Abstract
Abstract 1676
Pts treated with nilotinib in the ENESTnd phase 3 trial achieved higher and faster rates of major molecular response (MMR, ≤ 0.1% BCR-ABLIS), deeper molecular responses (MR4, ≤ 0.01%IS and MR4.5, ≤ 0.0032%IS), significantly lower rates of progression to accelerated phase/blast crisis (AP/BC), and fewer CML-related deaths compared with imatinib by 1, 2, and 3 y. Here, we report data with a minimum follow-up of 3 y; efficacy and safety data based on longer follow-up of 4 y will be presented to further assess the impact of nilotinib vs imatinib in pts with newly diagnosed Ph+ CML-CP.
Adult pts (N = 846) with newly-diagnosed Ph+ CML-CP were randomized to nilotinib 300 mg twice daily (BID; n = 282), nilotinib 400 mg BID (n = 281), or imatinib 400 mg once daily (QD; n = 283). MMR, MR4, MR4.5, time to progression to AP/BC, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) were evaluated.
Significantly higher rates of MMR, MR4, and MR4.5 by 3 y were achieved in nilotinib- vs imatinib-treated pts (Table). Nilotinib led to the achievement of higher rates of molecular responses regardless of Sokal risk group or age. The difference in the rates of both MR4 and MR4.5 continued to be significantly higher for nilotinib, with the difference in favor of nilotinib increasing from 1 to 3 y (MR4: 9%-14% difference by 1 y, 18%-24% difference by 3 y; MR4.5: 6%-10% difference by 1 y, 13%-17% difference by 3 y). Among patients who achieved MMR, more pts achieved MR4 or MR4.5 on nilotinib 300 mg BID (68%) and nilotinib 400 mg BID (62%) compared with imatinib (49%). No pt in any arm progressed after achieving MR4.5. Significantly fewer pts progressed to AP/BC on nilotinib vs imatinib (Table). No new progressions occurred on core treatment between the 2-y and 3-y analyses. When events occurring after treatment discontinuation were included, the rates of progression to AP/BC were also significantly lower with nilotinib vs imatinib (Table). Nearly twice as many pts had emergent mutations on imatinib (n = 21) vs either nilotinib arm (n = 11 in each arm), with 5 pts overall developing mutations between 2 and 3 y. OS remained similar in all groups at 3 y, but fewer CML-related deaths occurred in both the nilotinib 300 mg BID (n = 5) and 400 mg BID (n = 4) arms vs imatinib (n = 14). Both drugs were well tolerated. Few new adverse events (AEs) and laboratory abnormalities were observed between 2 and 3 y. Rates of discontinuation due to AEs were 10%, 14%, and 11% in the nilotinib 300 mg BID, nilotinib 400 mg BID, and imatinib arms, respectively.
Nilotinib continues to demonstrate superiority vs imatinib, yielding faster and deeper molecular responses and a significantly decreased risk of progression. Results of ENESTnd support the use of nilotinib as a standard of care option in newly diagnosed adult pts with Ph+ CML-CP and should be considered to replace imatinib as the standard-of-care frontline therapy for patients with Ph+ CML-CP.
. | Nilotinib 300 mg BID (n = 282) . | Nilotinib 400 mg BID (n = 281) . | Imatinib 400 mg QD (n = 283) . |
---|---|---|---|
MMR by 3 y, % | 73 | 70 | 53 |
P <.0001† | P <.0001† | ||
MMR by 3 y by Sokal risk, % | |||
Low (n = 103, 103, 104) | 77 | 77 | 63 |
Intermediate (n = 101, 100, 101) | 75 | 69 | 55 |
High (n = 78, 78, 78) | 67 | 64 | 39 |
MMR by 3 y by age, % | |||
Aged < 65 y (n = 246, 254, 248) | 73 | 71 | 53 |
Aged ≥65 y (n = 36, 27, 35) | 78 | 63 | 51 |
MR4 by 3 y, % | 50 | 44 | 26 |
P <.0001† | P <.0001† | ||
MR4.5 by 3 y, % | 32 | 28 | 15 |
P <.0001† | P =.0003† | ||
MR4.5 by 3 y by Sokal risk group, % | |||
Low (n = 103, 103, 104) | 30 | 34 | 18 |
Intermediate (n = 101, 100, 101) | 40 | 22 | 17 |
High (n = 78, 78, 78) | 24 | 27 | 9 |
MR4.5 by 3 y by age, % | |||
Aged < 65 y (n = 246, 254, 248) | 32 | 28 | 15 |
Aged ≥65 y (n = 36, 27, 35) | 31 | 30 | 17 |
Progression to AP/BC on core treatment | |||
Estimated 3-y rate of pts free from progression*, % Excluding CE | 99.3 | 98.7 | 95.2 |
P =.0059‡ | P =.0185‡ | ||
Including CE | 99.3 | 97.9 | 93.2 |
P =.0003‡ | P =.0085‡ | ||
Progression to AP/BC on study** | |||
Estimated 3-y rate of pts free from progression*, % | 96.7 | 98.1 | 93.5 |
P =.0496‡ | P =.0076‡ | ||
PFS on core treatment | |||
Estimated 3-y rate of PFS*, % | 96.9 | 98.3 | 94.7 |
P =.0842‡ | P =.0260‡ | ||
PFS on study** | |||
Estimated 3-y rate of PFS*, % | 93.3 | 96.7 | 92.0 |
P =.3754‡ | P =.0282‡ | ||
OS on study** | |||
Estimated 3-y rate of OS*, % | 95.1 | 97.0 | 94.0 |
P =.4413‡ | P =.0639‡ | ||
Estimated 3-y rate of OS considering only CML-related deaths*, % | 98.1 | 98.5 | 95.2 |
P =.0356‡ | P =.0159‡ |
. | Nilotinib 300 mg BID (n = 282) . | Nilotinib 400 mg BID (n = 281) . | Imatinib 400 mg QD (n = 283) . |
---|---|---|---|
MMR by 3 y, % | 73 | 70 | 53 |
P <.0001† | P <.0001† | ||
MMR by 3 y by Sokal risk, % | |||
Low (n = 103, 103, 104) | 77 | 77 | 63 |
Intermediate (n = 101, 100, 101) | 75 | 69 | 55 |
High (n = 78, 78, 78) | 67 | 64 | 39 |
MMR by 3 y by age, % | |||
Aged < 65 y (n = 246, 254, 248) | 73 | 71 | 53 |
Aged ≥65 y (n = 36, 27, 35) | 78 | 63 | 51 |
MR4 by 3 y, % | 50 | 44 | 26 |
P <.0001† | P <.0001† | ||
MR4.5 by 3 y, % | 32 | 28 | 15 |
P <.0001† | P =.0003† | ||
MR4.5 by 3 y by Sokal risk group, % | |||
Low (n = 103, 103, 104) | 30 | 34 | 18 |
Intermediate (n = 101, 100, 101) | 40 | 22 | 17 |
High (n = 78, 78, 78) | 24 | 27 | 9 |
MR4.5 by 3 y by age, % | |||
Aged < 65 y (n = 246, 254, 248) | 32 | 28 | 15 |
Aged ≥65 y (n = 36, 27, 35) | 31 | 30 | 17 |
Progression to AP/BC on core treatment | |||
Estimated 3-y rate of pts free from progression*, % Excluding CE | 99.3 | 98.7 | 95.2 |
P =.0059‡ | P =.0185‡ | ||
Including CE | 99.3 | 97.9 | 93.2 |
P =.0003‡ | P =.0085‡ | ||
Progression to AP/BC on study** | |||
Estimated 3-y rate of pts free from progression*, % | 96.7 | 98.1 | 93.5 |
P =.0496‡ | P =.0076‡ | ||
PFS on core treatment | |||
Estimated 3-y rate of PFS*, % | 96.9 | 98.3 | 94.7 |
P =.0842‡ | P =.0260‡ | ||
PFS on study** | |||
Estimated 3-y rate of PFS*, % | 93.3 | 96.7 | 92.0 |
P =.3754‡ | P =.0282‡ | ||
OS on study** | |||
Estimated 3-y rate of OS*, % | 95.1 | 97.0 | 94.0 |
P =.4413‡ | P =.0639‡ | ||
Estimated 3-y rate of OS considering only CML-related deaths*, % | 98.1 | 98.5 | 95.2 |
P =.0356‡ | P =.0159‡ |
Estimated by Kaplan-Meier analysis.
On study includes events during treatment or during follow-up after treatment discontinuation.
Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test stratified by Sokal vs imatinib.
Log-rank test stratified by Sokal vs imatinib.
Kantarjian:Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding. Kim:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; ARIAD: Research Funding; II-Yang: Research Funding. Clark:Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Pfizer: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Reiffers:BMS: Expense reimbursement for travel expenses Other; Novartis: Expense reimbursement for travel expenses, Expense reimbursement for travel expenses Other. Nicolini:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Ariad: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria. Hughes:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Ariad: Consultancy, Honoraria; CSL: Research Funding. Hochhaus:BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Ariad: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Kemp:Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp: Employment. Fan:Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp: Employment. Waltzman:Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp: Employment, Equity Ownership. Saglio:Novartis: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Consultancy. Larson:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy; Ariad: Consultancy, Research Funding.
Author notes
Asterisk with author names denotes non-ASH members.
This feature is available to Subscribers Only
Sign In or Create an Account Close Modal