024
medline:
1
6
2024
pubmed:
1
6
2024
entrez:
31
5
2024
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
In the primary analysis report of the GAIA/CLL13 trial, we found that venetoclax-obinutuzumab and venetoclax-obinutuzumab-ibrutinib improved undetectable measurable residual disease (MRD) rates and progression-free survival compared with chemoimmunotherapy in patients with previously untreated chronic lymphocytic leukaemia. However, to our knowledge, no data on direct comparisons of different venetoclax-based combinations are available. GAIA/CLL13 is an open-label, randomised, phase 3 study conducted at 159 sites in ten countries in Europe and the Middle East. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older, with a life expectancy of at least 6 months, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology group performance status of 0-2, a cumulative illness rating scale score of 6 or lower or a single score of 4 or lower, and no TP53 aberrations. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1), with a computer-generated list stratified by age, Binet stage, and regional study group, to either chemoimmunotherapy, venetoclax-rituximab, venetoclax-obinutuzumab, or venetoclax-obinutuzumab-ibrutinib. All treatments were administered in 28-day cycles. Patients in the chemoimmunotherapy group received six cycles of treatment, with patients older than 65 years receiving intravenous bendamustine (90 mg/m Between Dec 13, 2016, and Oct 13, 2019, 1080 patients were screened and 926 were randomly assigned to treatment (chemoimmunotherapy group n=229; venetoclax-rituximab group n=237; venetoclax-obinutuzumab group n=229; and venetoclax-obinutuzumab-ibrutinib group n=231); mean age 60·8 years (SD 10·2), 259 (28%) of 926 patients were female, and 667 (72%) were male (data on race and ethnicity are not reported). At data cutoff for this exploratory follow-up analysis (Jan 31, 2023; median follow-up 50·7 months [IQR 44·6-57·9]), patients in the venetoclax-obinutuzumab group had significantly longer progression-free survival than those in the chemoimmunotherapy group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·47 [97·5% CI 0·32-0·69], p<0·0001) and the venetoclax-rituximab group (0·57 [0·38-0·84], p=0·0011). The venetoclax-obinutuzumab-ibrutinib group also had a significantly longer progression-free survival than the chemoimmunotherapy group (0·30 [0·19-0·47]; p<0·0001) and the venetoclax-rituximab group (0·38 [0·24-0·59]; p<0·0001). There was no difference in progression-free survival between the venetoclax-obinutuzumab-ibrutinib and venetoclax-obinutuzumab groups (0·63 [0·39-1·02]; p=0·031), and the proportional hazards assumption was not met for the comparison between the venetoclax-rituximab group versus the chemoimmunotherapy group (log-rank p=0·10). The estimated 4-year progression-free survival rate was 85·5% (97·5% CI 79·9-91·1; 37 [16%] events) in the venetoclax-obinutuzumab-ibrutinib group, 81·8% (75·8-87·8; 55 [24%] events) in the venetoclax-obinutuzumab group, 70·1% (63·0-77·3; 84 [35%] events) in the venetoclax-rituximab group, and 62·0% (54·4-69·7; 90 [39%] events) in the chemoimmunotherapy group. The most common grade 3 or worse treatment-related adverse event was neutropenia (114 [53%] of 216 patients in the chemoimmunotherapy group, 109 [46%] of 237 in the venetoclax-rituximab group, 127 [56%] of 228 in the venetoclax-obinutuzumab group, and 112 [48%] of 231 in the venetoclax-obinutuzumab-ibrutinib group). Deaths determined to be associated with study treatment by the investigator occurred in three (1%) patients in the chemoimmunotherapy group (n=1 due to each of sepsis, metastatic squamous cell carcinoma, and Richter's syndrome), none in the venetoclax-rituximab and venetoclax-obinutuzumab groups, and four (2%) in the venetoclax-obinutuzumab-ibrutinib group (n=1 due to each of acute myeloid leukaemia, fungal encephalitis, small-cell lung cancer, and toxic leukoencephalopathy). With more than 4 years of follow-up, venetoclax-obinutuzumab and venetoclax-obinutuzumab-ibrutinib significantly extended progression-free survival compared with both chemoimmunotherapy and venetoclax-rituximab in previously untreated, fit patients with chronic lymphocytic leukaemia, thereby supporting their use and further evaluation in this patient group, while still considering the higher toxicities observed with the triple combination. AbbVie, Janssen, and F Hoffmann-La Roche.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
In the primary analysis report of the GAIA/CLL13 trial, we found that venetoclax-obinutuzumab and venetoclax-obinutuzumab-ibrutinib improved undetectable measurable residual disease (MRD) rates and progression-free survival compared with chemoimmunotherapy in patients with previously untreated chronic lymphocytic leukaemia. However, to our knowledge, no data on direct comparisons of different venetoclax-based combinations are available.
METHODS
METHODS
GAIA/CLL13 is an open-label, randomised, phase 3 study conducted at 159 sites in ten countries in Europe and the Middle East. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older, with a life expectancy of at least 6 months, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology group performance status of 0-2, a cumulative illness rating scale score of 6 or lower or a single score of 4 or lower, and no TP53 aberrations. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1), with a computer-generated list stratified by age, Binet stage, and regional study group, to either chemoimmunotherapy, venetoclax-rituximab, venetoclax-obinutuzumab, or venetoclax-obinutuzumab-ibrutinib. All treatments were administered in 28-day cycles. Patients in the chemoimmunotherapy group received six cycles of treatment, with patients older than 65 years receiving intravenous bendamustine (90 mg/m
FINDINGS
RESULTS
Between Dec 13, 2016, and Oct 13, 2019, 1080 patients were screened and 926 were randomly assigned to treatment (chemoimmunotherapy group n=229; venetoclax-rituximab group n=237; venetoclax-obinutuzumab group n=229; and venetoclax-obinutuzumab-ibrutinib group n=231); mean age 60·8 years (SD 10·2), 259 (28%) of 926 patients were female, and 667 (72%) were male (data on race and ethnicity are not reported). At data cutoff for this exploratory follow-up analysis (Jan 31, 2023; median follow-up 50·7 months [IQR 44·6-57·9]), patients in the venetoclax-obinutuzumab group had significantly longer progression-free survival than those in the chemoimmunotherapy group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·47 [97·5% CI 0·32-0·69], p<0·0001) and the venetoclax-rituximab group (0·57 [0·38-0·84], p=0·0011). The venetoclax-obinutuzumab-ibrutinib group also had a significantly longer progression-free survival than the chemoimmunotherapy group (0·30 [0·19-0·47]; p<0·0001) and the venetoclax-rituximab group (0·38 [0·24-0·59]; p<0·0001). There was no difference in progression-free survival between the venetoclax-obinutuzumab-ibrutinib and venetoclax-obinutuzumab groups (0·63 [0·39-1·02]; p=0·031), and the proportional hazards assumption was not met for the comparison between the venetoclax-rituximab group versus the chemoimmunotherapy group (log-rank p=0·10). The estimated 4-year progression-free survival rate was 85·5% (97·5% CI 79·9-91·1; 37 [16%] events) in the venetoclax-obinutuzumab-ibrutinib group, 81·8% (75·8-87·8; 55 [24%] events) in the venetoclax-obinutuzumab group, 70·1% (63·0-77·3; 84 [35%] events) in the venetoclax-rituximab group, and 62·0% (54·4-69·7; 90 [39%] events) in the chemoimmunotherapy group. The most common grade 3 or worse treatment-related adverse event was neutropenia (114 [53%] of 216 patients in the chemoimmunotherapy group, 109 [46%] of 237 in the venetoclax-rituximab group, 127 [56%] of 228 in the venetoclax-obinutuzumab group, and 112 [48%] of 231 in the venetoclax-obinutuzumab-ibrutinib group). Deaths determined to be associated with study treatment by the investigator occurred in three (1%) patients in the chemoimmunotherapy group (n=1 due to each of sepsis, metastatic squamous cell carcinoma, and Richter's syndrome), none in the venetoclax-rituximab and venetoclax-obinutuzumab groups, and four (2%) in the venetoclax-obinutuzumab-ibrutinib group (n=1 due to each of acute myeloid leukaemia, fungal encephalitis, small-cell lung cancer, and toxic leukoencephalopathy).
INTERPRETATION
CONCLUSIONS
With more than 4 years of follow-up, venetoclax-obinutuzumab and venetoclax-obinutuzumab-ibrutinib significantly extended progression-free survival compared with both chemoimmunotherapy and venetoclax-rituximab in previously untreated, fit patients with chronic lymphocytic leukaemia, thereby supporting their use and further evaluation in this patient group, while still considering the higher toxicities observed with the triple combination.
FUNDING
BACKGROUND
AbbVie, Janssen, and F Hoffmann-La Roche.
Identifiants
pubmed: 38821083
pii: S1470-2045(24)00196-7
doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(24)00196-7
pii:
doi:
Substances chimiques
venetoclax
N54AIC43PW
Bridged Bicyclo Compounds, Heterocyclic
0
Sulfonamides
0
ibrutinib
1X70OSD4VX
obinutuzumab
O43472U9X8
Piperidines
0
Vidarabine
FA2DM6879K
fludarabine
P2K93U8740
Rituximab
4F4X42SYQ6
Adenine
JAC85A2161
Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized
0
Cyclophosphamide
8N3DW7272P
Pyrazoles
0
Pyrimidines
0
Banques de données
ClinicalTrials.gov
['NCT02950051']
Types de publication
Journal Article
Clinical Trial, Phase III
Multicenter Study
Randomized Controlled Trial
Comparative Study
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
744-759Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Declaration of interests MF reports research funding from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, BeiGene, Janssen, and Roche, and honoraria from AbbVie. JvT reports honoraria from AbbVie, BeiGene, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Janssen, Lilly, and Roche; travel grants from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, BeiGene, Roche, Lilly, and Janssen; and has received consulting fees from and participated on advisory boards for AbbVe, BeiGene, Amgen, and AstraZeneca. MG has received honoraria for participation in symposia and advisory boards from AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, BeiGene, Bristol Myers Squibb (BMS)/Celgene, GSK, Novartis, Incyte, Janssen-Cilag, Jazz, Roche, Pfizer, Sanofi, and Servier; travel support from AbbVie, BeiGene, Pfizer, and Roche; all fees went to their institution. GJ has received honoraria from Astellas and AbbVie and participated on advisory boards for AbbVie and Servier. M-DL reports travel grants from AbbVie and Janssen. CdC-B reports consulting fees from Janssen, honoraria for lectures from Octapharma, support for attending meetings from AbbVie and Octapharma, and participation on advisory boards for Janssen, BeiGene, and AstraZeneca. CSchn reports speakers fees from AstraZeneca and AbbVie, travel support from AbbVie, and participation on an advisory board for Janssen. RB reports travel support from BeiGene, Janssen, and AbbVie, and honoraria for participation on an advisory board from AbbVie. TN reports honoraria for lectures or presentations and has participated at advisory boards from AbbVie, Roche, AstraZeneca, Gilead, BeiGene, and Janssen. CBP is the chairman of the Danish CLL group. HF reports research funding from Sanofi, Novartis, and Alexion and honoraria for lectures from Sanofi. NK reports research funding from AstraZeneca; honoraria from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Kite/Gilead, BMS, and Lilly; and travel support from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, BeiGene, Lilly, and Janssen; and participation on advisory boards for AstraZeneca and Janssen. JD reports consulting fees, honoraria, and travel support from AbbVie and Janssen. SB reports honoraria from and participation on speakers bureaus for Roche, Janssen, AbbVie, AstraZeneca, and Sanofi; travel support from Janssen, BeiGene, and Roche; and research funding from Janssen and Miltenyi. FS reports speakers fees from AstraZeneca, travel support from Lilly, and research funding from AstraZeneca. A-MF reports research funding and honoraria from AstraZeneca and travel support from AbbVie. KF reports research grants from AbbVie and Roche, honoraria for advisory boards from AstraZeneca, and travel support from Roche. K-AK reports consulting fees, participation on speakers bureaus, and research funding from Roche, AbbVie, and Janssen. MR reports honoraria from Janssen, Roche, and AstraZeneca; consulting fees from Roche, Janssen, AstraZeneca, and AbbVie; research funding from AbbVie and Roche, and travel support from AstraZeneca. MBr reports research funding and consulting fees from Amgen; honoraria for speakers bureaus from Amgen, Becton Dickinson, Janssen, and Pfizer; travel support from Janssen; and participation on advisory boards for Incyte and Amgen. ET reports participation on advisory boards and honoraria from AbbVie, Janssen-Cilag, and BeiGene, AstraZeneca, and Roche; and travel support from AstraZeneca, AbbVie, BeiGene, Janssen. SS reports honoraria from AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Celgene, Gilead, GSK, Hoffmann-La Roche, Janssen, Novartis, and Sunesis; research funding from AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Celgene, Gilead, GSK, Hoffmann-La Roche, Janssen, Novartis, and Sunesis; travel support from AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Celgene, Gilead, GSK, Hoffmann-La Roche, Janssen, Novartis, Sunesis; and speaker fees from AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Celgene, Gilead, GSK, Hoffmann-La Roche, Janssen, Novartis, and Sunesis. MH reports consulting fees from Roche, Gilead, Janssen, BMS, AbbVie, and AstraZeneca and honoraria from Roche, Gilead, Janssen, BMS, AbbVie, and AstraZeneca. APK reports honoraria from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, BMS, Janssen, LAVA, and Roche/Genentech; travel grants from AbbVie and Janssen; research funding from AstraZeneca, Janssen, Roche/Genentech, AbbVie, and BMS. CUN reports research funding from Octapharma and AstraZeneca; consultancy and speaker fees from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Janssen, Genmab, BeiGene, Octapharma, CSL Behring, Takeda, Lilly, and MSD; and participation on advisory boards for AstraZeneca, MSD, Genmab, and Janssen. BE reports consulting fees fromJanssen, AbbVie, Gilead, AstraZeneca, MSD, BeiGene, and Lilly; participation on speakers bureau for Roche, AbbVie, BeiGene, AstraZeneca, and MSD; honoraria from Roche, AbbVie, AstraZeneca, BeiGene, and MSD; research funding from Janssen, Gilead, Roche, AbbVie, BeiGene, and AstraZeneca; and travel support from BeiGene. All other authors declare no competing interests.