4.7 Article

A randomized phase 3 study of ixazomib-dexamethasone versus physician's choice in relapsed or refractory AL amyloidosis

Journal

LEUKEMIA
Volume 36, Issue 1, Pages 225-235

Publisher

SPRINGERNATURE
DOI: 10.1038/s41375-021-01317-y

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Cambridge, MA, USA

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In relapsed/refractory AL amyloidosis patients, there was no significant difference in hematologic response rate and complete response rate between the ixazomib-dexamethasone treatment group and physician's choice treatment group, but patients in the ixazomib-dexamethasone group had a significantly longer median time to vital organ deterioration or mortality.
In the first phase 3 study in relapsed/refractory AL amyloidosis (TOURMALINE-AL1 NCT01659658), 168 patients with relapsed/refractory AL amyloidosis after 1-2 prior lines were randomized to ixazomib (4 mg, days 1, 8, 15) plus dexamethasone (20 mg, days 1, 8, 15, 22; n = 85) or physician's choice (dexamethasone +/- melphalan, cyclophosphamide, thalidomide, or lenalidomide; n = 83) in 28-day cycles until progression or toxicity. Primary endpoints were hematologic response rate and 2-year vital organ deterioration or mortality rate. Only the first primary endpoint was formally tested at this interim analysis. Best hematologic response rate was 53% with ixazomib-dexamethasone vs 51% with physician's choice (p = 0.76). Complete response rate was 26 vs 18% (p = 0.22). Median time to vital organ deterioration or mortality was 34.8 vs 26.1 months (hazard ratio 0.53; 95% CI, 0.32-0.87; p = 0.01). Median treatment duration was 11.7 vs 5.0 months. Adverse events of clinical importance included diarrhea (34 vs 30%), rash (33 vs 20%), cardiac arrhythmias (26 vs 15%), nausea (24 vs 14%). Despite not meeting the first primary endpoint, all time-to-event data favored ixazomib-dexamethasone. These results are clinically relevant to this relapsed/refractory patient population with no approved treatment options.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available