Evaluation of ventoclax initiation prophylaxis and monitoring outcomes at each dose level and time point in patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia: A real-world experience
Abstract
Abstract Background: Venetoclax (VEN)+obinutuzumab (VO) is an effective therapy for CLL/SLL requiring regular monitoring for tumor lysis syndrome (TLS) during VEN ramp-up. The CLL14 trial of VO reported no TLS during VEN ramp-up; however, there are limited real-world data on monitoring practices and TLS outcomes for different dose levels and monitoring timepoints. This study assessed VEN initiation prophylaxis and monitoring outcomes for patients (pts) with CLL/SLL starting VO in first line (1L) in an outpatient, real-world setting. Methods This interim analysis relied onretrospective observational data from 4 US sites of the CLL Collaborative Study of Real-World Evidence (CORE). Adult pts with CLL/SLL were eligible if they: (1) started VO per-label outside of a clinical trial in 1L, or immediately after exposure in 1L to agents with different mechanisms of action (i.e., BTKi, anti-CD20 only) of <30 days; (2) prior to VEN start, had either (i) low physician-determined tumor burden (TB) (i.e., all lymph nodes [LN] <5 cm and ALC <25 x 109/L), or (ii) medium physician-determined TB (i.e., any LN ≥5-<10 cm or ALC ≥25 x 109/L) with creatinine clearance ≥80 mL/min; (3) had no strong CYP3A inhibitors or prophylactic rasburicase from 3 days prior to VEN start until end of VEN ramp-up; and (4) had VEN ramp-up in an outpatient setting. TB-related labs/imaging was assessed from 2 months prior to obinutuzumab initiation (i.e., index date) until VEN start. VEN characteristics (i.e., dosing, duration), prophylaxis measures (i.e., antihyperuricemics and IV hydration), and TLS-related monitoring and management (i.e., lab results and interventions received) were collected per ramp-up week and TLS monitoring timepoint. Results Of 128 pts in CORE who initiated VO in any line, 72 pts met inclusion criteria (low TB: 57 [79.2%]; medium TB: 15 [20.8%]). Median (IQR) age was 62 (56.0, 68.5) years, 58.3% were male, and 81.9% had ECOG grade ≤1. Among pts tested, 7/68 (10.3%) had del(17p)/TP53 mutation and 43/66 (65.2%) had unmutated IGHV. Median (IQR) time from index to VEN start was 23.0 (22.0, 30.0) days. Most pts completed ramp-up (98.6% [71/72]) and followed a per-label regular dosing schedule (93.1% [67/72]). Prior to VEN ramp-up, all pts received prophylactic antihyperuricemics (allopurinol: 71 [98.6%]; febuxostat: 2 [2.8%]) and prophylactic hydration. In the 2 days prior to a dose escalation for at least 1 week of ramp-up, prophylactic IV hydration was reported for 27 (37.5%) pts based on physician determination. One pt stopped VEN after week 2 due to neutropenia (grade 3+). During ramp-up (median [IQR] of 9 [8, 12] blood tests per pt), no lab or clinical TLS was reported. Of 21 (29.2%) pts who received an intervention following a lab assessment, most had low TB at VEN start (16 [76.2%]). All interventions were either prophylactic or non-TLS-related. Following a lab assessment for at least 1 week of ramp-up, prophylactic IV or escalated oral hydration intervention was reported in 17/21 pts (81.0%) based on physician determination (e.g., to manage impaired baseline renal function in those with low TB, patient request, or institutional practice) (IV hydration: 15 pts; escalated oral hydration: 2 pts). By per-label monitoring timepoints, hydration intervention was given prophylactically following pre-dose lab tests for 7 pts (across weeks 1-5), 6-8 hours post-dose for 5 pts (weeks 1-2), and 24 hours post-dose for 10 pts (weeks 1-2). By per-label monitoring timepoints, other non-TLS-related interventions (i.e., blood transfusion for anemia, insulin for hyperglycemia, and potassium for non-TLS-related hypokalemia) were given following pre-dose lab tests for 2 pts (weeks 1-5) and 24 hours post-dose for 4 pts (weeks 1-2). Conclusion Consistent with the CLL14 trial, no TLS was reported in this real-world, interim analysis of pts with mostly low TB and good renal function at 1L VO initation. All interventions during VEN ramp-up were prophylactic or non-TLS-related, with prophylactic hydration commonly given based on physician preference. These results suggest that VO initiation is manageable in an outpatient setting. Consideration should be given for simplified monitoring requirements including potential removal of 6-8 hour post-dose lab in this population and be further explored in prospective studies. Data collection for this study is ongoing to further contextualize real-world VEN initiation prophylaxis and monitoring outcomes in a larger cohort.
Article Details
Authors (33)
Christopher Jensen
4University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, United States
Mazyar Shadman
Andres Chang
Department of Hematology and Medical Oncology
Nicole Lamanna
4Columbia University, New York, United States
Beenish Manzoor
3AbbVie Inc., North Chicago, United States
Chaitra Ujjani
15Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, United States
Deborah Stephens
1University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Hematology, Chapel Hill, United States
Wendy Sinai
5AbbVie Inc., North Chicago, United States
Brian Hill
1Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Department of Hematology and Medical Oncology, Cleveland, United States
Jennifer Brown
10Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, United States
Hande Tuncer
8Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, United States
Matthew S Davids
1Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Medical Oncology, Boston, United States
Toby Eyre
3Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Churchill Cancer Center, Oxford, United Kingdom
Nicolas Martinez-Calle
10Nottingham University Hospitals, NHS Trust, Nottingham, United Kingdom
Lori Leslie
14Division of Oncology, John Theurer Cancer Center, Hackensack University Medical Center, Hackensack Meridian Health, Hackensack, NJ
Lindsey Roeker
5Mayo Clinic, Rochester, United States
Paul Barr
1University of Rochester Medical Center, Department of Medicine, Wilmot Cancer Institute, Rochester, United States
Nnadozie Emechebe
3AbbVie Inc., North Chicago, United States
Alan Skarbnik
19Novant Health Cancer Institute, Department of Hematology, Charlotte, United States
Bita Fakhri
1Division of Hematology, Department of Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA
Meghan Thompson
1Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, United States
Joanna Rhodes
21Rutgers Cancer Institute, New Brunswick, United States
Isabelle Fleury
2Maisonneuve-Rosemont Hospital, Institut Universitaire d'Hémato-Oncologie et de Thérapie Cellulaire, Montreal, Canada
Frederick Lansigan
19Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, United States
Robson Lima
5AbbVie Inc., North Chicago, United States
Zhu Cui
1Tufts Medical Center, Boston, United States
Michael Coyle
21Lowell General Hospital, Lowell, United States
Samin Houshyar
6University of Rochester Wilmot Cancer Institute, Rochester, United States
Laurie Pearson
22University of Massachusetts, Worcester, United States
Irina Pivneva
23Analysis Group, Inc., Montreal, Canada
Talissa Watson
23Analysis Group, Inc., Montreal, Canada
Annie Guerin
5Analysis Group Inc, Montreal, Canada
Nilanjan Ghosh
5Levine Cancer Institute/Advocate Health, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Charlotte, NC