Tag Archive for: Gazyva

Emerging Therapies in Relapsed Follicular Lymphoma: What’s Next?

What’s the latest in relapsed follicular lymphoma treatment developments? Expert Dr. Brad Kahl from Washington University School of Medicine discusses immunotherapy, combination treatments, bispecific monoclonal antibodies, and the testing status of various therapies. 

Download Resource Guide | Descargar Guía

See More from START HERE Follicular Lymphoma

Related Resources:

What Is Follicular Lymphoma Exactly?

What Is Follicular Lymphoma Exactly?

Newly Diagnosed Follicular Lymphoma and Treatment Options

Newly Diagnosed Follicular Lymphoma and Treatment Options


Transcript:

Lisa Hatfield:

We have drugs that are oral, that are, we call them targeted agents, they hit like a molecular pathway inside the cell a lot, and they kill the cells a lot differently than chemotherapy does. And we have a number of new drugs that work through the immune system and try to attack the lymphoma that way.

Dr. Brad Kahl:  

So when we have patients who relapse, probably the most commonly used second-line treatment right now is a combination of a drug called lenalidomide (Revlimid), which is a pill that’s used in a few different cancers. It works very well for certain cancers, and it works well in follicular lymphoma. And that’s given with the immunotherapy drug called rituximab (Rituxan). And that was proven in a study to be very effective. About 80 percent of people will respond to the regimen, and that remission on average lasts in the two to three-year range.

So that’s probably the most commonly used second-line regimen right now in the U.S. for follicular lymphoma. And then there are a number of treatments that are now available in third-line and beyond that are new within the past, say three, four years. And these newer treatments that I’m about to describe are now being tested as second-line treatments and even as first-line treatments.

So it’s possible that some of these treatments I’m about to describe will become in the future, our go to regimens for first-line treatment or second-line treatment. And we hope they do move up, because that means they’re, it means they’re even better than what we’ve been using. So probably the treatments that we’re most excited about right now in follicular lymphoma are the drugs called bispecific monoclonal antibodies.

There are two that are now FDA-approved. One’s called mosunetuzumab-axgb (Lunsumio), and that was approved about a year-and-a-half ago. And the other one’s called epcoritamab-bysp (Epkinly), and that was approved just a month ago. And basically these drugs are infused or injected under the skin, infused intravenously injected under the skin and their proteins that will literally stick to the lymphoma cells. And when it does that, it kind of coats the cancer cells. And then after these bispecific antibodies coat the tumor cells, they literally will trick the patient’s T cells or healthy T cells to come in and attack the cancer.

So it’s a way of trying to trick the patient’s own immune system to come in and start fighting the cancer. And these two drugs are very promising in the relapsed setting. They work about 80 percent of the time to get some kind of response. About 60 percent of the time patients will go into complete remission, which means we can’t find any evidence for the lymphoma on scans. And they’re both so new that I don’t think we have a full understanding of how durable these remissions are going to be right now.

It looks that like about, if you do get a complete remission, that about half of those patients are holding that complete remission at two and three years. But we’re, we don’t know about four years and five years yet because the drugs are too new. And we expect that if, as these drugs move up and are tested in the second-line setting and in the first-line setting, they’ll work even better because the cancer cells tend to be easier to kill in earlier lines of therapy. Other agents that have moved into the relapsed follicular lymphoma space would include CAR T-cell therapy.

This is a fairly sophisticated complicated approach where you actually will run the patient’s blood through apheresis machine and you will extract the patient’s T cells and those T cells get genetically modified in a lab and then expanded and then are shipped back to the center and then re-infused back into the patient. So now again, we’re tricking the patient’s T cells into fighting their B-cell lymphoma.

And there are three CAR T products that are now FDA approved for use in follicular lymphoma, and they have very high response rates. With seemingly good durability we’re now getting three and four-year follow-up for these CAR T products with about half of people still in remission. The CAR T products probably have a little more toxicity and a little more risk than the bispecifics. So I think most of us are thinking we would try the bispecifics before CAR T, but there might be certain patients where a CAR T strategy is more appropriate to use before a bispecific.

So we’re very excited to have these tools in our toolbox. It’s always good to have more options. And then I should just mention the small molecule inhibitors. So here’s an example. Just this past year there was approval for a small molecule called zanubrutinib (Brukinsa). It targets an enzyme called BTK or Bruton’s tyrosine kinase. This is a pill really well tolerated. It’s given in a combination with an immunotherapy drug called obinutuzumab (Gazyva).

This zanubrutinib-obinutuzumab combination got FDA-approved just this year for recurrent follicular lymphoma. The results look very good for that. It’s very well-tolerated. There’s another oral agent called tazemetostat (Tazverik), which was approved a couple of years ago. It targets a mutated protein in follicular lymphoma. This is, again, is a pill super well-tolerated, very few side effects. So, there’s just a few examples for you of all the different treatment options we have for follicular lymphoma that has recurred after initial treatment.

And believe it or not, the decision-making can be difficult when you have so many choices and so many good choices, that’s a good problem to have. And I find myself a lot of times spending a lot of time with the patient and their family as we talk through these different options, and we try to think what’s best for them at this point in time, talking through the pros and the cons, how active it is, what side effects do we need to be concerned about. And it’s a lot for patients to digest when you have so many choices. But like I mentioned that’s actually a good problem to have.

Lisa Hatfield:

I think you’re right. There’s a lot of hope in those options. I do have two follow-up questions. One of them is when you talk about lenalidomide or brand name Revlimid, CAR T bispecific antibodies, this new small molecule, are these all quality of life is so important for cancer patients. Are these all limited duration treatments for recurrent disease when there’s a recurrence of the disease, or are they long-term treatments for the disease?

Dr. Brad Kahl:

Yeah, really good question. And the answer is different for every agent. So I’ll try to just kind of run through the list. For the CAR T products, the three different CAR T products, it’s like a one-time treatment and then you’re done because the cells that get infused will persist in the patient’s body for months and months and months. So they’re infused and then the cells will hang around a long time acting on the cancer. So for the CAR T it’s a one-time treatment. For the bispecifics, the mosunetuzumab-axgb product is a time-limited treatment that is done in less than a year. The epcoritamab-bysp is designed to be given indefinitely.

So those are, there are some pros and cons of those two agents, the two small molecules that I mentioned, the zanubrutinib is meant to be given indefinitely and the tazemetostat is meant to be given indefinitely. And then the first one I mentioned was the lenalidomide. That is in follicular lymphoma that it was developed to be given for 12 months in this setting. So the duration of therapy is unique for each of the different agents that I mentioned.


Share Your Feedback

Follicular Lymphoma Patient Expert Q&A: Dr. Brad Kahl

 

Dr. Brad Kahl from Washington University School of Medicine explores the transformative potential of emerging therapies for follicular lymphoma and their significance for patients and families. He also addresses the unique challenges of living with follicular lymphoma and its impact on patients’ lives today.

Download Resource Guide | Descargar Guía

See More from START HERE Follicular Lymphoma

Related Resources:

What’s the News on Follicular Lymphoma and Bispecific Antibodies

What Should Follicular Lymphoma Patients Know About Remission

What Can Follicular Lymphoma Patients Expect With Remission


Transcript:

Lisa Hatfield:

Welcome to this START HERE Patient Empowerment Network program. This program bridges the expert and patient voice, enabling patients and care partners to feel comfortable asking questions of their health care team. Joining me today is hematologist-oncologist Dr. Brad Kahl, Professor of Medicine in the Division of Oncology at the Washington University School of Medicine and Director of the lymphoma program at the Alvin J. Siteman Cancer Center in St. Louis, Missouri. Thank you so much for joining us, Dr. Kahl.

Dr. Brad Kahl:

It’s a pleasure. Thanks for having me, Lisa.

Lisa Hatfield:  

The world is complicated, but understanding your follicular lymphoma diagnosis and treatment options along your journey doesn’t have to be. The goal of Start Here is to create actionable pathways for getting the most out of your follicular lymphoma treatment and survivorship. No matter where you are on your journey, this program is designed to provide easy to understand, reliable, and digestible information to help you make informed decisions. And most of all, we’re asking questions from you. I’m thrilled you’ve joined us.

Please remember to download the program resource guide via the QR code. There is great information there that will be useful during this program and after. Let’s start here. Dr. Kahl, there is a great deal going on in the follicular lymphoma landscape, and I want to dig into that. But before we do, as is custom for this program, I’d like to start with a brief overview of this disease. What is follicular lymphoma? And can you break it down a little bit, the key differences between Hodgkin and non-Hodgkin lymphoma and how follicular lymphoma fits into that?

Dr. Brad Kahl:

Sure. The terminology can be kind of confusing to patients, so I’ll try to explain it. Hodgkin lymphoma is a specific kind of lymphoma. Non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma just means it’s not Hodgkin’s. So non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma is just a big, broad, descriptive term. It’s like saying automobile. But there are lots of different kinds of cars, obviously. So follicular lymphoma is a specific type of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. So it’d be like saying Chevy Malibu or something specific within that automobile term. So there’s like 100 different kinds of non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Follicular lymphoma is one of those. A

nd it’s kind of a unique answer biologically and clinically. Follicular lymphoma is characterized by this particular mutation inside the cells that sends a signal to the cells that says don’t die. So instead of being a disease of rapid cellular proliferation and growth, it’s more of a disease of slow cellular accumulation. If people can picture that, the cells are just accumulating slowly. So it’s kind of a slow-moving cancer. And probably when patients are diagnosed, they’ve probably had it for a long time already.

They just didn’t know it, because follicular lymphoma often doesn’t cause symptoms. And usually when we get a patient with newly diagnosed follicular lymphoma, the disease is very widespread. And that obviously makes people fearful. And so we spend a lot of time trying to reassure them that’s not a problem that’s typical for follicular lymphoma. Everybody wants to know their stage, of course. And I try to tell them, the stage doesn’t really matter that much in follicular lymphoma. In some cancers, the stage is a big deal. But those are cancers that you can kind of remove surgically.

But there’s really no role for surgery as a treatment in follicular lymphoma. The disease is typically very widespread in diagnosis, meaning it’s all over the body. And so when we do treat it, we pick treatments that will work everywhere. And our treatments tend to work just as well when the disease is at a more advanced stage. That’s why as the doctors, we don’t spend too much time worrying about the stage. It’s just not, it’s not as important in follicular lymphoma.

Lisa Hatfield:

Okay. Thank you. And just to clarify, when you mentioned that there is a mutation or often mutations in follicular lymphoma, is that in the cancer cells themselves, or is that in a mutation, like a BRCA mutation that a patient can be tested for? I presume it is.

Dr. Brad Kahl:

Right. That’s a great question. The mutation is specific to the cancer cells. So people are not born with this mutation. It’s not a mutation that you pass along in your family to children. It’s a mutation that is acquired in these cells at some point in the patient’s lifetime. Another confusing term is this whole idea of B-cell lymphoma or T-cell lymphoma.

And just to try to clarify that. So we have different kinds of lymphocytes in our body, and these lymphocytes, they have jobs to do as part of our immune system. And one kind of lymphocyte is a T cell, and that has specific roles in our immune system. And another kind is a B cell, and that has specific jobs to do in our immune system. Follicular lymphoma is derived from a B cell, a B-cell lymphocyte. So the…a B cell gets this mutation, and that turns it from a normal healthy B cell into a follicular lymphoma cell.

Lisa Hatfield:  

Okay. Thank you for explaining that and for that overview. That’s really helpful. I appreciate that. So, Dr. Kahl, you also mentioned treatments and how oftentimes it’s not a cancer where you can just remove the cancer. Can you talk about some of the exciting developments with treatments and new innovative therapies, and what are the most important highlights for patients and families?

Dr. Brad Kahl:

Yeah. There’s a lot to talk about here. So I’ll start with how we approach a newly diagnosed patient, and then we’ll go into how we approach patients who have relapsed disease. So the most often, or the most common way a follicular lymphoma patient comes to medical attention is they just either notice a lump from an enlarging lymph node, or some enlarged lymph nodes are just found incidentally because they’re having some testing for some other condition.

And so, like I said, very often patients don’t have symptoms. That’s very typical. Occasionally, the patients will have symptoms, and those symptoms might be pain from a large lymph node mass that’s pushing on something. Occasionally, they might have fevers or night sweats. They wake up in the middle of the night just drenching wet, or unexplained weight loss. Those would be symptoms that can occur in follicular lymphoma. But most patients who come to see us for the first time don’t have symptoms.

When we have a newly diagnosed patient and it takes a biopsy to make the diagnosis, we then need to do the staging evaluation. So that involves some sort of imaging. And nowadays that’s usually in the form of what’s called a PET scan, which gives us a good snapshot of the whole body. And it’ll show us enlarged lymph nodes. And then the PET portion of the scan will show us if the lymph nodes are metabolically more active.

So they show up as these bright spots on the PET scan. And that’s what allows us to stage the patient. It tells us where the disease is located and how much of the disease we see. And so I’m often telling patients, I don’t worry so much about the stage. I worry more about the disease burden. So the way I explain that to patient is, suppose I could take all the follicular lymphoma cells out of your body, and I made a pile. How big is the pile? And that’s actually, I think, more important than the stage in determining our initial strategy.

Because believe it or not, if we have a patient who comes to us with a new diagnosis of follicular lymphoma and they have no symptoms, and it turns out that their tumor burden is very low, we often will recommend an initial approach of no treatment, which is a strange thing for patients to hear. And we spend a lot of time trying to explain the rationale for that. So I’ll try to explain that to you now. Follicular lymphoma is hard to cure.

So it’s this weird cancer in that it’s slow-moving. It often doesn’t make people sick, and we have good treatments for it, but curing it, like making it go away once and for all, proves to be kind of difficult. And studies in the past have shown if you have a patient who has no symptoms and is low tumor burden, that their prognosis is just as good if you leave them alone at the beginning. And many patients will not need any treatment at all for two years, three years, five years. I even have follicular lymphoma patients who I’ve been observing for more than 10 years that have never needed any treatment.

About two out of every 10 patients that are newly diagnosed can go 10 years without needing any treatment. So that’s why we’ll start that strategy for some patients. And that’s psychologically can be difficult for patients. You’re telling me I’ve got a new cancer diagnosis. You’re saying you have good treatments for it. And yet you’re saying you don’t want to use any of those treatments. And so it takes a lot of talking and explaining to try to get people comfortable with that.

Some people never get comfortable with that, I admit it. But some people get very comfortable with it. But it is a very appropriate initial strategy for a low tumor burden asymptomatic person just to observe and get a handle on the pace of the disease. If the disease starts to grow, or if the patient starts to get symptoms, we can start our treatment at that time. And the treatment is going to work just as well as it would have had if we started it last year, or two years ago.

So we feel like we’re putting the patient in no harm, no risk of harm by starting on this strategy of a watch and wait. On the other hand, some patients have high tumor burden, they have a lot of disease, or they have symptoms. And for those patients we need to start them on treatment because the treatment can put them in remission and get them feeling better. Right now, the most common frontline treatment in follicular lymphoma will be a combination of some chemotherapy and some immunotherapy.

The most commonly used regimen in the United States right now is a two drug regimen, a chemotherapy drug called bendamustine (Treanda), and an immunotherapy drug called rituximab (Rituxan). And you give that treatment every 28 days for six months. And it’ll put 90 percent of people into remission. And on average, those remissions last five plus years. And it’s a very, very tolerable treatment.  It’s not too bad as far as chemotherapy goes. There’s no, most people don’t lose their hair. They don’t get peripheral neuropathy, that sometimes chemotherapy drugs give.

It’s not too bad for nausea and things like that. I’m not saying it’s easy or it’s fun. It’s none of that. But as far as chemo goes, it’s not too bad. And it’s effective, it is very effective. And I’ve given that treatment and I have people who are still in their first remission 10 years later, so you can get, for some people can get these really long remissions. But the reality is most patients, their disease does come back, they do relapse at some point. And then we have to start talking about what to do for second line treatment or third-line treatments.

And that’s where things have really taken off in follicular lymphoma in the last few years, there are a number of brand new treatment options in play for relapsed follicular lymphoma that are very exciting, and proves that we’re moving away from chemotherapy. We have drugs that are oral, that are, we call them targeted agents, they hit like a molecular pathway inside the cell a lot, and they kill the cells a lot differently than chemotherapy does. And we have a number of new drugs that work through the immune system, and try to attack the lymphoma that way.

So when we have patients who relapse, probably the most commonly used second-line treatment right now is a combination of a drug called lenalidomide (Revlimid), which is a pill that’s used in a few different cancers. It works very well for certain cancers, and it works well in follicular lymphoma. And that’s given with the immunotherapy drug called rituximab. And that was proven in a study to be very effective. About 80 percent of people will respond to the regimen, and that remission on average lasts in the two to three-year range.

So that’s probably the most commonly used second line regimen right now in the U.S. for follicular lymphoma. And then there are a number of treatments that are now available in third-line and beyond that are new within the past, say three, four years. And these newer treatments that I’m about to describe are now being tested as second line treatments and even as first-line treatments.

So it’s possible that some of these treatments I’m about to describe will become in the future, our go to regimens for first line treatment or second line treatment. And we hope they do move up, because that means they’re, it means they’re even better than what we’ve been using. So probably the treatments that we’re most excited about right now in follicular lymphoma are the drugs called bispecific monoclonal antibodies. There are two that are now FDA-approved. One’s called mosunetuzumab-axgb (Lunsumio), and that was approved about a year-and-a-half ago.

And the other one’s called epcoritamab-bysp (Epkinly), and that was approved just a month ago. And basically these drugs are infused or injected under the skin, infused intravenously injected under the skin and their proteins that will literally stick to the lymphoma cells. And when it does that, it kind of coats the cancer cells. And then after these bispecific antibodies coat the tumor cells, they literally will trick the patient’s T cells or healthy T cells to come in and attack the cancer.

So it’s a way of trying to trick the patient’s own immune system to come in and start fighting the cancer. And these two drugs are very promising in the relapse setting. They work about 80 percent of the time to get some kind of response. About 60 percent of the time patients will go into complete remission, which means we can’t find any evidence for the lymphoma on scans. And they’re both so new that I don’t think we have a full understanding of how durable these remissions are going to be right now.

It looks that like about, if you do get a complete remission, that about half of those patients are holding that complete remission at two and three years. But we’re, we don’t know about four years and five years yet because the drugs are too new. And we expect that if, as these drugs move up and are tested in the second-line setting and in the first-line setting, they’ll work even better because the cancer cells tend to be easier to kill in earlier lines of therapy. Other agents that have moved into the relapse follicular lymphoma space would include CAR T-cell therapy.

This is a fairly sophisticated complicated approach where you actually will run the patient’s blood through apheresis machine and you will extract the patient’s T cells and those T cells get genetically modified in a lab and then expanded and then are shipped back to the center and then re-infused back into the patient. So now again, we’re tricking the patient’s T cells into fighting their B-cell lymphoma.

And there are three CAR T products that are now FDA approved for use in follicular lymphoma, and they have very high response rates. With seemingly good durability we’re now getting three and four-year follow-up for these CAR T products with about half of people still in remission. The CAR T products probably have a little more toxicity and a little more risk than the bispecifics. So I think most of us are thinking we would try the bispecifics before CAR T, but there might be certain patients where a CAR T strategy is more appropriate to use before a bispecific.

So we’re very excited to have these tools in our toolbox. It’s always good to have more options. And then I should just mention the small molecule inhibitors. So here’s an example. Just this past year there was approval for a small molecule called zanubrutinib (Brukinsa). It targets an enzyme called BTK or Bruton’s tyrosine kinase. This is a pill really well tolerated. It’s given in a combination with an immunotherapy drug called obinutuzumab (Gazyva). This zanubrutinib-obinutuzumab combination got FDA-approved just this year for recurrent follicular lymphoma.

The results look very good for that. It’s very well-tolerated. There’s another oral agent called tazemetostat (Tazverik), which was approved a couple of years ago. It targets a mutated protein in follicular lymphoma. This is, again, is a pill super well-tolerated, very few side effects. So, there’s just a few examples for you of all the different treatment options we have for follicular lymphoma that has recurred after initial treatment.

And believe it or not, the decision-making can be difficult when you have so many choices and so many good choices, that’s a good problem to have. And I find myself a lot of times spending a lot of time with the patient and their family as we talk through these different options, and we try to think what’s best for them at this point in time, talking through the pros and the cons, how active it is, what side effects do we need to be concerned about. And it’s a lot for patients to digest when you have so many choices. But like I mentioned that’s actually a good problem to have.

Lisa Hatfield:

I think you’re right. There’s a lot of hope in those options. I do have two follow-up questions. One of them is when you talk about lenalidomide or brand name Revlimid, CAR T bispecific antibodies, this new small molecule, are these all quality of life is so important for cancer patients. Are these all limited duration treatments for recurrent disease when there’s a recurrence of the disease or are they long-term treatments for the disease?

Dr. Brad Kahl:

Yeah, really good question. And the answer is different for every agent. So I’ll try to just kind of run through the list. For the CAR T products, the three different CAR T products, it’s like a one-time treatment and then you’re done because the cells that get infused will persist in the patient’s body for months and months and months. So they’re infused and then the cells will hang around a long time acting on the cancer. So for the CAR T it’s a one-time treatment. For the bispecifics, the mosunetuzumab-axgb product is a time-limited treatment that is done in less than a year. The epcoritamab-bysp is designed to be given indefinitely.

So those are, there are some pros and cons of those two agents, the two small molecules that I mentioned, the zanubrutinib is meant to be given indefinitely and the tazemetostat is meant to be given indefinitely. And then the first one I mentioned was the lenalidomide. That is in follicular lymphoma that it was developed to be given for 12 months in this setting. So the duration of therapy is unique for each of the different agents that I mentioned.

Lisa Hatfield:

Okay. Thank you for that overview of all those emerging therapies. That’s great to know for patients, Dr. Kahl. All right. It’s that time where we answer questions we’ve received from you. Remember, as patients, we should always feel empowered to ask our healthcare providers any and all questions we might have about our treatment, our disease, and our prognosis. Please remember, however, this program is not a substitute for medical care. Always consult with your own medical team.

So, Dr. Kahl, we have several patients who have submitted some questions. The first question is regarding emerging technologies. And I think that you probably have answered that very well actually in a discussion here. So the second question this patient had is how might future innovations build on the latest treatments to offer even better outcomes for patients? You, I think maybe have touched on that, but maybe speak to that a little bit more as far as longer remissions. Yeah.

Dr. Brad Kahl:

Right, right. So I think right now the main emphasis in research is to take some of these really promising drugs that were developed for relapsed follicular lymphoma and do two things with them, test them in combinations in the relapse setting to see if you can make them even more active. So an example of that would be take the drug lenalidomide, which is really active in the relapse setting and pair it with the drug mosunetuzumab-axgb, which is very active in the relapse setting, and pair them together and see if you can get better results than either drug alone.

So there are studies trying to answer questions like that at this time. And then the other area of major interest is to take these promising new treatments approved in the relapse setting and test them upfront. So there are studies being literally designed right now as we speak that will test bispecific monoclonal antibodies in the frontline setting.

So patients can envision being offered a chance to have a chemo-free strategy where they’re just getting a bispecific monoclonal antibody as their initial treatment. And there are studies that will test these drugs as single agents, and there are studies that will test these drugs in combinations with other agents in the frontline setting, like lenalidomide, for example. So we have no results from any of these trials yet, but these trials are just starting to enroll patients and this could fundamentally change the way we’re managing follicular lymphoma in the future if any of these new strategies turn out to be more promising than what we have done historically.

Lisa Hatfield:

Thank you. Okay. Another question, Dr. Kahl. How do outcomes differ for patients with relapsed/refractory disease compared to those who respond well to initial treatment?

Dr. Brad Kahl:

So that’s a really good question. And when we have a patient going through frontline treatment, we’re all really crossing our fingers that that first remission is incredibly durable. Because when the disease relapses, the remissions do tend to get shorter and shorter and shorter, which is frustrating for everybody.And so we love it when we get a nice long first remission. And in the older days when all we had to offer was chemotherapy and some different immunochemotherapy regimens, the remissions in second line and third line might be two years or one year.  It can get frustrating as you go through treatment after treatment after treatment. It’s hard on patients. The side effects start to accumulate. And that’s one of the reasons we’re so excited about all these new agents that we have for relapsed disease with the bispecifics and the CAR T products and the small molecule inhibitors like tazemetostat and zanubrutinib. Because it appears as though these remissions for relapsed disease might be getting longer than what we have seen historically. So there’s no question that dealing with relapsed follicular lymphoma is more difficult than dealing with frontline follicular lymphoma. But we’re optimistic that these newer treatments we have are improving outcomes for patients with relapsed disease.

Lisa Hatfield:

Okay. Thank you. And another question, which patients are considered the most vulnerable when it comes to follicular lymphoma and why, and what measures can be taken to better support these populations in terms of treatment and care? And I’m not sure if they’re talking about different age groups or ethnic groups or geographic groups like rural versus more urban areas, but if you can speak maybe to general terms to answer that question, that would be great.

Dr. Brad Kahl:

Yeah, right. Well, the first thing that comes to mind are older patients. Older patients are always more challenging to take through cancer therapies. The older patients are more fragile. They don’t tolerate the treatments quite as well. They don’t have the physiologic reserve. They’re more susceptible to complications and infections. So I always think when we have older patients that need treatment in follicular lymphoma, the doctor has to be extra, extra careful, sort of the Goldilocks principle. You don’t want the treatment too hot and you don’t want it too cold, too hot, it might work great, but you might get unacceptable side effects too cold, maybe no side effects, but not enough activity against the disease. So we’re always trying to get that patient the best remission we can get them, but doing the least amount of harm along the way.

So I think that takes a little bit of art, a little bit of experience to figure out how to get your older more fragile patients through follicular lymphoma therapy. And then I think the whole idea of patients who live in rural areas, that can often be challenging too, because they may be hours and hours away from medical care. So if they do have a complication of treatment, an infection, for example, it can be challenging to get them the care they need in a quick amount of time. So when I have patients who I know live way out in the country, far away from our center, I just, we always give them a card, it’s got our phone number and I’m like, you feel like something’s going wrong, call us. I don’t care if it’s 2 in the morning, you call us.

It’s not your job to figure out what’s going wrong. That’s our job. It’s just your job to describe to us what you’re experiencing and then we’ll figure out over the phone whether we want you to drive the three hours to come see us or whether we think you just need to go to the closest place, which might be 30 minutes away. So at least you’re in the hands of some medical professionals. And then they can call us with an update on what they’re noticing, what the tests are saying. So taking care of patients who live far away from the medical center poses some additional challenges.

Lisa Hatfield:

Okay. Thank you. And that’s a great takeaway for patients. If you have a question, call your provider. They can help take the stress away from making that decision yourself. 

Well, here’s a loaded question for you, Dr. Kahl. Why does relapse happen in the first place, and what are the changes in the body that signal when and if treatment is likely going to fail?

Dr. Brad Kahl:

Boy, we wish we understood why relapse happens in the first place. Last I mentioned, most of these treatments can get people into remission, which means that they can kill the vast majority of the cancer cells, maybe 99.9 percent of them, but for some patients, there’s just a few stubborn cells that remain behind. Maybe those cells are just sitting there, not growing at all, which follicular lymphoma cells can do.

And when the cells are not trying to divide, not trying to grow, they’re kind of protected from killing. They’re just sitting there doing nothing. And so we think it’s this property that how the cells kind of protect themselves. And so these rare cells that are just kind of sitting there, quiescently not growing, not dividing, these might be the cells then that just hang around for years and then contribute to that relapse five years down the road.

But I admit we don’t fully understand why one patient will relapse two years after a treatment and the next patient is still in remission 10 years later. These are things that we don’t fully understand. Every patient’s lymphoma is a little different, I’m afraid. So two people with follicular lymphoma, they don’t really have the same cancer, cancer, they are sort of like snowflakes. No two are alike. And so they can have different mutations inside the cells that’ll make the cancer behave a little differently from one patient to another. It might make it respond to treatment a little differently from one patient to another. And so what is true for one follicular lymphoma patient may not be true for another.

So if a patient’s symptoms are not being relieved, that might be a clue that the treatment isn’t working as well as we want it to. And then in some cases the only way to figure out if a treatment is working is by scanning. So we’ll have a before picture from a PET scan or a CT scan, and then we’ll take them through a few cycles of treatment, and then we’ll get another scan to prove that the treatment is working like we want it to work. And if it’s not working like we want it to work, then we’ll say, okay, this one isn’t working for you. Let’s go to the what we think is the next best option for you.

Lisa Hatfield:

Okay. Thank you. And just listening to you and hearing about all these nuances with follicular lymphoma, I would probably recommend as a patient myself with a different kind of cancer, seeking out at least a consult from somebody who specializes mostly in follicular lymphoma, at least a hematologist who can tease through some of these nuances to help you as a patient find the best treatments and therapies and quality of life. So just a little tidbit there. So, Dr. Kahl, thank you so much for being part of this Patient Empowerment Network START HERE program.It’s these conversations that help patients truly empower themselves along their treatment journey. And on behalf of patients like myself and those watching, thank you for joining us, Dr. Kahl.

Dr. Brad Kahl:

Thank you for having me.

Lisa Hatfield:  

I’m Lisa Hatfield, thank you for joining this Patient Empowerment Network program.


Share Your Feedback

CLL Expert Updates on Diagnostic Tool and Technology Advances

CLL Expert Updates on Diagnostic Tool and Technology Advances from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.

What diagnostic tool and technology advances for chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) are available in clinic, and which ones are in the research setting? Experts Dr. Jennifer Brown from Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and Dr. Callie Coombs from the University of California, Irvine discuss next generation sequencing and research that is under study for CLL mutations.

Download Resource Guide  | Descargar guía de recursos

See More from EPEP CLL

Related Resources:

How Can CLL HCPs Gain More Understanding of Mutation Profiles

How Can CLL HCPs Gain More Understanding of Mutation Profiles?

CLL Clinical Trials for Molecularly Defined Patient Subgroups

CLL Clinical Trials for Molecularly Defined Patient Subgroups

CLL Expert Perspectives on Current and Future Patient Care

CLL Expert Perspectives on Current and Future Patient Care

Transcript:

Dr. Callie Coombs:

I think an argument could be made in practice whether or not sending these mutation tests is beneficial, but research, clearly important, and I think it’s going to give us key insights into our therapeutic sequencing strategies going forward. So I’m certainly a proponent of doing the testing in a well-monitored setting, but I don’t think it’s ready for prime time to be applied completely broadly to our patients.

Dr. Nicole Rochester:

Thank you, Dr. Coombs, and I appreciate you adding that additional practical tips and information specifically for our healthcare providers. And you kind of moved into the next topic, which was really around new diagnostic tools and technologies that are available to detect and monitor mutations. So I’m going to go back to you, Dr. Brown, to see if you have any additional information that you’d like to share about new diagnostic tools, technologies with regard to these mutations and any other tips perhaps for our healthcare provider audience.

Dr. Jennifer Brown:

Well, and really the only issue is what Dr. Coombs mentioned that it’s very important to get a next generation sequencing test to evaluate the p53 mutation, that it really is not well-evaluated by any other test, and is often missed because it’s thought that checking for the deletion is sufficient. So I would just reemphasize that point that she made very clearly. Other than that, we don’t really need any additional tools to monitor for mutations.

In the research setting, we’re trying to do more and more sensitive assays to try and see when the earliest time that these mutations may emerge is and is there a way we could prevent that or, and just to better understand some of the biology, but it’s not really anything that’s needed in clinical practice. And we’re also not using the mutations to monitor residual disease. It turns out that the best way to do that is probably looking at the B-cell receptor itself, which is again, something that we’re studying in the research setting, but is not really something that needs to be done in clinical practices yet.

Dr. Nicole Rochester:

Wonderful. Thank you, Dr. Brown. We definitely want to leverage you all’s expertise in this area. And so my next question has to do with practices. And you’ve really kind of addressed this to some extent already. Are there any unforeseen or perhaps outdated practice-related barriers that may either hinder your work or that of your colleagues specifically related to better understanding CLL mutations?

Dr. Callie Coombs:

Yeah, I mean, I think in addition to what I mentioned about 17p and TP53, one type of mutation we haven’t talked about is assessing for the mutation status of IGHV.  So that’s actually something else that I’ve seen frequently missed as far as the routine testing of a CLL patient. But I do think it’s very important to send. Is it as important as when we were in the chemoimmunotherapy era where it would be hugely predictive for who had a long remission and who wouldn’t?

Maybe not as important, but I do think if someone’s unmutated that still can really help inform certain aspects of their journey. One is the time that between diagnosis and when he or she’ll need their first treatment. But two, also the expected length of remission should this patient embark upon a time-limited regimen such as venetoclax (Venclexta) and obinutuzumab (Gazyva).

But the separate question is, again, coming down to the practical aspect of how IGVH is tested. So another misunderstanding that I’ve seen is FISH tests look for the IGH locus. And so I’ve seen on recurrent occasions if that’s deleted, they say, “Oh, that’s a mutation.” Well that’s definitely not the same thing, and so it’s just to realize the IGHV test is a very specific test.

Some large facilities do it as an in-house test, I myself have been sending mine out to the Mayo Clinic, there’s other vendors where you can do it, but what they do is they specifically sequence IGHV and then compare the patient sequence to a consensus germline sequence to determine the percent of mutation, and it’s actually a good thing to be mutated with this gene, these are the patients that often have a longer time until they need their first treatment, if they need treatment at all, and then they generally have better responses to therapy. Though with BTK inhibitors, that difference is often becoming quite slim given that they work in both groups of patients.


Share Your Feedback

What Should Follicular Lymphoma Patients Know About Remission?

What Should Follicular Lymphoma Patients Know About Remission? from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.

What does follicular lymphoma remission mean, and what should patients know about it? Expert Dr. Kami Maddocks from The Ohio State University explains remission, functional cure, and immunosuppression.

See More from START HERE Follicular Lymphoma

Related Resources:

What Should Follicular Lymphoma Patients Know About Beauty Products

What Follicular Lymphoma Treatment Side Effects Should Patients Expect

What Can Follicular Lymphoma Patients Expect With Remission


Transcript:

Lisa Hatfield:

This patient is asking if you are in remission for a long period of time after follicular lymphoma treatment, can you technically be cured in some cases, or are you considered to still have the cancer?

Dr. Kami Maddocks:

So that is a great question. There’s a term that’s used in follicular lymphoma called a functional cure. So we have patients that essentially get treated, and they live long enough that they die from something else without their follicular lymphoma ever relapsing. So while we say from what we know if somebody lives long enough that this disease is likely going to relapse at some point, there are patients that will be treated, and the disease will never come back.

Lisa Hatfield:

Can patients facing follicular lymphoma be considered immunocompromised if they’re in remission?

Dr. Kami Maddocks

I think this kind of goes back to when we talked about the immune system recovery that this can be a little bit of a complicated question, because it depends a little bit on the treatment that they got, how far out from the treatment they are and how many treatments they’ve had in the past. So, in general, if I have a patient that has received therapy, their counts have recovered, they in general look like…their lab work looks like their immune system, then in general I would say that they have an immune system that’s likely similar to somebody who didn’t have the follicular lymphoma, and they’re going to be able to fight infections and respond to vaccines.

I think what we do know is sometimes when patients get rituximab maintenance or obinutuzumab (Gazyva) maintenance or some of the chemotherapies there are some patients that can have a longer time that they’re immunosuppressed. So I think this is always something that’s good to ask your doctor for. In your specific situation with the treatment you received, when do you expect to have a regularly functioning immune system?


Share Your Feedback:

Create your own user feedback survey

Start Here: Bridging the CLL Expert and CLL Patient Voice

Chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) can sometimes feel overwhelming and complicated, but what can patients and care partners do to help improve their care? With this question in mind, the Patient Empowerment Network initiated the START HERE CLL program, which aims to close the gap in the expert and patient voice to build empowerment. 

START HERE CLL Program Resources

 The program series includes the following resources:

Lisa Hatfield and Dr. Danielle Brander

Patient-Expert Q&A Webinar Topics and Key Takeaways

In the Patient-Expert Q&A webinars, CLL experts Dr. Ryan Jacobs from Levine Cancer Institute, and Dr. Danielle Brander from Duke Cancer Institute shared their expert knowledge to help patients and care partners fortify their knowledge and confidence. The webinars provided some in-depth discussion along with key takeaways derived from questions submitted by patients. Some of the discussion covered:

Among some key points from the webinars, Lisa and Dr. Jacobs discussed the importance of genetic markers. Dr. Jacobs recommended CLL patients ask their doctor about their prognostic markers. “The one that is still potentially affecting outcomes, even with our novel treatments, are chromosome 17 aberrations, which stately are rare in the initial diagnostic setting, that or a TP53.”

The watch-and-wait phase of CLL, also called active surveillance, is a common term heard by CLL patients. However, there are actually two types of CLL. “While some CLL patients experience very gradual disease progression and are actively monitored during a watch-and-wait phase, other patients may experience a more expedited CLL progression and will need more frequent treatment.”

Treatment advancements for CLL have been moving forward over recent years. Dr. Brander shared her perspective about the advancements. “So over the last decade or even the last five years, for patients diagnosed with CLL, there’s been a very encouraging and marked change in the available treatments…not that many years ago we generally only had chemotherapy or chemotherapy combined with these antibody targeted treatments that we call immunotherapy sometimes. But in the last 5 to 10 years we’ve seen quite a remarkable change in treatments that target, meaning often they go after pathways or ways that the CLL cells have learned to grow or have learned to not die the way that normal cells should, die after certain time points.” 

Vaccines for those with CLL have gathered more visibility in recent years with COVID-19. Dr. Jacobs addressed some questions about vaccination and shared, “I in general am recommending, as does the CDC, to get boosted every six months for patients with any level of immune suppression and having CLL qualifies you as that. And then I recommend all of the general vaccines that come with age, like, for example, the Shingrix vaccine for shingles is now safe to give to CLL patients because it’s a conjugate vaccine, it’s not a live virus vaccine. So we’re lucky now with just standard vaccines in the U.S., there are no live virus vaccines that the CLL patient has to worry about anymore, so I definitely encourage shingles, pneumonia vaccines, boosting for COVID. We’ll see if we get an RSV vaccine, that sounds like it’s on the horizon. Flu, of course.”

Worries about CLL progression are felt by many patients, and there are some ways to stay alert for warning signs. Expert Dr. Jacobs explained signs of CLL progression including new or worsened drenching night sweats, significant changes in a patient’s ability to function, and major changes in lymph nodes over a short period. Dr. Jacobs also shared some research updates for treatments that have shown success against progression to Richter’s transformation. “…I’ve been having some recent success using CAR T in those patients, and also now have a, I was thankfully getting it sort of off-label approval to do that, but now I actually have a clinical trial investigating axicabtagene ciloleucel (Yescarta) in those patients.

Some CLL patients wonder about whether they can take a break from treatment. Dr. Brander addressed this question about BTK inhibitors. “…BTK inhibitors are given continuously, meaning, at least so far, the standard way we recommend of those treatments is that they’re taken every day, either once or twice a day, depending on which BTK inhibitor, and they’re taken every day. Unless patients run into progression, meaning the CLL learns to grow through its resistance or patients run into side effects that despite maybe team’s recommendation of changing the dose or holding the medications, that it’s just the medication is just not tolerate.”

Many CLL patients also wonder about the impact of exercise on their treatment response and their duration of treatment response. Dr. Brander explained about the impact of exercise. “I think certainly trials or studies really need to be continuing to look at this, because I think there likely are things that we can be more specific to patients about. There are studies looking at physical fitness and exercise regimens not necessarily specific to CLL, although there are studies being done in that space, but to other cancers showing that physical activity and exercise can help even for patients not on treatment maintain control of their cancer. So general daily activity and exercise are important in studies that look at how do you tailor that to an individual I think are important too.

Whether patient fatigue is originating from CLL or from symptoms of old age can sometimes be difficult to determine. Dr. Jacobs shared some insight about fatigue. “Fatigue, I’m not as confident when that’s the only issue that a patient’s having. I try to differentiate between fatigue from other causes and old age, and specifically to CLL. They try to put it as a metric and say, if you’re having to spend half the day or more just lying around and you’re not able to do your normal activities of daily living, like that’s a severe level of fatigue and treatment should be considered. I’m looking for somewhat of a precipitous decline, not necessarily just kind of the gradual fatigue that you might more relate to aging.

Some program participants provided valuable testimonials and insights on what they learned from the START HERE CLL Patient-Expert Q&A webinars:

Testimonials:

  • I love PEN webinars because I feel I have a direct connection with the best experts. I have many questions for my team after this program, thank you.”
  • “This program was stellar. I learned a lot that I have to address with my doctor.”
  • “I have a greater comfort level with promising treatment options.”
  • “I was most interested in learning about treatment options for relapsed patients and Dr. Jacobs provided great information. THANK YOU!”
  • “This was very helpful as I consider how to support my sister who has been diagnosed with CLL.”

Learnings:

  • “What BTK and BCL-2 inhibitors are…How Fish looks for DNA for Leukemia cells. And how exercise can help any cancer patient. Thanks for the program!”
  • “Even though I am Watch & Wait, I appreciated the information and explanation of the latest treatments.” 
  • “Fantastic program. Learned about many reasons docs decide not to treat.”
  • “I learned about some potential treatment options should I relapse.”

Many other questions were raised during the CLL Patient-Expert Q&A webinars. We hope you can use these valuable CLL resources to build your knowledge and confidence toward becoming a more empowered patient or care partner.

Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia Research and EVOLVE Trial Updates 

Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia Research and EVOLVE Trial Updates from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.

What’s the latest in chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) research? Expert Dr. Danielle Brander shares research updates and an update about the EVOLVE trial by the SWOG cooperative group.

Dr. Danielle Brander is an Assistant Professor in the Division of Hematologic Malignancies & Cellular Therapy at Duke University Medical Center. Learn more about Dr. Danielle Brander.

Download Resource Guide   |  Descargar Guía en Español

See More from START HERE CLL

Related Programs:

Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia Prognosis and Treatment Factors

Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia Prognosis and Treatment Factors

Common Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia Symptoms and Follow-Up Tests

Common Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia Symptoms and Follow-Up Tests


Transcript:

Lisa Hatfield:

Can you talk a little bit about the novel pathways and targets that are currently under investigation in CLL, and what are the most important highlights from those for patients and their families and care partners?

Dr. Danielle Brander:

Yes. So over the last decade or even the last five years, for patients diagnosed with CLL, there’s been a very encouraging and market change in the available treatments that is, you know, not that many years ago we generally only had chemotherapy or chemotherapy combined with these antibody targeted treatments that we call immunotherapy sometimes.

But in the last 5 to 10 years we’ve seen quite a remarkable change in treatments that target, meaning often they go after pathways or ways that the CLL cells have learned to grow or have learned to not die the way that normal cells should, die after certain time points. The two main categories of treatments that are approved for CLL treatment, either for patients as a first treatment or patients that have had treatment before including prior chemo or other agents are called BTK inhibitors or BCL-2 inhibitors.

BTK is something inside the leukemia cells. It’s also in some of our other cells. But in the CLL cells particularly, they’re very sensitive in needing that protein. So in targeting that BTK inhibitors keep the cells from getting the normal signals that they need to stay alive, and so the lymph nodes that are big get smaller, a spleen that might be big get smaller, white count eventually comes back down, for example.

And those BTK inhibitors have also already encouragingly changed over recent years. So there was…you’ll hear people say first generation, these were the first inhibitors that came out, that was a drug called ibrutinib (Imbruvica), which is still around. And then there are second generation that are approved that have come out as first treatment or treatment for previously patients that receive treatment.

Those second-generation BTK inhibitors are called zanubrutinib (Brukinsa) and acalabrutinib (Calquence) that are approved. The main other approved category of these targeted treatments I mentioned is venetoclax based treatment. And that targets something different, that targets a set of proteins inside the cell that tell the cell to stay alive too long. And so you have this accumulation and venetoclax targets that pathway. And the last thing I’ll mention about the BTK inhibitors that’s emerging is now there are trials of what are called non-covalent BTK inhibitors.

So they work in a different way, they go after BTK and so that they can work. The non-covalent, even for patients where the first and second-generation, traditional covalent BTK inhibitors I mentioned stop working, those are not yet approved officially for CLL, though they’re approved in mantle cell lymphoma. That’s a drug called pirtobrutinib (Jaypirca), that’s a non-covalent BTK. And the reason that emerging set of treatment, as I mentioned, is important is because it can work for patients where the first or second-generation covalent BTK inhibitors stop working. The venetoclax (Venclexta), as I mentioned, works by a different mechanism. So patients, of course, where the BTK stopped working, in many cases venetoclax can be helpful as well.

Lisa Hatfield:

So I read a little bit, I did a little research on trials that you’re involved in, and there is a trial the EVOLVE CLL trial, and I wonder if you can talk about that a little bit because I think it is exciting for patients to hear that there might be an option for earlier intervention. And I’m not sure if you’re allowed to talk about any results yet, but if you can speak to results, that would be great to hear about those results too.

Dr. Danielle Brander:

Well, yes and no, thank you for bringing this up because this is very important. As you mentioned, it’s called the EVOLVE study. It’s led by a national cooperative group called SWOG, meaning there are lots of places that it’s available, not just larger centers, but smaller oncology centers as well. And this is to look at what’s called early intervention, meaning as we spoke about before, most patients with CLL don’t need treatment at the time that they’re diagnosed.

The reasons for treatment are, we call those treatment indications are based on three main categories that I’ll just review. For some patients, it’s new or progressive symptoms like weight loss or, very symptomatic limiting life day-to-day activities like night sweats or fatigue, for example, that’s the first category of reasons some patients might need treatment is unmanageable side effects.

The second main category is if the lymph nodes get very large or impacting on organ function, or the same for the spleen, it’s getting very large to a certain size, or it’s affecting your ability to eat regular meals or losing weight. And then the last category of treatment indications that we generally wait to start treatment for are if it’s affecting the normal blood count.

So there’s not one magic white count where patients need to start treatment, but almost like weeds in a garden,  if those CLL cells are crowding out the red blood cells, so the hemoglobin’s falling or it’s crowding out the platelets, so the platelets are crowding and can’t grow and reach a certain threshold, then we recommend treatment. Of course, there are scattered other reasons, but those are the main three categories. And the reason of waiting to start until those are met is because historically trials have been done to look at waiting for those indications versus treating around the time of diagnosis.

Those trials so far have included, chemotherapy by itself or chemotherapy in combination. And most recently there was a trial looking at first-generation ibrutinib that was given continuously. And so far there’s been no survival. So no life expectancy benefit to early treatment versus waiting for those indications. And the other reason generally not treating all patients is because some patients never require treatment, about a quarter of patients.

So if we offer treatment to everybody, at the time of diagnosis, there are patients that would get treatment that would be exposed to side effects and never needed. But what the EVOLVE study is uniquely looking at is randomizing. And randomizing means some patients will get treatment and some patients will wait until those traditional reasons to need treatment. But for those randomized to receive therapy, it’s that venetoclax based treatment combined with this antibody called obinutuzumab (Gazyva).

And the way that treatment is given for patients, is the same way it’s given for patients who outside of the trial need treatment, meaning they get the antibody infusion, then they get the venetoclax pill, but it’s for a fixed duration, meaning a total of one year of treatment. The trial is also only for patients with higher-risk CLL. So as I mentioned, some patients never need treatment, some patients do, some patients need it quicker.

So rather than looking at this trial and saying all patients, including those with CLL, that’s likely to be slower-growing. The EVOLVE trial is only for patients who are more likely to need treatment in the next couple of years.  And the way that’s determined is a score called the CLL-IPI score, and CLL-IPI tries to identify patients more likely to need treatment in the next couple of years by a couple of key factors.

Stage at the time of diagnosis, it looks at age, and it looks at key factors of the leukemia itself, including something called deletion 17P or TP53, because that marker in the cells is a high risk of eventually needing treatment.  So to answer your question, what EVOLVE is looking at is taking higher-risk patients, so patients rather than all patients more likely to need treatment anyway, and around the time of diagnosis, randomizing to either be treated or to follow the traditional, sometimes called watch and wait or dynamic monitoring until they reach traditional markers. And ultimately, and it’ll likely take many years to look at, ultimately the question is looking at if that helps prolong patient survival by having higher-risk patients receive that fixed-duration treatment earlier in time. We don’t yet have any results or any results to share, because the study is still enrolling.

Dr. Danielle Brander:

But again, I think it’s something for patients to be aware of, because it does look at the higher risk patients. But around a year, it has to be within a year of diagnosis. So patients who are newly diagnosed, the question to ask your oncology team is “Do I qualify?” if it’s something you’re interested for, and they’ll help walk you through that. If you haven’t had markers checked, for example, it might be a good time to ask about that, to see if this is something would be available, even if not available though, it does create a time to talk to your team about the markers, because those can inform regardless of trial or not maybe what to expect in coming years and likelihood of treatment. 


Share Your Feedback

Create your own user feedback survey

CLL Patient Expert Q&A: Dr. Danielle Brander

CLL Patient Expert Q&A: Dr. Danielle Brander from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.

START HERE bridges the expert and patient voice, enabling chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) patients to feel comfortable asking questions of their healthcare team with precision. In this program, CLL expert Dr. Danielle Brander speaks to managing CLL side effects, emerging novel CLL therapies and treatment options for CLL progression.

Dr. Danielle Brander is an Assistant Professor in the Division of Hematologic Malignancies & Cellular Therapy at Duke University Medical Center. Learn more about Dr. Danielle Brander.

Download Resource Guide   |  Descargar Guía en Español

See More from START HERE CLL

Related Programs:

Are There Signs of Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia Progression?

Are There Signs of Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia Progression?

CLL and BTK Inhibitor Treatment: What Are the Risk Factors?

Can CLL Treatment Cause Gastrointestinal Side Effects?

Can CLL Treatment Cause Gastrointestinal Side Effects?


Transcript:

Lisa Hatfield:

Welcome to this START HERE, Patient Empowerment Network program. This program bridges the CLL expert and patient voices, enabling patients and care partners to feel comfortable asking questions of their healthcare team. Joining me is Dr. Danielle Brander, a CLL specialist serving as assistant professor in the Division of Hematologic Malignancies and Cellular Therapy at Duke University Medical Center. Dr. Brander directs the chronic lymphocytic leukemia or CLL and lymphoma program and serves as primary investigator for CLL focus clinical trials. Thank you so much for joining us, Dr. Brander.

Dr. Danielle Brander:

Thanks for having me, Lisa.

Lisa Hatfield:

The world can be complicated, but understanding your chronic lymphocytic leukemia diagnosis and treatment options doesn’t have to be. The goal of START HERE is to create actionable pathways for getting the most out of CLL treatment and survivorship. Before we get started, please remember to download the program resource guide via the QR code. There is great information there that will be useful during this program and after. So let’s get started. Dr. Brander, I’d like to talk about what’s on the CLL treatment radar. There’s a lot going on in terms of emerging treatment options, clinical trial data, and other learnings from the CLL community. Before we jump into a detailed discussion, can you provide an explanation of what CLL is?

Dr. Danielle Brander:

Absolutely. So CLL, or chronic lymphocytic leukemia, we generally think of as blood cancer. But often as you hear the ending of that, the name leukemia, we also think of it as a lymphoma, meaning patients can have the spectrum of an elevated white count like you might think of in terms of a leukemia. They can also, like a lymphoma though, have enlarged lymph nodes or spleen. And often patients are diagnosed incidentally and that just means that they’re…in seeing their physician or their medical team for other reasons. And they might have had a blood test, and their white counts elevated.

Or they might notice they have a tiny enlarged lymph node or found on screening for other cancers, for example. And so the takeaway there is that many patients don’t necessarily have symptoms and certainly often many patients don’t have reasons to need to start treatment at the time they’re diagnosed. So in terms of what it is today, I think more and more patients are being diagnosed both because it is something that comes about as patients get older, but also because it’s found during routine other visits. And so more and more patients I think are found incidentally that way.

Lisa Hatfield:

Okay, thank you. So just a follow-up question to that, if a patient goes into their primary care provider and finds something unusual that might indicate CLL, will they be referred to a hematologist right away at that point? Usually?

Dr. Danielle Brander:

So that is a great question. Often they are, for example, if they’re noted to have a high white count or, specifically a type of white cell called lymphocytes. However, there are many things that can cause that or cause a small lymph node. And so, some primary care appropriately, if those changes are small and they could be due to other things like an infection, for example, then their primary care might want to follow up first. And if things go away, it may not be related to a cancer at all.

But if it’s something that persists or it seems very out of range, or primary care, who, you know, are specialists and seeing kind of changes all the time, and may say this seems a little bit out of range, then even before something’s diagnosed, patients might be referred to a hematologist or an oncologist to help with that workup. But often because primary care is so astute in seeing these things, they may counsel patients to say, let’s send this test or this test to get things going while we’re speaking to a hematologist or oncologist.

Lisa Hatfield:

We have CLL patients and care partners who are newly diagnosed in active treatment, watch and wait, and also living well with their disease. Joining this program no matter where you are in your CLL journey, START HERE provides easy-to-understand, reliable, and digestible information to help you make informed decisions. So, Dr. Brander, we’re going to get into a more detailed discussion now of CLL. Can you talk a little bit about the novel pathways and targets that are currently under investigation in CLL, and what are the most important highlights from those for patients and their families and care partners?

Dr. Danielle Brander:

Yes. So over the last decade or even the last five years, for patients diagnosed with CLL, there’s been a very encouraging and marked change in the available treatments that is, you know, not that many years ago we generally only had chemotherapy or chemotherapy combined with these antibody targeted treatments that we call immunotherapy sometimes.

But in the last 5 to 10 years we’ve seen quite a remarkable change in treatments that target, meaning often they go after pathways or ways that the CLL cells have learned to grow or have learned to not die the way that normal cells should, die after certain time points. The two main categories of treatments that are approved for CLL treatment, either for patients as a first treatment or patients that have had treatment before including prior chemo or other agents are called BTK inhibitors or BCL-2 inhibitors.

BTK is something inside the leukemia cells. It’s also in some of our other cells. But in the CLL cells particularly, they’re very sensitive in needing that protein. So in targeting that BTK inhibitors keep the cells from getting the normal signals that they need to stay alive, and so the lymph nodes that are big get smaller, a spleen that might be big get smaller, white count eventually comes back down, for example. And those BTK inhibitors have also already encouragingly changed over recent years.

So there was…you’ll hear people say first generation, these were the first inhibitors that came out, that was a drug called ibrutinib (Imbruvica), which is still around. And then there are second generation that are approved that have come out as first treatment or treatment for previously patients that receive treatment.

Those second-generation BTK inhibitors are called zanubrutinib (Brukinsa) and acalabrutinib (Calquence) that are approved. The main other approved category of these targeted treatments I mentioned is venetoclax based treatment. And that targets something different, that targets a set of proteins inside the cell that tell the cell to stay alive too long. And so you have this accumulation and venetoclax targets that pathway. And the last thing I’ll mention about the BTK inhibitors that’s emerging is now there are trials of what are called non-covalent BTK inhibitors.

So they work in a different way, they go after BTK and so that they can work. The non-covalent, even for patients where the first and second-generation, traditional covalent BTK inhibitors I mentioned stop working, those are not yet approved officially for CLL, though they’re approved in mantle cell lymphoma. That’s a drug called pirtobrutinib (Jaypirca), that’s a non-covalent BTK. And the reason that emerging set of treatment, as I mentioned, is important is because it can work for patients where the first or second-generation covalent BTK inhibitors stop working. The venetoclax (Venclexta), as I mentioned, works by a different mechanism. So patients, of course, where the BTK stopped working, in many cases venetoclax can be helpful as well.

Lisa Hatfield:

Great. Thank you so much. So I read a little bit, I did a little research on trials that you’re involved in, and there is a trial the EVOLVE CLL trial, and I wonder if you can talk about that a little bit because I think it is exciting for patients to hear that there might be an option for earlier intervention. And I’m not sure if you’re allowed to talk about any results yet, but if you can speak to results, that would be great to hear about those results too.

Dr. Danielle Brander:

Well, yes and no, thank you for bringing this up because this is very important. As you mentioned, it’s called the EVOLVE study. It’s led by a national cooperative group called SWOG, meaning there are lots of places that it’s available, not just larger centers, but smaller oncology centers as well. And this is to look at what’s called early intervention, meaning as we spoke about before, most patients with CLL don’t need treatment at the time that they’re diagnosed. The reasons for treatment are, we call those treatment indications are based on three main categories that I’ll just review. For some patients, it’s new or progressive symptoms like weight loss or, very symptomatic limiting life day-to-day activities like night sweats or fatigue, for example, that’s the first category of reasons some patients might need treatment is unmanageable side effects.

The second main category is if the lymph nodes get very large or impacting on organ function, or the same for the spleen, it’s getting very large to a certain size, or it’s affecting your ability to eat regular meals or losing weight. And then the last category of treatment indications that we generally wait to start treatment for are if it’s affecting the normal blood count.

So there’s not one magic white count where patients need to start treatment, but almost like weeds in a garden, if those CLL cells are crowding out the red blood cells, so the hemoglobin’s falling or it’s crowding out the platelets, so the platelets are crowding and can’t grow and reach a certain threshold, then we recommend treatment. Of course, there are scattered other reasons, but those are the main three categories. And the reason of waiting to start until those are met is because historically trials have been done to look at waiting for those indications versus treating around the time of diagnosis.

Those trials so far have included chemotherapy by itself or chemotherapy in combination. And most recently there was a trial looking at first-generation ibrutinib that was given continuously. And so far there’s been no survival. So no life expectancy benefit to early treatment versus waiting for those indications. And the other reason generally not treating all patients is because some patients never require treatment, about a quarter of patients. So if we offer treatment to everybody, at the time of diagnosis, there are patients that would get treatment that would be exposed to side effects and never needed. But what the EVOLVE study is uniquely looking at is randomizing. And randomizing means some patients will get treatment and some patients will wait until those traditional reasons to need treatment. But for those randomized to receive therapy, it’s that venetoclax based treatment combined with this antibody called obinutuzumab (Gazyva).

And the way that treatment is given for patients, is the same way it’s given for patients who outside of the trial need treatment, meaning they get the antibody infusion, then they get the venetoclax pill, but it’s for a fixed duration, meaning a total of one year of treatment. The trial is also only for patients with higher-risk CLL. So as I mentioned, some patients never need treatment, some patients do, some patients need it quicker. So rather than looking at this trial and saying all patients, including those with CLL, that’s likely to be slower-growing. The EVOLVE trial is only for patients who are more likely to need treatment in the next couple of years.  And the way that’s determined is a score called the CLL-IPI score, and CLL-IPI tries to identify patients more likely to need treatment in the next couple of years by a couple of key factors.

Stage at the time of diagnosis, it looks at age, and it looks at key factors of the leukemia itself, including something called deletion 17P or TP53, because that marker in the cells is a high risk of eventually needing treatment.  So to answer your question, what EVOLVE is looking at is taking higher-risk patients, so patients rather than all patients more likely to need treatment anyway, and around the time of diagnosis, randomizing to either be treated or to follow the traditional, sometimes called watch and wait or dynamic monitoring until they reach traditional markers. And ultimately, and it’ll likely take many years to look at, ultimately the question is looking at if that helps prolong patient survival by having higher-risk patients receive that fixed-duration treatment earlier in time. We don’t yet have any results or any results to share, because the study is still enrolling.

But again, I think it’s something for patients to be aware of, because it does look at the higher risk patients. But around a year, it has to be within a year of diagnosis. So patients who are newly diagnosed, the question to ask your oncology team is “Do I qualify?” if it’s something you’re interested for, and they’ll help walk you through that. If you haven’t had markers checked, for example, it might be a good time to ask about that, to see if this is something would be available, even if not available though, it does create a time to talk to your team about the markers, because those can inform regardless of trial or not maybe what to expect in coming years and likelihood of treatment.

Lisa Hatfield:

Great, thank you for that. So as a cancer patient, one of the biggest questions I had when I was diagnosed, you hear the word “cancer” or in this case “CLL leukemia.”Two questions. One of them, is there a cure for CLL? And if not, are any of the…are there any trials looking at a cure for CLL?

Dr. Danielle Brander:

Yes. Excellent. An understandable question. Traditionally, we say that CLL or others slower-growing, or sometimes you’ll hear the term indolent lymphomas, do tend to be slower-growing.  Some patients don’t need treatment. But the flip side of that is we generally think of them as not curable, that they’re a chronic condition and that treatment, the goal of treatment is to knock it down and relieve whatever symptoms or indications or reasons you’re starting treatment are.

But at some level, we historically think of CLL as either eventually coming back or sticking around, so to speak. However, I think most oncologists, most those in the field, feel that some of the treatments that are around or in combination, that we’re going to have some patients that have maybe what a term might be functional cure or individual, cure-like condition.

Meaning if our newer treatments for some patients can knock down the CLL so much that it either doesn’t come back or take so long to even show itself again, in a way that serves as what the purpose of cure, really is, which is to get it down to levels that it’s not causing problems or not coming back, for the lifetime of the patient. Bone marrow transplant is the only therapy historically that has been cured, has offered a cure for some patients. The downside and the reason that most patients aren’t referred to for bone marrow transplant is the risk side of it. Meaning, unfortunately, a bone marrow or stem cell transplant has such a high risk of directly causing side effects.

That could be life-limiting or chronic side effects from the transplant itself versus the agents available now that we aren’t using or referring to bone marrow transplant nearly as much, but I think it’s really encouraging what we’re seeing in responses. So we talked already about those main categories of BTK inhibitors or venetoclax, I didn’t yet talk about, but there are many trials that have looked at those in combination, or CAR T, for example, or bispecific antibodies that are knocking down the CLL to such low levels. But the hope is that serves as a way of functional cure. But it’s going to take time to see if that’s the case. But we’re all very encouraged and really believe that that’s on the horizon.

Lisa Hatfield:

Great. Thank you so much. And even a functional cure sounds really hopeful, so I’m happy to hear that term. Thank you. And I want to be cognizant of your time and the time of everybody watching. So we are going to move into some of the questions that we’ve received from you watching this, patients. Remember, as patients, we should always feel empowered to ask our healthcare providers any and all questions we might have about our treatment and prognosis. Please remember, however, this program is not a substitute for medical care and always consult with your own medical team. So, Dr. Brander, let’s start here. How do you explain, you kind of covered this a little bit, CLL treatment options and prognosis to your newly diagnosed patients? And I think that the prognosis piece is really important, especially if they do start treatment. 

Dr. Danielle Brander:

Sure, absolutely. So, what are the things we’re looking for in terms of needing treatment?  Because some of those, especially the symptoms we’re noting a lymph node or spleen, for example, or symptoms of anemia, which is low red cells or bleeding from low platelets, it’s helpful for patients to understand what we’re looking for, but, of course, in the time between visits those are the things we want to help patients with if they notice.

And so we encourage them all the time to call our triage or send us, you know, most electronic medical records now, have ways to send your team a message. And we want to know about that from patients in between visits. In terms of prognosis, as I mentioned before, there are other CLL-specific labs usually on the blood, meaning a regular blood draw.

Most patients don’t need another lymph node biopsy or a bone marrow biopsy, though that happens in some cases. And two of those or some of those key markers I mentioned before, but they test in the leukemia, there’s one test called the FISH, F-I-S-H, it’s not specific to CLL, we use it in other cancers. But it’s to look for specific changes in the leukemia genomics, meaning the DNA, the genetic material of the leukemia, not genetics you’re born with, but the cancer itself.

And there are specific patterns and that can be helpful as I sit down with patients to say this isn’t 100 percent, but this is kind of what to expect and likelihood of needing treatment over the next couple of years. There’s another test called IGHV, another mutation test TP53 kind of beyond this to go over right now, but as you mentioned, I think it’s important to meet with your medical team and say, ‘How does this pertain to me specifically?”

In terms of prognosis, I think there’s two parts to that of understanding what to expect. There’s likelihood of needing treatment, there’s likelihood of time to treatment, and those kind of markers and staging system help in a good way. Right now, our historical expectations, meaning 5 or 10 years ago, we could often also sit with patients and say, “This is the prognosis in terms of survival.” Expected life expectancy on average, but in a good way, most of our systems nowadays with the newer treatments likely vastly underestimate patient survival, meaning those systems were designed when we only had chemotherapy treatments.

Now, we know patients even with the highest risk markers, the faster progressions are living, you know, years and years beyond what was expected with chemotherapy. So I just caution especially materials around from just a couple of years ago that likely they don’t pertain, but they can be helpful in knowing what to expect.

Lisa Hatfield:

Great, thank you for that. Answering that question. We have a couple of questions about BTK inhibitors, and you already talked a little bit about the role of those and why they’re significant in treating CLL. But another patient’s asking about the, of course, a lot of patients wonder, what are the side effects? They hear chemo and like, “Oh, my gosh, the side effects are going to be off.” Can you talk about the side effects and even maybe some unusual side effects that you’ve heard of from patients when using the BTK inhibitors?

Dr. Danielle Brander:

Sure, absolutely. And so again, really important, these are things that as we maybe anticipate patients are going to start treatment, this is a long discussion of deciding between treatment, for example, as first treatment. There’s no trial saying one path is necessarily better than the other. So we try to individualize choosing between BTK inhibitors or that venetoclax-based therapy I mentioned. Some of that though comes about and what expected side effects are expected side effects for the individual. I try for patients to hear it from myself, other members of the team, the nurse, our pharmacist, for example.

And so patients shouldn’t feel overwhelmed to keep asking about what to expect or new side effects. There are some side effects we talk about regardless of the treatment. So I’ll just point out, anytime you’re starting treatment, you’ll hear the team talk about risk for infection, monitoring for fevers, reaching out to us about those kinds of side effects, lower blood counts that can happen regardless, not specific to BTK though it can happen there as well.

There’s some specifically though with BTK inhibitors, we ask patients to watch out for. Some BTK inhibitors can cause some cardiovascular side effects, meaning watching out for funny beating of the heart or what we call palpitations, skipped beats. There can be arrhythmias, some patients can have with time elevation in their blood pressure, for example. And then risk for bleeding, meaning BTK inhibitors affect how the platelets stick together similar to what aspirin does.

So the platelet levels may be normal but patients might have easier bruising, just generally manageable. But if there’s any kind of bleeding, certainly the team should be aware. It’s also the reason though, if you’re on a BTK inhibitor and you have a planned surgery or procedure, let your team know, because we may recommend or a lot of times recommend holding the medication before and after certain surgeries or procedures.

Other side effects can be muscle or joint aches. Some patients have some gastrointestinal side effects like looser stools or sensitivities to certain food causing looser stools, for example. And then there are some that are specific to the individual BTK inhibitor. This is the one point I’ll mention that first-generation BTK inhibitor ibrutinib, part of the reason for the second-generation zanubrutinib and acalabrutinib is not necessarily of them working better but to have less of these side effects that I just mentioned.

Lisa Hatfield:

Great, thank you for that. So this patient is telling us that he’s trying to plan life while living with cancer. It’s a challenge. It’s hard to know where to start. Can some patients go off of ibrutinib? I don’t say…ibrutinib after five years and enter a watch-and-wait kind of program. And will they be monitored during that time too, if they ever do go off of the medication?

Dr. Danielle Brander:

Yeah. So again, more excellent, excellent questions. So of those main categories of treatment, the BTK inhibitors are given continuously, meaning, at least so far, the standard way we recommend of those treatments is that they’re taken every day, either once or twice a day, depending on which BTK inhibitor, and they’re taken every day. Unless patients run into progression, meaning the CLL learns to grow through its resistance or patients run into side effects that despite maybe team’s recommendation of changing the dose or holding the medications, that it’s just the medication is just not tolerated.

In those cases, there are cases where we do recommend stopping the treatment because of side effects. And the key there is that patients if depending how long they’ve been on treatment or how their CLL is responding, might not need to go on to the next treatment right away.

So to answer this patient’s question, if they were to run into a side effect that wasn’t manageable, there are patients where we say, stop treatment and let’s just watch things, see if you need treatment, if your CLL has no other reason to jump into the next therapy. And there have been encouraging things that we’re learning and that I think are hopeful to this patient’s question, which is maybe in the future there are patients where we proactively can tell them to stop after a certain time because of what we’ve learned for patients so far. But at the current moment in time, we don’t tell patients to stop at a certain amount of time.

But there are trials that are looking at that after a certain number of years. And there are also trials that have followed patients who have stopped therapy and some of those patients, as I mentioned, who are told to stop treatment due to other side effects or other reasons, may go a long time, a couple of years before they need to start therapy.

Lisa Hatfield:

Okay, great. Thank you. I’m going to add one little question there too, if you don’t mind. So we’ve talked about trials a little bit, and I know that patients can go to clinicaltrials.gov, but what if a patient lives in an area that doesn’t have a major academic center or maybe trials aren’t being done very much in their area? Do you have a recommendation for patients? Should they just ask their doctor about trials if say, for example, they want to go on one of these trials? What recommendations do you have for those patients?

Dr. Danielle Brander:

Yes, absolutely. Starting with your healthcare team is very helpful to navigate to the right site. You mentioned the SWOG trial, which is online at a lot of the community and academic sites. So I would say also don’t or I encourage patients that just if they’re at a smaller site, it doesn’t mean there aren’t trials available. And then without going into all the individual, I guess societies and advocacy networks I really think that that’s been a tremendous benefit for patients is that there are societies through, you know, having leukemia or lymphoma, for example, that list or want to help patients connect them to what available trials there are.

Because while we think of trials as maybe the treatment, the reality is that a lot of trials are looking at other things too, patient’s physical function, patient’s other aspects of life besides the drug itself. So yes, I think that’s a great question for patients to be thinking about.

Lisa Hatfield:

Great, thank you. And you’re right, talking about access to trials is a whole other issue that will probably take up an entire program. But there are the advocacy networks out there, even Patient Empowerment Network. We can maybe help with that a little bit too. So we have another patient who is concerned about chances of relapse and is asking if there are any lifestyle changes through diet and supplements or anything that you can speak to that may enhance their response or their duration response to the treatment?

Dr. Danielle Brander:

Yeah. So a very very great question to bring about. And this is the one area, understandably where many of us feel frustrated because we can’t tell patients specifically that this trial has been done and says this specific diet is helpful or this specific lifestyle change is helpful to make the treatment work for longer. I think some of that is because some of the general advice we give meaning maintaining daily activity or a well-balanced diet sound non-specific or simple, but I think do help in patients staying in an overall general health wellness so that they can benefit from the treatment and potentially have less side effects from the therapy.

But getting back to the question we just talked about, I think certainly trials or studies really need to be continuing to look at this, because I think there likely are things that we can be more specific to patients about. There are studies looking at physical fitness and exercise regimens not necessarily specific to CLL, although there are studies being done in that space, but to other cancers showing that physical activity and exercise can help even for patients not on treatment maintain control of their cancer. So general daily activity and exercise are important in studies that look at how do you tailor that to an individual I think are important too?

Lisa Hatfield:

All right. So probably time for this last question from a patient. “As a CLL expert, how do you help empower your patients so they can get the most out of their CLL treatment and survivorship? How do you work with them as a team to make sure, I guess they’re having the best outcome they can?”

Dr. Danielle Brander:

Absolutely. So it starts at the start. I guess so for conversations, meaning for those that don’t need treatment right away building the relationship, understanding how I can help patients and their caregivers help, for example, they like to learn how much they want to know, what resources can I connect them with. And then I think it’s important for them to have other team members that they can go to and talk to and hear it from, because sometimes the same information we can just share in different ways or approach differently. The nurse on our team or our pharmacist or I work with a wonderful group of nurse practitioners and physician assistants as well. And so from the beginning, I want patients to feel free to ask the questions that come to mind.

It’s amazing, of course, during the course of the visit when you’re going over your labs and that, that sometimes it’s easy to forget the questions you came in with. So, of course, anytime you can write them down before coming in, write them down and then maybe prioritize because all of us…I think it’s hard to remember everything. So prioritizing the questions we want to make sure we get to and go over as well as know that these same questions are going to mean different things to you the longer you’re living with your CLL. And so it’s okay to ask the same questions. Again, there’s never a question that any of us mind going over several times. And then just know how the team can help you. You know, are you coming? How much information do you want?

How much input do you want us to put? And what is your importance and priority? At the end of the day, I want all patients to know no one knows what it is, like living with it. No one knows what’s most important as much as you and your family or your caregiver team does. And I learn just as much from patients and the way they share their experiences. There’s a lot we can look at a group of patients with CLL and say how different each patient’s experiences, who needs treatment or not, who has side effects or not. But no one’s going to know as much as as you do living with it. And it’s our hope to help you wherever you are in your journey or whatever ways that we can help you.

Lisa Hatfield:  

Well, and I appreciate your comment that we can ask the same questions over and over if we need to. I know my oncologist when I first met with him, I felt guilty taking in more than two questions, but right before he moved, I took in a long, I rolled up a piece of paper, a long scroll, and I said, I have some questions for you, but I knew they were all repeat questions. But it does give us a little bit of peace of mind just hearing it again from somebody, especially in those initial phases of treatment, just hearing it, even if you have to hear it again and again. So thank you for mentioning that. It makes us feel a little more confident in taking those concerns to our providers, even if they’re repeated concerns. 

Lisa Hatfield:

Dr. Brander, thank you so much for being part of this Patient Empowerment Network START HERE Program. It’s these conversations that help patients truly empower themselves along their treatment journey. And on behalf of patients like myself and those watching, thank you very much for joining us.

Dr. Danielle Brander:  

Thank you for having me.

Lisa Hatfield:  

I’m Lisa Hatfield, thank you for joining this Patient Empowerment Network program. 


Share Your Feedback

Create your own user feedback survey

What Follicular Lymphoma Treatments Are Available?

What Follicular Lymphoma Treatments Are Available? from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.

Follicular lymphoma patients have different treatment options, but what should patients know about them? Expert Dr. Sameh Gaballa shares an overview of available treatment options and research results of treatment versus watch and wait. 

Dr. Sameh Gaballa is a hematologist/oncologist specializing in treating lymphoid malignancies from Moffitt Cancer Center. Learn more about Dr. Gaballa.

See More from START HERE Follicular Lymphoma

Related Resources:

What Exactly is Follicular Lymphoma? An Expert Explains

What Exactly is Follicular Lymphoma? An Expert Explains

Follicular Lymphoma Patient Expert Q&A: Start Here

Follicular Lymphoma Patient Expert Q&A: Start Here

Newly Diagnosed with Follicular Lymphoma? Start Here

Newly Diagnosed with Follicular Lymphoma? Start Here


Transcript:

Lisa Hatfield:

So, can you speak to the novel pathways and targets that are currently under investigation in follicular lymphoma? And what are the most important highlights to point out to patients and families?

Dr. Sameh Gaballa: 

Yeah, absolutely. So you have to remember, number one, not all patients with follicular lymphoma have to be treated. A fair number of patients can be safely observed initially, because the…so when I was talking about the types of lymphoma, so the aggressive lymphomas, those ones are treatable, but curable, meaning you treat it, goes away, good chance that it goes away and does not come back.

Whereas follicular lymphoma, those are slow-growing lymphomas. They may or may not cause problems. The treatment though, they’re very treatable. There are a lot of treatments available, but the thing is they’re not curable, meaning that they go into remission, they could stay in remission for years, but then eventually they would come back again. So you have to remember that because of that, large trials were done previously where patients who had no symptoms and not a lot of disease, they were randomized, half would get treated.

The other half were on a watch and wait. And the patients who, survival is exactly the same in both groups, there was not really any advantage to early treatment versus treatment as if there’s a reason in the future. And we typically have some indications where we decide, okay, well, it’s time to treat. And those basically have to do if the lymph nodes are big enough or they’re close to an important structure and we don’t want them to grow more and maybe press on an important structure, or if they’re causing some kind of symptom or they’re causing anemia or low platelets. I mean, there has to be one, because there has to be one reason for why you’re trying to treat that patient, because you’re basically trying to fix a problem.

So if there’s no problem initially, it doesn’t make sense to treat it. Now, there are lots of available treatments, it could be only immune therapy, something like rituximab (Rituxan)  or obinutuzumab (Gazyva); these are antibody treatments. There are also combinations with chemotherapies, like bendamustine (Treanda), rituximab for if we have relatively bulky disease. There are options as well that do not involve chemotherapy.

So something like pills like lenalidomide (Revlimid) combined with rituximab, those are also options that can be used in follicular lymphoma. But over the last few years, there have been a lot of changes in follicular lymphoma and a lot of novel targets and a lot of novel treatments available. So, for example, a few years ago now, we’ve had CAR T-cell therapy approved. Right now, we have two products approved, axi-cel and tisagenlecleucel (Kymriah). There’s also data that was presented with liso-cel in follicular lymphoma. So hopefully we might see an approval for that as well. So that’s one class.

There’s also bispecific antibodies, and it’s very exciting times. We had the first bispecific antibody approved in the United States in December of 2022. That’s mosunetuzumab-axgb (Lunsumio). So what is a BiTE antibody? These basically are advanced types of immune therapies where you give the patient an antibody that has two ends to it, one end sticks to the cancer cell, the other end sticks to your immune cells. So it’s basically handholding your own immune cells or your own T cells to go and get attached to the cancer cell and kill it, not chemotherapy. It, of course, can have some immunological side effects like fevers or inflammation initially when it’s done, typically when in the first cycle or second cycle.

But something called cytokine release syndrome rarely can cause neurological toxicity. That’s also very transient usually, and very rare with bispecific antibodies. But those are two up and coming treatments. Right now, they’re approved in patients who’ve had relapsed/refractory disease, meaning they’ve had two or more lines of previous therapies, but they’re…we have them now in trials where we’re looking at those agents in earlier lines of therapy. There are other agents as well.

A few years ago, we had tazemetostat (Tazverik) approved, which is a pill that targets an enzyme in the cells called EZH2 and they basically, this pill tries to ask the cancer cell to differentiate, rather than get stuck and not die. So they differentiate and then they eventually die, so that’s another class of medicine. And we’ve now seen some data with BTK inhibitors. There’s been data presented from the ROSEWOOD Study with zanubrutinib plus obinutuzumab (Brukinsa plus Gazyva); it’s not yet FDA-approved, but the data looks interesting and certainly needs to be looked at further. 


Share Your Feedback:

Create your own user feedback survey

Follicular Lymphoma Patient Expert Q&A: Start Here

Follicular Lymphoma Patient Expert Q&A: Start Here from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.

The START HERE program bridges lymphoma expert and patient voice, whether you are newly diagnosed, in active treatment or in watch and wait. In this webinar, Dr. Sameh Gaballa provides an overview of the latest in follicular lymphoma, emerging therapies, clinical trials and options for follicular lymphoma progression and recurrence.

Dr. Sameh Gaballa is a hematologist/oncologist specializing in treating lymphoid malignancies from Moffitt Cancer Center. Learn more about Dr. Gaballa.

Download Resource Guide  |  Descargar guía de recursos

See More from START HERE Follicular Lymphoma

Related Resources:

What Exactly is Follicular Lymphoma? An Expert Explains

What Exactly is Follicular Lymphoma? An Expert Explains

What Follicular Lymphoma Treatments Are Available?

Newly Diagnosed with Follicular Lymphoma? Start Here

Newly Diagnosed with Follicular Lymphoma? Start Here


Transcript:

Lisa Hatfield: 

Welcome to the START HERE Patient Empowerment Network Program. This program bridges the expert and patient voice enabling patients and care partners to feel comfortable asking questions of their healthcare team.  Joining me today is Dr. Sameh Gaballa, an oncologist hematologist from Moffitt Cancer Center. Dr. Gaballa’s clinical interests are treating patients with lymphoid malignancies. His research focuses on developing novel targeted agents for treating patients with indolent lymphomas, such as follicular lymphoma, marginal zone lymphoma, and lymphoplasmacytic lymphomas. Thank you so much for joining us today, Dr. Gaballa.

Dr. Sameh Gaballa:

Thank you, Lisa. Happy to be here.

Lisa Hatfield:

Thank you. The world is complicated, but understanding your follicular lymphoma diagnosis and treatment options doesn’t have to be. The goal of START HERE is to create actionable pathways for getting the most out of follicular lymphoma treatment and survivorship. 

Before we get started, please remember to download the program resource guide via the QR code. There’s great information there that will be useful during this program and after. So let’s get started. So, Dr. Gaballa, I’d like to talk about what’s on the follicular lymphoma treatment radar. There’s a lot going on in terms of emerging treatment options, clinical trial data, and other learnings for the follicular lymphoma community.  But before we jump into how the armamentarium is expanding, can you provide an explanation of what follicular lymphoma is?

Dr. Sameh Gaballa:

Yeah, absolutely, thank you, Lisa. So, follicular lymphoma is a type of B-cell non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. What does that mean? It’s basically, so in your body, there are cells that are part of the immune system; these are lymphocytes. These cells normally, their normal function, is to fight infection, they’re part of your immune system. They actually are involved also with fighting cancers, but sometimes they become malignant. But not all lymphomas are the same. Lymphomas are a huge family. So there’s Hodgkin’s lymphoma, there is non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. Within non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, there is a type called B-cell non-Hodgkin’s and there’s a T-cell non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. And then within B-cell non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, there are two big groups. So one group, they are these aggressive lymphomas that grow quickly, they can make you sick quickly, and these lymphomas we have to treat right away.

And then you have those slow-growing indolent lymphomas that are sometimes very commonly actually diagnosed by chance, or incidentally, that’s usually the most common way these are diagnosed.  And the most common slow-growing indolent lymphoma is going to be follicular lymphoma. Now, where do you find these lymphomas? It’s a blood disease. So, again, we said that those cells are normally borne in the bone marrow, they are in the blood, they’re in the lymph nodes, they’re in the spleen. So usually you would find those malignant cells usually in the lymph nodes, but you could also find them sometimes in the spleen or in the blood or in the bone marrow as well. And the symptoms they cause will be dependent on where they are and how big the, those, the involvement is.

Lisa Hatfield:

Well, thank you for that detailed overview, Dr. Gaballa. We do have follicular lymphoma patients and care partners who are newly diagnosed, in active treatment, watching and waiting, and also living with their disease joining this program. No matter where you are on your journey, START HERE provides easy-to-understand, reliable, and digestible information to help you make informed decisions. Dr. Gaballa, we’re going to dive right into things with a high-level update. So, can you speak to the novel pathways and targets that are currently under investigation in follicular lymphoma? And what are the most important highlights to point out to patients and families?

Dr. Sameh Gaballa:

Yeah, absolutely. So you have to remember, number one, not all patients with follicular lymphoma have to be treated. A fair number of patients can be safely observed initially, because the…so when I was talking about the types of lymphoma, so the aggressive lymphomas, those ones are treatable, but curable, meaning you treat it, goes away, good chance that it goes away and does not come back. Whereas follicular lymphoma, those are slow-growing lymphomas. They may or may not cause problems. The treatment though, they’re very treatable. There are a lot of treatments available, but the thing is they’re not curable, meaning that they go into remission, they could stay in remission for years, but then eventually they would come back again. So you have to remember that because of that, large trials were done previously where patients who had no symptoms and not a lot of disease, they were randomized, half would get treated.

The other half were on a watch and wait. And the patients who, survival is exactly the same in both groups, there was not really any advantage to early treatment versus treatment as if there’s a reason in the future. And we typically have some indications where we decide, okay, well, it’s time to treat. And those basically have to do if the lymph nodes are big enough or they’re close to an important structure and we don’t want them to grow more and maybe press on an important structure, or if they’re causing some kind of symptom or they’re causing anemia or low platelets. I mean, there has to be one, because there has to be one reason for why you’re trying to treat that patient, because you’re basically trying to fix a problem.

So if there’s no problem initially, it doesn’t make sense to treat it. Now, there are lots of available treatments, it could be only immune therapy, something like rituximab (Rituxan)  or obinutuzumab (Gazyva); these are antibody treatments. There are also combinations with chemotherapies, like bendamustine (Treanda), rituximab for if we have relatively bulky disease. There are options as well that do not involve chemotherapy.

So something like pills like lenalidomide (Revlimid) combined with rituximab, those are also options that can be used in follicular lymphoma. But over the last few years, there have been a lot of changes in follicular lymphoma and a lot of novel targets and a lot of novel treatments available. So, for example, a few years ago now, we’ve had CAR T-cell therapy approved. Right now, we have two products approved, axi-cel and tisagenlecleucel (Kymriah). There’s also data that was presented with liso-cel in follicular lymphoma. So hopefully we might see an approval for that as well. So that’s one class.

There’s also bispecific antibodies, and it’s very exciting times. We had the first bispecific antibody approved in the United States in December of 2022. That’s mosunetuzumab (Lunsumio). So what is a BiTE antibody? These basically are advanced types of immune therapies where you give the patient an antibody that has two ends to it, one end sticks to the cancer cell, the other end sticks to your immune cells. So it’s basically , it’s handholding your own immune cells or your own T cells to go and get attached to the cancer cell and kill it, not chemotherapy. It, of course, can have some immunological side effects like fevers or inflammation initially when it’s done, typically when in the first cycle or second cycle.

But something called cytokine release syndrome rarely can cause neurological toxicity. That’s also very transient usually, and very rare with bispecific antibodies. But those are two up and coming treatments. Right now, they’re approved in patients who’ve had relapsed/refractory disease, meaning they’ve had two or more lines of previous therapies, but they’re…we have them now in trials where we’re looking at those agents in earlier lines of therapy. There are other agents as well.

A few years ago we had tazemetostat (Tazverik) approved, which is a pill that targets an enzyme in the cells called EZH2 and they basically, this pill tries to ask the cancer cell to differentiate, rather than get stuck and not die. So they differentiate and then they eventually die, so that’s another class of medicine. And we’ve now seen some data with BTK inhibitors. There’s been data presented from the ROSEWOOD Study with zanubrutinib plus obinutuzumab (Brukinsa plus Gazyva); it’s not yet FDA-approved, but the data looks interesting and certainly needs to be looked at further.

Lisa Hatfield:

Well, thank you for that overview. It seems like as a blood cancer patient myself, it seems like a hopeful time for patients with the treatments that are kind of on the horizon or are in clinical trials right now. So thank you for that.

Dr. Sameh Gaballa:

Absolutely.

Lisa Hatfield:

So it’s that time now where we answer questions, some of which we’ve received from you, the patients watching this. Remember, as patients, we should always feel empowered to ask our healthcare providers any and all questions we might have about our treatment and prognosis. Please remember, however, that this program is not a substitute for medical care. Always consult with your medical team.  So, Dr. Gaballa, let’s start here. How do you explain follicular lymphoma treatment options and prognosis to your newly diagnosed patients? And what does shared decision-making look like in your office?

Dr. Sameh Gaballa:

Oh, absolutely. So follicular lymphoma, you really have to explain to the patient what, how are we coming to the recommendation that we’re currently giving. So if we think this is, this patient is a good candidate for a watch-and-wait approach, for example, we really have to walk them through why that really is the best option and not why should we jump on treatments and vice versa, if we think this patient needs to be treated, how do we really…the patient really has to understand all the other treatment options and why this needs to be treated. Because a lot of patients initially, sometimes when you present them with a watch-and-wait approach, if they don’t know all the background, they might not feel very comfortable because they might think, “Well, I have this cancer in me, and we’re not doing anything about it, and that doesn’t really sound too…something I should be doing.”

But then when you explain to them, “Well, you see, you don’t have a lot of disease, those studies have already been done in the past where patients who were treated or not treated, the survival was the same, so there, you might get side effects from the treatment, but not necessarily have benefits. And in the future, should this need to be treated, we have a lot of things to do.” So, really, so this is kind of the shared decision portion where you just have to walk the patients through why that will be the best situation. There is data with single-agent rituximab, even in patients who are asymptomatic, and we have the UK data, and that’s an option.

And that is also offered to some of the patients, even if they’re not symptomatic and they don’t have a lot of disease, if that’s what really the patient wants, if they’re not really comfortable with a watch and wait. And there’s again some data to help justify that. Again, there’s no advantage in overall survival, but sometimes the patients would kind of feel more in control. They feel like, “Okay, I did something about it.” So that’s the shared approach.

In terms of your other question about prognosis, unfortunately that’s an area of an unmet need. I mean, we have some tools to help us differentiate follicular lymphoma patients from each other, which patient is high-risk, meaning those are the patients who might relapse quickly, or they might not respond well to treatments. Unfortunately, we don’t have great tools. We have something called a FLIPI score, which is, we use a number of parameters including clinical parameters like stage or age and some other parameters as well, and we have a scoring system. But it doesn’t 100 percent predict if this is going to be a high-risk follicular lymphoma or a low-risk.

Unfortunately, the best predictor of prognosis for follicular lymphoma, you would know about retrospectively,  it’s something called POD24, progression of disease in 24 months. Meaning that if you have a patient who’s treated with chemotherapy and immune therapy, and then they go into remission, and then they relapse again in less than 24 months, progression of disease within 24 months, those are the, those represent about 20 percent of follicular   lymphoma patients, and those represent a high-risk group of patients. That’s the best tool that we have. But unfortunately, if you’re diagnosed today, you’re not going to know if you’re in this group or not until you actually need to be treated and not just treated with immune therapy.

It has to be with chemotherapy as well. And then if you relapse within two years, then we know that this is a high-risk entity. There is genetic testing, there is something called a FLIPI-m7 scoring system. But again, these tools are not great to tease out the low risk from the high-risk follicular lymphoma patients. But 80 percent of patients who are not going to be POD24, meaning that they get treated, they’re in remission for two years or more, and actually those patients have very similar survival to the general population. So, yeah, so a lot of times we don’t know right away, but we do have some tools to kind of give us an idea.

Lisa Hatfield:

Great. Thank you for that information. It’s kind of hard for cancer patients to only know what their prognosis is retrospectively, but that’s a great explanation. Thank you. Okay, another patient question, “How does the staging of follicular lymphoma impact treatment choices?”

Dr. Sameh Gaballa:

Yeah, so as you saw, I didn’t really stress too much about staging, because it’s a blood disease. So the vast majority of patients are going to be what we call stage III to IV disease. So, obviously when you see a patient if if they, they might think that, “Oh my God, I have a stage III to IV cancer,” because that’s really what they’re familiar with. But follicular lymphoma is a blood disease, so by default it’s going to be in a lot of lymph nodes, it might be in the bone marrow as well, but stage III to IV disease follicular lymphoma doesn’t, that does not mean that this is a terminal cancer. Patients could live completely in normal life, even with a stage III to IV follicular lymphoma. This is not like a breast cancer or colon cancer where stage is everything.

But why do we have a staging system? Obviously, there’s a need to have staging system for all cancers, but clinically, the only time it makes a difference is there’s a small group of patients who have a truly stage I or II disease, meaning just one group of lymph nodes on one side of the diaphragm that may fit within one radiation field. So if you have someone who’s just coming in with one or a few groups of lymph nodes all in one place, we call that a stage I or II follicular lymphoma, not common, because again, most patients are stage III to IV. The only difference there is you can potentially offer those patients radiation therapy if it’s truly localized, but then you would need to do a bone marrow biopsy and confirm that it’s not in the bone marrow.

And if it is localized within one radiation field, that can be offered and we can sometimes give after radiation therapy, either observe it or consider giving rituximab afterwards. But that’s the only time where we’re going to mention staging, again, uncommon because most, the vast majority of patients are going to be stage III to IV. So why would we do that? Why would we irradiate if it’s only one group of lymph nodes? Because there’s about, I mean, if you irradiated, those lymph nodes will go away, but there’s about maybe a, it’s different. The number is different between studies, but about maybe a third of patients, if you irradiate that group of lymph nodes or one lymph node, it actually might not come again in the future. So you might have very long remissions/possible cure if you…and this is the only situation where we would consider treating someone who does not have symptoms, because you could have very long remissions with radiation.

Lisa Hatfield:

Although follicular lymphoma is a slow-growing cancer, can you speak to the signs that the disease is progressing in the body, what signs that patients might want to look out for?

Dr. Sameh Gaballa:

Yeah, absolutely. So, typically we educate the patients to there are some red flags to look out for, not just for progression,but also for another condition called disease transformation. So, follicular lymphoma does have a, there is a possibility that it can transform from a slow-growing lymphoma to an aggressive lymphoma. Now, this happens at a rate of about maybe 2 to 3 percent per year, but it’s a cumulative risk, so meaning if a patient lives many, many decades, their lifetime risk can be up to as high as 20, 25 percent, 30 percent, depending on the different literature, so there is a chance that these slow-growing lymphomas can transform to an aggressive lymphoma.

And when they do know this, there’s no watch and wait for transformed disease. It has to be treated with chemo immunotherapy because the goal of treatment then is to try to get rid of the aggressive component. What are the signs and symptoms to suggest that you might have transformed disease? This is not something that the patient would typically need to look out for. I tell my patients that, “You don’t need to see, do I have transformed disease or not. This is going to come, and you’re going to know when you have transformed disease. Extreme fatigue, drenching night sweats, the fever sometimes that are not going away.”

The patient might have pain if the lymph node is pressing on some important structure. They may have loss of appetite, loss of weight. So again, something that dramatically happens quickly over a few weeks of time. So if the patient feels sick for one reason or another and they’re not getting better, it can all happen within a few weeks’ time frame. This is the time to get checked early on and go see your oncologist, because then we might need to investigate if there is any potential for transformation. So that’s issue number one.

Issue number two is, which is the much more common scenario, which is the follicular lymphoma is slowly progressing. How would you know? I mean, if you notice a lymph node that in your neck or under the armpits or the groin areas, if they’re growing, then that needs to be evaluated. I mean the patients should expect that those will be growing, they will grow. But they grow over months and years. They don’t grow over weeks.

So anytime you kind of are unsure, if you feel that it’s growing faster than usual, this is, again, something to look out for. And then the B symptoms that I mentioned. So like the sweats, the fevers, the weight, loss of weight, loss of appetite, these are also sometimes things to look out for. Not necessarily, they don’t always mean that it’s transformed disease. It can also be that the follicular lymphoma is also progressing and might need to be treated as well.

Lisa Hatfield:

And then just a quick follow-up to that question. So a patient is watching out for these red flags, but are they going through any kind of regular monitoring in your office? Are you meeting with them on a regular basis? And how frequent might that be for a follicular lymphoma patient who’s watching and waiting?

Dr. Sameh Gaballa:

Yeah. So how does watch and wait look? So, and I tell patients always watch and wait does not mean ignore. Watch and wait means that we’re monitoring the disease, we’re looking at it. How do we do that? So typically we would see the patient maybe every three to six months. And then depending on how do we, when we get a sense or tempo of how their disease is progressing, then we’ll know how often we need to see them. I’ve had, I still have patients where I’m seeing them every three months. And I also have some patients where the disease has been stable for years, I only see them once a year.

In terms of imaging, that’s also sometimes an area of controversy. Typically, initially for the first maybe year or two years, I do like a scan, like a CT scan every six months, just to get a sense of how quick or how slow the disease is progressing. If there’s absolutely no change at all, then sometimes we either don’t do scans and just go by the patient’s symptoms and blood work and physical exam, or we do maybe once a year scan but not more than that. So this is how we would monitor the patients in a watch-and-wait approach.

Lisa Hatfield:

And we have another question about treatment profiles, “What can I do to reduce side effects during active treatment?”

Dr. Sameh Gaballa:

So it depends on what the treatment that you’re getting. If it’s immune therapy, like rituximab alone, those typically don’t really have a lot of side effects. I mean, sometimes with the first one or two treatments, you might get an allergic reaction, an infusion allergic reaction, which is very common, but subsequently it shouldn’t really cause a lot of side effects. If the patient is getting chemotherapy, well, it depends on which chemotherapy they’re getting. But in general, it’s always good to stay hydrated and to stay physically active. So if the patient goes in with a healthy body, well-hydrated, you eat fresh fruits and vegetables, walking 30 to 60 minutes a day, your body is going to handle the side effects much better than if you’re going in, you’re very weak, and your general health is not adequate.

Lisa Hatfield:

Another patient is asking if you can speak to emerging treatment options for patients with relapsed/refractory follicular lymphoma?

Dr. Sameh Gaballa:

Yeah. So the field of follicular lymphoma is changing rapidly. I always tell patients that sometimes the best treatment is actually on a clinical trial because those are going to be the next generation of treatments that are going to get approved in the next few years. But right now we have the most effective therapy really is CAR T-cell therapy. CAR T-cell therapy by far is the most effective treatment we have at this time. It’s approved for patients who have had two or more lines of prior therapies. We also are investigating this.

I actually have a trial here at Moffitt where we’re looking at CAR T-cell therapy as early as in the second line, in patients who have what we call the high-risk ones, the POD24. So a patient with POD24 follicular lymphoma relapsed in less than two years. We have a trial to investigate the role of CAR T-cell therapy in this setting. The other very promising group of treatments, again, is bispecific antibodies, again, currently approved in the third line, mosunetuzumab.

But there are others coming up and have data on epcoritamab-bysp (Epkinly), as well as a lot of other bispecifics, as well as combinations. I mean, epcoritamab-bysp has also data presented with combination with lenalidomide. And right now, the follow-up duration is not very long, but so far, it looks extremely promising with very high response rates. So those also might be coming very soon. And, of course, once something works in the relapsed/refractory setting, we start looking at earlier lines of therapy.

And actually, we’re now looking at trials in the first-line setting with some of these agents as well. Tazemetostat is a pill. It’s also approved in the third-line setting, but we’re also investigating it. We have a trial here where we’re looking at combining it with standard rituximab, lenalidomide, so tazemetostat plus rituximab, lenalidomide as early as in the second line. So that also is interesting. And as I mentioned before, BTK inhibitors currently being looked at in trials might also have a role in follicular lymphoma very soon.

Lisa Hatfield:

And this patient is asking about the significance of bispecific antibody treatment. And you touched on that a little bit. It looks like she’s also asking if there are specific genetic or molecular markers that can predict a patient’s response. And if I try to translate that, maybe she might be asking about targeted therapy.

Dr. Sameh Gaballa:

Yeah, so bispecific antibodies and CAR T-cell therapy, they target something called CD, either CD19 or CD20, and that’s almost universally expressed on B cells. So most of your follicular lymphoma patients are going to be expressing CD19 or CD20. Tazemetostat is the pill that I talked about.  It inhibits an enzyme called EZH2. Some patients have an EZH2 mutation where it seems to work very well. However, tazemetostat also works in patients who don’t have that mutation. So that’s why it’s not very important to check for the mutation.

It seems maybe it works better in patients who do have the mutation, but it does work as well in patients who do not have that mutation. So unlike other malignancies and other cancers, biomarkers are not yet driving a lot of our treatment decisions in follicular lymphoma as of right now.

Lisa Hatfield:

Thank you. Another question. Is it common for follicular lymphoma to transform into a more aggressive type of lymphoma? And how would that change a treatment plan? And maybe how common is it for that to happen?

Dr. Sameh Gaballa:

Yeah. There’s about a 2 to 3 percent chance per year that the slow-growing lymphoma can transform to an aggressive lymphoma. That, if it does transform, I mean we talked about the symptoms and signs, you get sick quickly, rapidly enlarging lymph nodes, loss of weight, loss of appetite, drenching night sweats. No, a transformation, typically we would do a PET scan, see what’s the most active lymph node, try to get a biopsy from that and confirm there is a large cell transformation. Now, that’s a completely different disease, it needs to be treated completely differently, typically with chemoimmunotherapy.

Something like R-CHOP, for example, is one of the most common regimens we use in this scenario. And the goal of treatment here is to try to get rid of the aggressive lymphoma component here so that it does not recur again. I mentioned it’s about a 2 to 3 percent per year, but it depends on how long the patient lives. So if they live many, many, many decades, their lifetime risk is anywhere between 20 to 30 percent max during their lifetime.

Lisa Hatfield:

And As a blood cancer patient myself, this is a great question this patient is asking, “Is there a risk of secondary cancers after receiving treatment for follicular lymphoma?”

Dr. Sameh Gaballa:

So that’s always a concern, and it depends on what treatment they had. So chemotherapy that can potentially damage DNA can lead to second malignancies, including things like acute leukemia. Luckily, that’s not a high risk. That’s a rare side effect from some of those chemotherapies. Some of the pills can do that as well. Something like lenalidomide can sometimes have second malignancies. But we’re talking about rare incidences, and the benefits usually would outweigh the risks. But it’s not with all treatments, meaning some of the other immune therapies that do not involve chemotherapy would not typically be associated with some of those second malignancies. So it just really depends on what exactly the treatment you’re getting.

Lisa Hatfield:

Can you speak to maintenance therapy and monitoring in follicular lymphoma? And what signs of infection should patients and care partners be aware of during treatment?

Dr. Sameh Gaballa:

Yeah, so there have been randomized studies in slow-growing lymphomas that show that if you do, after you get your standard treatment for follicular lymphoma, if you do what we call a maintenance treatment, usually with rituximab, which is an immune therapy, where you do it every two to three months for about two years, we have data showing that that decreases or delays the risk of relapse. However, it doesn’t change the overall survival, meaning that it just has patients in remission longer. When their disease comes back, they just get treated again at that point, and it doesn’t really affect survival.

So it’s one of those shared decision-making with the patients. I usually go over the risks and benefits of maintenance therapy. It’s optional. It’s not a must. During COVID, we pretty much stopped all maintenance treatments, because the risks were outweighing the benefits because maintenance treatment is…will suppress the immune system more, is associated with more infections. And these infections can be anything. I mean, it could be a pneumonia, could be recurrent urinary infections. It could be any type of infection. So there’s always this risk and benefit that we have to discuss with the patient.

Lisa Hatfield:

Well, Dr. Gaballa, thank you so much for being part of this Patient Empowerment Network START HERE program. It’s these conversations that help patients truly empower themselves along their treatment journey. And on behalf of patients like myself and those watching, thank you so much for joining us, Dr. Gaballa.

Dr. Sameh Gaballa:

No, thank you, Lisa. I really appreciate it. Thank you.

Lisa Hatfield:

I’m Lisa Hatfield. Thank you for joining this Patient Empowerment Network program.


Share Your Feedback:

Create your own user feedback survey

Can Bone Marrow Return to Normal After CLL Treatment?

Can Bone Marrow Return to Normal After CLL Treatment? from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.

Is it possible for chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) patients to achieve normal bone marrow after CLL treatment? Expert Dr. Ryan Jacobs explains MRD-undetectable status and the typical time period to deep CLL remission.

Dr. Ryan Jacobs is a hematologist/oncologist specializing in chronic lymphocytic leukemia from Levine Cancer Institute. Learn more about Dr. Jacobs.

See More from START HERE CLL

Related Programs:

Does Untreated Asymptomatic CLL Carry Risks?

Why Is Early Stage Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia Treatment Delayed?

Why Is Early Stage Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia Treatment Delayed?

Should CLL Patients Worry About Enlarged Lymph Nodes?

Should CLL Patients Worry About Enlarged Lymph Nodes?


Transcript:

Lisa Hatfield:

This patient is asking, upon completion of venetoclax (Venclexta) and obinutuzumab (Gazyva) and achieving MRD-undetectable status, how long does it take your bone marrow to achieve improved hemoglobin, hematocrit platelets, white blood cells? And does it always return to normal? And I might add in there just any kind of treatment, does the bone marrow typically return to “normal”? And how long does that take?

Dr. Jacobs:

So the majority of patients treated in the first-line setting and actually in the relapse setting with a combination of venetoclax and obinutuzumab, will have their CLL go into such a deep remission that we cannot detect it in 1 out of 10,000 cancer cells. So that is called MRD-undetectable. Those patients are usually also in complete remission, which means if you look at the bone marrow, you’re not going to see any CLL there. So the majority of patients have their counts normalized while they’re still on the venetoclax. You take it for a year. The complete remission is usually achieved before therapy is completed. And what little, if any CLL is in the bone marrow is not causing a drop in the counts. Now, of course, patients can have the toxicity-reduced counts. And if that’s the case, if it’s a toxicity issue, then it should resolve when you stop treatment. So I would say, usually it does return to normal, if not all…when they’re on therapy, then after therapy. If it’s a relapsed patient that’s seen a lot of therapies though, the bone marrow might never return to normal. 

Lisa Hatfield:

How far out are we from curative therapies for CLL patients with the tougher prognostic indicators?

Dr. Jacobs:

So I think curative is an interesting question, and it can mean different things to different people. But we’ve already shown at the most recent American Society of Hematology meeting, when they looked at the average life expectancy of patients without CLL, since the time that ibrutinib (Imbruvica) got approved and then now CLL patients, the survival curves are overlapping. So as of now, it looks like with our newer treatments that a CLL patient should reasonably expect to live a normal life expectancy. Does that mean cure? Well, if by cure you mean, does the disease go away forever with one treatment? We still don’t think we have that therapy for most patients. But we’ll see as we get longer and longer follow-up with some of these newer agents is there are going to be a proportion of patients that never relapse, that ibrutinib is going to have the longest follow up because it was the first one. I was just looking at a poster at the European Hematology Association meeting where they’ve followed patients seven, eight years out and more than half have still not progressed that got ibrutinib as a first-line therapy. So it’s reasonable to think that maybe some will never progress.


Share Your Feedback

Create your own user feedback survey

CLL and Vaccines | Vital Advice for Protecting Patients

CLL and Vaccines | Vital Advice for Protecting Patients from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.

 What do chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) patients need to know about vaccines? Expert Dr. Ryan Jacobs explains CLL treatments that reduce vaccine response and his vaccine recommendations.

Dr. Ryan Jacobs is a hematologist/oncologist specializing in Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia from Levine Cancer Institute. Learn more about Dr. Jacobs.

Download Resource Guide   |  Descargar Guía en Español

See More from START HERE CLL

Related Programs:

How Can I Ensure My CLL Doesn't Progress to Richter's Transformation?

How Can I Ensure My CLL Doesn’t Progress to Richter’s Transformation?

CLL and BTK Inhibitor Treatment: What Are the Risk Factors?

CLL Genetic Markers: What Should I Ask About Prognostic Factors?

CLL Genetic Markers: What Should I Ask About Prognostic Factors?


Transcript:

Lisa Hatfield:

So we have another patient who has asked a series of questions. Her first question is, “Can you speak to immune vulnerability and the importance of regular vaccination for CLL patients?”

Dr. Ryan Jacobs:

Yes. So we know that having active CLL reduces a patient’s ability to respond to vaccination and increases redirection, we know being on treatment for CLL also produces varying risk depending on the treatment. The drugs that seem to do the most damage to the immune system, and specifically in terms of their ability to respond to vaccination or the antibody treatment like rituximab (Rituxan) and obinutuzumab (Gazyva), and their effects last for many months after that treatment is finished. Unlike the oral drugs which have a short half-life, the antibodies hang around for many months after being administered.

I in general am recommending, as does the CDC, to get boosted every six months for patients with any level of immune suppression and having CLL qualifies you as that. And then I recommend all of the general vaccines that come with age, like, for example, the Shingrix vaccine for shingles is now safe to give to CLL patients because it’s a conjugate vaccine, it’s not a live virus vaccine.

So we’re lucky now with just standard vaccines in the U.S., there are no live virus vaccines that the CLL patient has to worry about anymore, so I definitely encourage shingles, pneumonia vaccines, boosting for COVID. We’ll see if we get an RSV vaccine, that sounds like it’s on the horizon. Flu, of course. And the patient should just be aware based on what kind of treatment that they’re on, they may not have a good chance at responding to these vaccines, but I still try with my patients. The other important element to think about when you’re considering an infection risk and everything is just kind of what’s…obviously, the pandemic has been a very dynamic thing, and certain times there’s been a lot more risk than others. Thankfully, at the time of this recording, we’re doing on probably as good as we’ve done since the onset of COVID. So you have to make your decisions on the situations you put yourself into, based on your personal situation and what’s going on in the bigger picture, risk-wise. Flu season, COVID season, a lot of RSV going around or something like that.


Share Your Feedback

Create your own user feedback survey

CLL Genetic Markers: What Should I Ask About Prognostic Factors?

CLL Genetic Markers: What Should I Ask About Prognostic Factors? from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.

What’s key for chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) patients to know about genetic markers? Expert Dr. Ryan Jacobs explains genetic markers checked in standard CLL testing, questions to ask your doctor, and common treatments used with specific genetic markers.

Dr. Ryan Jacobs is a hematologist/oncologist specializing in Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia from Levine Cancer Institute. Learn more about Dr. Jacobs.

Download Resource Guide   |  Descargar Guía en Español

See More from START HERE CLL

Related Programs:

IGHV-Mutated vs IGHV-Unmutated CLL | What’s the Difference

Concerned About CLL Watch and Wait? Start Here

CLL and Vaccines | Vital Advice for Protecting Patients


Transcript:

Lisa Hatfield:

“How can I ask my doctor to make sure I am being tested for serum markers?” And more broadly, I think a lot of patients are a little bit nervous about asking questions of their doctor, because they don’t want to feel like they’re questioning their expertise or doubting them. So how in general can we ask our doctor questions if we hear something? Or how can we approach our doctor with those types of questions?

Dr. Ryan Jacobs:

So I mentioned asking your doctor, “What’s my prognostic markers?” I think is probably the easiest way to get that information. And your doctor should be checking those. The question comes up like, what are the “high-risk” markers? We talked about mutated versus unmutated. Thankfully, our novel treatments, that doesn’t seem to matter. Same goes with…there’s on FISH there used to be, if you found three copies of chromosome 12, that’s called trisomy 12, that doesn’t seem to matter with our newer treatments. A deletion at chromosome 11, again, used to not do as well with chemo. Novel therapies, doesn’t seem to matter.

The one that is still potentially affecting outcomes, even with our novel treatments, are chromosome 17 aberrations, which stately are rare in the initial diagnostic setting, that or a TP53. A deletion at 17p or TP53 mutation probably is only going to be around 10 percent of patients or so. And in the relapse setting though, that number goes up because of the more aggressive cancers emerge, we call that clonal evolution. So maybe in the 20-ish percent range. These patients, we tend to prioritize indefinite therapies first, because it seems like these patients do better if you keep treatment going, as opposed to interrupted therapies like venetoclax (Venclexta). And so we tend to treat those patients with a drug like acalabrutinib (Calquence) or zanubrutinib (Brukinsa) first and then think about the venetoclax later for those patients. 

Lisa Hatfield:

Okay. Okay. And just to clarify, for patients too, I know that a lot of cancers, there are discussions about the 17 deletion, 17p, and then also the TP53 gene. So if I understand correctly, the TP53 gene is housed on chromosome number 17. So if that is missing, then that patient may be missing that gene, that is it considered a tumor suppressor gene, which we want. Is that correct?

Dr. Ryan Jacobs:  

Right. So it’s either missing, which is what we see on FISH with a deletion, or it can be mutated and that’s the next gen sequencing, and often it will be both in those patients. We think with indefinite, there’s some really good data that was just released with zanubrutinib. When they looked at 17p-deleted patients, there’s some long-term follow-up with ibrutinib-treated 17p-deleted patients. With chemo these patients would only get about a year or so, but we’re getting maybe even close to normal outcomes with long-term BTK. But we do know if you just give them a year of venetoclax and obinutuzumab (Gazyva) for six months and then stop, they do relapse quicker than the other patients. So they relapse after about four years. As opposed to with five years of follow-up with that first-line venetoclax approach, there are 62 percent of patients who are still free of progression.

Share Your Feedback

Create your own user feedback survey

Emerging CLL Research | Understanding the CAPTIVATE and MAJIC Studies

Emerging CLL Research | Understanding the CAPTIVATE and MAJIC Studies from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.

What’s the latest in chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) research? Expert Dr. Ryan Jacobs shares updates about the CAPTIVATE study, MAJIC study, and potential treatment breakthroughs.

Dr. Ryan Jacobs is a hematologist/oncologist specializing in Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia from Levine Cancer Institute. Learn more about Dr. Jacobs.

Download Resource Guide   |  Descargar Guía en Español

See More from START HERE CLL

Related Programs:

CLL Patient Expert Q&A: Start Here

CLL Patient Expert Q&A: Start Here

Diagnosed with CLL? Start Here

Diagnosed with CLL? Start Here

Is It Aging or My CLL?

Is It Aging or My CLL?


Transcript:

Lisa Hatfield:

I did a little research last night before I talked with you, and it sounds like that is something that the CAPTIVATE trial is investigating. A patient asked about that, what that trial is. And it’s music to my ears as a cancer patient to hear something like “fixed duration”, it’s also investigating a fixed duration so patients and have maybe a bit of a medication vacation. So can you speak to that trial a little bit and explain what it is a little bit on how that might benefit patients with CLL?

Dr. Ryan Jacobs: 

Yeah. So one of the best elements of treating with venetoclax (Venclexta) is that it produces a deep level of remission in many patients. In fact, when given with the monoclonal antibody obinutuzumab (Gazyva), to CLL patients receiving that treatment as a first line of therapy for their CLL, about three-quarters of CLL patients will get to so deep of a remission that we call them minimal residual disease negative.

Lisa Hatfield: 

And that’s a blood test or a bone marrow test, but more easily done as a blood test, where we can look to a sensitivity of one in 10,000 white cells and determine if there’s any CLL in those 10,000 cells. We can actually go deeper than that, but we say, we CLL patients are negative if they’re less than one in 10,000. And so 75 percent of patients will get to that depth of remission just with obinutuzumab for six months along with venetoclax for a year.

Dr. Ryan Jacobs:

So when researchers saw that, they recognized that we could probably stop treatment in those patients getting venetoclax because venetoclax yields these deep responses. And then the next kind of thought was, well, could we give a BTK inhibitor with venetoclax, but also over a defined treatment timeline and maybe get some of the remarkable benefits of treating with a BTK inhibitor but not get stuck being on therapy for years and years.

So the CAPTIVATE study was the first really to, in a large Phase II manner, look at that combination in a younger patient population, it was for patients 70 and younger. And it wasn’t in a high risk or anything, it was all comers. But they did have to be 70 and younger and getting treatment as a first-line therapy. So the combination was very effective. As of the last American Society of Hematology meeting in December, four years of data was reported and a large percentage of patients were still free of progression, over 80 percent still free of progression. And that’s three years off therapy at that point.

It was well-tolerated, not many patients had to come off due to toxicity. It was in fact, less than 10 percent had really significant toxicities requiring discontinuation. So it was a well-tolerated effective treatment.

I do have one of those studies to open at my institution, the acalabrutinib-venetoclax combination,  it’s called the MAJIC trial, and it is a large Phase III study that if it’s successful, I think would lead to the approval of giving those two drugs together. But then the extra credit question is, who should get the combination and who should get the drugs separately? And we don’t have an answer for that right now, and that’s a long topic of debate among CLL specialists. 

Lisa Hatfield:

Great. Well, thank you. So for that trial you spoke of that you’re conducting right now, is that… Is it only relapsed patients who are eligible for that? Or is that for front-line therapy.

Dr. Ryan Jacobs:

No, this is a first-line therapy that the MAJIC study is.

Lisa Hatfield: 

Oh good. That’s promising for patients too.

Dr. Ryan Jacobs:

And it has a really good comparator arm, so that won’t be a problem that the standard arm on that study is venetoclax (Venclexta) plus obinutuzumab, so it’s comparing against one of our best treatments, and so we really will get the answer of does it look better to use the BTK with the Bcl-2? Or is it not really that much better than just giving a venetoclax with obinutuzumab? And then the one obvious element that I didn’t mention that would be nice for most patients in addition to being efficacious and well-tolerated is if you could get an all-oral combination. Of course, venetoclax with obinutuzumab, you’re still getting quite a few infusions with the obinutuzumab over the first six months. So that’s a lot of time in the infusion center that you could avoid with just the combination of two oral targeted agents. So that would be a breakthrough for patients too, I think. 


Share Your Feedback

Create your own user feedback survey

Diagnosed With CLL? Start Here

Diagnosed with CLL? Start Here from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.

What do newly diagnosed chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) patients need to know? Expert Dr. Ryan Jacobs explains how CLL occurs and provides an overview of treatment types. 

Dr. Ryan Jacobs is a hematologist/oncologist specializing in Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia from Levine Cancer Institute. Learn more about Dr. Jacobs.

Download Resource Guide   |  Descargar Guía en Español

See More from START HERE CLL

Related Programs:

CLL Patient Expert Q&A: Start Here

CLL Patient Expert Q&A: Start Here

IGHV-Mutated vs IGHV-Unmutated CLL | What’s the Difference

Is It Aging or My CLL?

Is It Aging or My CLL?


Transcript:

Lisa Hatfield:

There’s a lot going on in terms of novel therapies and new options. But before we jump into all of that, the tool box that’s expanding, can you introduce CLL and provide an explanation of what it is and what that means for a newly diagnosed patient?

Dr. Ryan Jacobs:

So chronic lymphocytic leukemia, or CLL, is the most common chronic lymphoma/leukemia. It is really both most of the time. It presents with what we call lymphocytosis, meaning the white blood cell count, and specifically the lymphocyte count is high or elevated. To call it CLL, to make that formal cancer diagnosis, we can generally take a patient’s blood sample and put it through a fancy machine that we call a flow cytometer, that looks for characteristic markers on the outside of the cells, and if there’s a bunch of those cells, we call that a monomorphic population.

So a bunch of those cells that look the same, and they’re B cells, that’s the type of lymphocyte count they are, and they’re over this threshold of 5,000. Then that is the diagnosis right there, we don’t need an invasive procedure. You generally do not need a bone marrow biopsy or a lymph node biopsy. There is in about 15 percent of cases, the disease presents with just in large nymph nodes, and the white count is normal. We call that small lymphocytic lymphoma. It’s considered an overlap with CLL, and I’ve had many patients that have started off with SLL and then eventually manifest elevated lymphocyte count later in their disease course. So it is considered an overlap, the treatment is the same for both of those disease entities.

So that’s the diagnosis of CLL and how it generally shows up initially. In a nutshell, it’s a cancer of the aging population, average age is 70. I have a lot of patients that ask me, “Why did I get CLL?” And the answer is, “We don’t know.” It’s that way with most cancers, unfortunately, we don’t know why one person gets a cancer and the other person doesn’t.

But it obviously has something to do with the aging effect on the DNA of the B lymphocytes because of how much more common it is as patients get older. 

Lisa Hatfield:

We know that therapies are evolving faster, hopefully faster than patients are relapsing, which is a good thing. So when they do relapse, chances are there will be a new option for this patient. But a CLL cure still remains elusive.

So, Dr. Jacobs, if you can speak to…we’ll just jump right into some of the newer, the novel therapies and things that are being investigated with CLL treatment. If you can just speak to some of those newer therapies, the novel pathways and targets that are currently under investigation with CLL, we’d appreciate that.

Dr. Ryan Jacobs:

Sure. We’ve come a long way in how we are managing this common cancer that’s benefiting a lot of patients. And as mentioned, with this cancer being one that is more common in the older population, we do know that the population of the United States specifically is getting older, there’s going to be more 70-year-olds. So these breakthroughs are helping a growing number of CLL patients.

Before 2014, really outside of a clinical trial, the only way we could treat CLL Is with combinations of chemotherapy and an immune therapy, like a monoclonal antibody called rituximab (Rituxan), that was kind of our first, what we would call targeted treatment outside of chemotherapy that we had, and it was, like targeted treatments are, well tolerated. It was an antibody that targets B cells specifically.

So we were combining it with chemo, we would call that chemoimmunotherapy, and it helped a lot of CLL patients. But for many, those were poor prognostic markers in particular, and those with relapse disease, chemotherapy was not very helpful, and it was quite toxic in many circumstances.

So we’ve been fortunate that since 2014, we’ve had a lot of new treatment options, and they’re targeted therapies. It’s not like non-specific cytotoxic chemotherapy, these are treatments that have been developed with specific targets in mind that are unique to the B-cell neoplasm, the B-cell cancer, the CLL. And the first of these that really changed everything was a BTK inhibitor called ibrutinib (Imbruvica), that we got in 2014.

Initially, we can only use it in the relapse setting, but eventually, in 2016, we could start treating patients as a first line of therapy with ibrutinib.  And then in 2019, we had a newer version of BTK inhibitor, we call those second-generation BTK inhibitors. That drug was acalabrutinib. And it eventually was shown in a head-to-head study to be just as effective as ibrutinib in a relapsed patient population, but it had less side effects than ibrutinib. So in, specifically, atrial fibrillation, hypertension. Cardiac toxicities overall were one that they really focused on in that study.

So as a whole, when we were choosing BTK inhibitors, we were shifting away from ibrutinib, shifting to acalabrutinib, and then just as…earlier this year, we had a third BTK inhibitor, zanubrutinib (Brukinsa), that was approved. It’s also considered a second generation BTK inhibitor like ibrutinib and acalabrutinib (Calquence). It treats CLL in the same way, in how it inhibits BTK or Bruton’s tyrosine kinase, that’s over expressed in CLL cells.

But it also has a favorable toxicity profile when compared head to head with ibrutinib, and now we have two second-generation options between acalabrutinib and zanubrutinib. And it’s not really easy for us to know between those two, which is “better.” When we decide to treat with a BTK inhibitor, we’re usually choosing between those two at this point, and we’re trying to personalize the decision for the patient, and there are some different factors they can get involved in that complicated decision.

Luckily, we are not limited to BTK as a target. I mentioned earlier, we have monoclonal antibody, rituximab like the one I mentioned, but a newer version of rituximab, a more potent version, obinutuzumab. Is one that we have available along with a Bcl-2 inhibitor, venetoclax (Venclexta). That is now, as of 2018, improved in the frontline CLL setting, also approved in the relapsed setting, of course, since 2016.  And we use venetoclax with a monoclonal antibody like obinutuzumab (Gazyva), and together they are a very potent combination that cause pretty rapid cancer cell death, as opposed to the BTK inhibitors that more put the cancer to sleep and require daily dosing indefinitely for as long as the drugs work.

And remarkably, the data on BTK inhibitors tells us that should work for many, many years. They’ve been following some of the patients that got treatment in the first line setting, and eight years out, there’s still more than 50 percent of the patients are free of progression, so they can’t even quote an average response time yet. With eight years of follow-up on the early ibrutinib patients.  The difference with venetoclax combined with a monoclonal antibody like obinutuzumab, is because it causes a more rapid cell death, you can give it on a time-defined schedule. So we tend to give it for one year in the first-line setting and two years in the relapse setting, and the antibody portion is just given for the first six months. 

The BTK inhibitors and venetoclax are oral treatments, so that’s a big win for patients to avoid the infusion center for those treatments, but the IV antibody treatments will still require some trips to the infusion center if you’re doing that combination with venetoclax. For most patients, those two targets are what we’re choosing between, and we try to personalize the decision to the patient. And again, that’s a very complicated discussion on what is “best.” And we use things like the prognostic work-up, medical problems that the patients already have, medicines that patients are on, to help make the best treatment decision for our CLL patients. But those…for in terms of how well that treats the CLL, both of those are considered equivalent options for the large majority of CLL patients.

We’ve got some things on the horizon, but in general, those are two targets that we have at this point. There is for relapsed patients, PI3 kinase inhibitors that are still FDA-approved at this time, that aren’t quite as effective and more toxic, so we sometimes think about using one of those targeted therapies if a patient has already progressed on a BTK inhibitor in venetoclax class. In the future, we are looking towards combining BTK and Bcl-2 inhibitor. Like, for example, there’s been studies already done that I’ve put many patients on, with ibrutinib-venetoclax, and I believe there’s a question about that later.

There’s also an ongoing study that I have opened at my institution that’s looking at acalabrutinib and venetoclax. So taking these two pills together in a time-defined manner, so you don’t have to take the BTK inhibitor indefinitely. And then there are some therapies that have already been improved in other lymphomas, and we wonder if they’re going to have a role in CLL eventually. So we now have bispecific antibodies, so that’s taking a drug like rituximab or obinutuzumab and adding a T-cell engager to it, so it has two targets or it’s bispecific.

And we have that drug, mosunetuzumab (Lunsumio) available in follicular lymphoma and there’s several others in development, and we’ll see how their role comes into play in CLL as well. As well as CAR T-cell therapy, where we take a patient’s T cells and genetically engineer them to attack the cancer. That’s now an approved therapy for many different kinds of lymphomas and multiple myeloma as well.

So we wonder if that’s going to have a role in CLL. But I think for the foreseeable future, it’s going to be looking first at BTK and then Bcl-2 inhibition, or vice versa. And we don’t really know which is better to go first, we think they’re both…they can both be sequenced one after the other. And then maybe it will have some of these other breakthroughs coming in and helping for after patients need something beyond those therapies.

And there’s probably going to be a lot of patients that never need anything beyond those options, those initial couple of targets, because they do so well. I think in the most immediate future, the approval that is going to give us a new great option is going to be for an alternative site BTK inhibitor, or it’s also called a non-covalent BTK inhibitor.

And there’s this drug called pirtobrutinib (Jaypirca), it has been approved in mantle cell lymphoma and likely will get approved in CLL this year. And that drug specifically is a BTK inhibitor that still works even in patients that have, say, progressed on ibrutinib or acalabrutinib or zanubrutinib. That will be a new target available for CLL patients and probably pretty quickly become one of the go-to drugs that we use for relapsed CLL patients that have already been treated with a BTK…with a traditional BTK inhibitor. So growing number of options and it’s really great for our CLL patients. 


Share Your Feedback

Create your own user feedback survey

CLL Patient Expert Q&A: Start Here

CLL Patient Expert Q&A: Start Here from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.

The START HERE program bridges the CLL expert and patient voice, whether you are newly diagnosed, in active treatment or in watch and wait. In this webinar, Empowerment lead Lisa Hatfield and expert Dr. Ryan Jacobs  provide an overview of the latest in CLL, managing CLL side effects and options for CLL progression.

Dr. Ryan Jacobs is a hematologist/oncologist specializing in Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia from Levine Cancer Institute. Learn more about Dr. Jacobs.

Download Resource Guide   |  Descargar Guía en Español

See More from START HERE CLL

Related Programs:

Diagnosed with CLL? Start Here

Diagnosed with CLL? Start Here

Emerging CLL Research: Understanding the CAPTIVATE and MAJIC Studies

Can CLL Treatment Cause Gastrointestinal Side Effects?

Can CLL Treatment Cause Gastrointestinal Side Effects?


Transcript:

Lisa Hatfield:  

Hello and welcome. My name is Lisa Hatfield, your host for this Patient Empowerment Network program. In this important dialogue, we bridge the expert and patient voice 

to enable you and me to feel comfortable asking questions of our healthcare teams with more precision. The world is complicated, as is a cancer diagnosis, but understanding your CLL doesn’t have to be. The goal is to create actionable pathways for getting the most out of CLL treatment and survivorship. Joining me today is Dr. Ryan Jacobs, a CLL expert from Levine Cancer Institute. Thank you very much for joining us today, Dr. Jacobs, we really appreciate you being here and your time and expertise.

Dr. Ryan Jacobs:

Thanks for having me, Lisa.

Lisa Hatifield:

Before we get started, please remember to download the program resource guide via the QR code. There is great information there that will be useful during this program and after. Okay, let’s get started. So, Dr. Jacobs, I’d like to talk about what’s on the chronic lymphocytic leukemia radar, and rather than saying that entire phrase each time, I’m going to refer to it as CLL, because I’m pretty sure I’ll fumble that up. There’s a lot going on in terms of novel therapies and new options, but before we jump into all of that, the tool box that’s expanding, can you introduce CLL and provide an explanation of what it is and what that means for a newly diagnosed patient?

Dr. Ryan Jacobs: 

So chronic lymphocytic leukemia, or CLL, is the most common chronic lymphoma/leukemia. It is really both most of the time. It presents with what we call lymphocytosis, meaning the white blood cell count, and specifically the lymphocyte count is high or elevated. To call it CLL, to make that formal cancer diagnosis, we can generally take a patient’s blood sample and put it through a fancy machine that we call a flow cytometer, that looks for characteristic markers on the outside of the cells, and if there’s a bunch of those cells, we call that a monomorphic population.

So a bunch of those cells that look the same, and they’re B cells, that’s the type of lymphocyte count they are, and they’re over this threshold of 5,000. Then that is the diagnosis right there, we don’t need an invasive procedure. You generally do not need a bone marrow biopsy or a lymph node biopsy. There is in about 15 percent of cases, the disease presents with just in large nymph nodes and the white count is normal. We call that small lymphocytic lymphoma. It’s considered an overlap with CLL, and I’ve had many patients that have started off with SLL and then eventually manifest elevated lymphocyte count later in their disease course. So it is considered an overlap, the treatment is the same for both of those disease entities.So that’s the diagnosis of CLL and how it generally shows up initially. In a nutshell, it’s a cancer of the aging population, average age is 70. I have a lot of patients that ask me, “Why did I get CLL?” And the answer is, we don’t know. It’s that way with most cancers, unfortunately, we don’t know why one person gets a cancer and the other person doesn’t. But it obviously has something to do with the aging effect on the DNA of the B lymphocytes because of how much more common it is as patients get older.

Lisa Hatifield:

Thank you for that overview, Dr. Jacobs. We do have CLL patients who are watching this who are newly diagnosed, they may be in active treatment, they may be in remission, they may be managing their CLL just fine right now in their lives. So we’re along the whole spectrum of CLL, so thank you for that overview. We know that therapies are evolving faster, hopefully faster than patients are relapsing, which is a good thing. So when they do relapse, chances are there will be a new option for this patient. But a CLL cure still remains elusive. So, Dr. Jacobs, if you can speak to…we’ll just jump right into some of the newer, the novel therapies and things that are being investigated with CLL treatment. If you can just speak to some of those newer therapies, the novel pathways and targets that are currently under investigation with CLL, we’d appreciate that.

Dr. Ryan Jacobs:

Sure. We’ve come a long way in how we are managing this common cancer that’s benefiting a lot of patients. And as mentioned, with this cancer being one that is more common in the older population, we do know that the population of the United States specifically is getting older, there’s going to be more 70-year-olds. So these breakthroughs are helping a growing number of CLL patients.

Before 2014, really outside of a clinical trial, the only way we could treat CLL Is with combinations of chemotherapy and an immune therapy, like a monoclonal antibody called Rituximab, that was kind of our first, what we would call targeted treatment outside of chemotherapy that we had, and it was, like targeted treatments are, well tolerated.  It was an antibody that targets B cells specifically. So we were combining it with chemo, we would call that chemoimmunotherapy, and it helped a lot of CLL patients. But for many, those were poor prognostic markers in particular, and those with relapse disease, chemotherapy was not very helpful, and it was quite toxic in many circumstances. So we’ve been fortunate that since 2014, we’ve had a lot of new treatment options, and they’re targeted therapies. It’s not like non-specific cytotoxic chemotherapy, these are treatments that have been developed with specific targets in mind that are unique to the B-cell neoplasm, the B cell cancer, the CLL.

And the first of these that really changed everything was a BTK inhibitor called ibrutinib, that we got in 2014. Initially, we can only use it in the relapse setting, but eventually, in 2016, we could start treating patients as a first line of therapy with ibrutinib (Imbruvica). And then in 2019, we had a newer version of BTK inhibitor, we call those second-generation BTK inhibitors. That drug was acalabrutinib (Calquence). And it eventually was shown in a head-to-head study to be just as effective as ibrutinib in a relapsed patient population, but it had less side effects than ibrutinib. So in specifically, atrial fibrillation, hypertension. Cardiac toxicities overall were one that they really focused on in that study. So as a whole, when we were choosing BTK inhibitors, we were shifting away from ibrutinib, shifting to acalabrutinib, and then just as…earlier this year, we had a third BTK inhibitor, zanubrutinib (Brukinsa), that was approved. It’s also considered a second-generation BTK inhibitor like ibrutinib and acalabrutinib.

It treats CLL in the same way, in how it inhibits BTK or Bruton’s tyrosine kinase, that’s overexpressed in CLL cells. But it also has a favorable toxicity profile when compared head to head with ibrutinib, and now we have two second generation options between a acalabrutinib and zanubrutinib. And it’s not really easy for us to know between those two, which is “better.” When we decide to treat with a BTK inhibitor, we’re usually choosing between those two at this point, and we’re trying to personalize the decision for the patient, and there’s some different factors they can get involved in that complicated decision. Luckily, we are not limited to BTK as a target. I mentioned earlier, we have monoclonal antibody, rituximab (Rituxan) like the one I mentioned, but a newer version of Rituximab, a more potent version, obinutuzumab (Gazyva). Is one that we have available along with a Bcl-2 inhibitor, venetoclax. That is now, as of 2018, improved in the frontline CLL setting, also approved in the relapse setting, of course, since 2016.

And we use venetoclax with a monoclonal antibody like obinutuzumab, and together they are a very potent combination that cause pretty rapid cancer cell death, as opposed to the BTK inhibitors that more put the cancer to sleep and require daily dosing indefinitely for as long as the drugs work. And remarkably, the data on BTK inhibitors tells us that should work for many, many years. They’ve been following some of the patients that got treatment in the first line setting, and eight years out, there’s still more than 50 percent of the patients are free of progression, so they can’t even quote an average response time yet. With eight years of follow-up on the early ibrutinib patients. The difference with venetoclax combined with a monoclonal antibody like obinutuzumab, is because it causes a more rapid cell death, you can give it on a time-defined schedule. So we tend to give it for one year in the first-line setting and two years in the relapse setting, and the antibody portion is just given for the first six months.

The BTK inhibitors and venetoclax are oral treatments, so that’s a big win for patients to avoid the infusion center for those treatments, but the IV antibody treatments will still require some trips to the infusion center if you’re doing that combination with venetoclax. For most patients, those two targets are what we’re choosing between, and we try to personalize the decision to the patient. And again, that’s a very complicated discussion on what is “best”. And we use things like the prognostic work-up, medical problems that the patients already have, medicines that patients are on, to help make the best treatment decision for our CLL patients. But those…for in terms of how well that treats the CLL, both of those are considered equivalent options for the large majority of CLL patients. We’ve got some things on the horizon, but in general, those are two targets that we have at this point. There is for relapsed patients, PI3 kinase inhibitors that are still FDA approved at this time, that aren’t quite as effective and more toxic, so we sometimes think about using one of those targeted therapies if a patient has already progressed on a BTK inhibitor in venetoclax class.

In the future, we are looking towards combining BTK and Bcl-2 inhibitor. Like for example, there’s been studies already done that I’ve put many patients on, with ibrutinib-venetoclax, and I believe there’s a question about that later. There’s also an ongoing study that I have opened at my institution that’s looking at acalabrutinib and venetoclax. So taking these two pills together in a time-defined manner, so you don’t have to take the BTK inhibitor indefinitely. And then there’s some therapies that have already been improved in other lymphomas, and we wonder if they’re going to have a role in CLL eventually. So we now have bispecific antibodies, so that’s taking a drug like Rituximab or obinutuzumab and adding a T-cell engager to it so it has two targets or it’s bispecific. And we have that drug, mosunetuzumab (Lunsumio) available in follicular lymphoma, and there are several others in development, and we’ll see how their role comes into play in CLL as well. As well as CAR T-cell therapy, where we take a patient’s T cells and genetically engineer them to attack the cancer. That’s now an approved therapy for many different kinds of lymphomas and multiple myeloma as well. So we wonder if that’s going to have a role in CLL.

But I think for the foreseeable future, it’s going to be looking first at BTK and then Bcl-2 inhibition, or vice versa. And we don’t really know which is better to go first, we think they’re both…they can both be sequenced one after the other. And then maybe it will have some of these other breakthroughs coming in and helping for after patients need something beyond those therapies. And there’s probably going to be a lot of patients that never need anything beyond those options, those initial couple of targets, because they do so well. I think in the most immediate future, the approval that is going to give us a new great option is going to be for an alternative site BTK inhibitor, or it’s also called a non-covalent BTK inhibitor.

And there’s this drug called pirtobrutinib, it has been approved in mantle cell lymphoma and likely will get approved in CLL this year. And that drug specifically is a BTK inhibitor that still works even in patients that have, say, progressed on ibrutinib or acalabrutinib or zanubrutinib. That will be a new target available for CLL patients and probably pretty quickly become one of the go-to drugs that we use for relapsed CLL patients that have already been treated with a BTK…with a traditional BTK inhibitor. So growing number of options and it’s really great for our CLL patients.

Lisa Hatfield:

Thank you for that overview again, Dr. Jacobs. It does sound like there are a lot of new therapies coming out, especially for relapsed patients, super exciting for them. And this is actually a great time to jump right into questions. We have many questions from patients that different patients have submitted. But first, I want to remind everybody that this program is not a substitute for medical care. Please consult with your medical team for advice on your own condition or disease. And, Dr. Jacob, I was taking notes as you were talking, because you had spoken a little bit about a combination of the BTK inhibitor and Bcl-2 inhibitor with venetoclax. And I did a little research last night before I talked with you, and it sounds like that is something that the CAPTIVATE trial is investigating. 

So that’s exciting, and a patient asked about that, what that trial is. And it’s music to my ears as a cancer patient to hear something like “fixed duration,” it’s also investigating a fixed duration so patients and have maybe a bit of a medication vacation. So can you speak to that trial a little bit and explain what it is a little bit on how that might benefit patients with CLL?

Dr. Ryan Jacobs:

Yeah. So one of the best elements of treating with venetoclax is that it produces a deep level of remission in many patients. In fact, when given with the monoclonal antibody obinutuzumab, to CLL patients receiving that treatment as a first line of therapy for their CLL, about three-quarters of CLL patients will get to so deep of a remission that we call them minimal residual disease-negative. And that’s a blood test or a bone marrow test, but more easily done as a blood test, where we can look to a sensitivity of one in 10,000 white cells and determine if there’s any CLL in those 10,000 cells. We can actually go deeper than that, but we say, we call patients negative if they’re less than one in 10,000. And so 75 percent of patients will get to that depth of remission just with obinutuzumab for six months along with venetoclax for a year. So when researchers saw that, they recognized that we could probably stop treatment in those patients getting venetoclax because venetoclax yields these deep responses. And then the next kind of thought was, well, could we give a BTK inhibitor with venetoclax, but also over a defined treatment timeline and maybe get some of the remarkable benefits of treating with a BTK inhibitor but not get stuck being on therapy for years and years.

So the CAPTIVATE study was the first really to, in a large Phase II manner, look at that combination in a younger patient population, it was for patients 70 and younger. And it wasn’t in a high risk or anything, it was all comers. But they did have to be 70 and younger and getting treatment as a first-line therapy. So the combination was very effective. As of the last American Society of Hematology meeting in December, four years of data was reported and a large percentage of patients were still free of progression, over 80 percent still free of progression. And that’s three years off therapy at that point.

It was well-tolerated, not many patients had to come off due to toxicity. It was, in fact, less than 10 percent had really significant toxicities requiring discontinuation. So it was a well-tolerated effective treatment.

I do have one of those studies to open at my institution, the acalabrutinib-venetoclax combination, it’s called the MAJIC trial, and it is a large Phase III study that if it’s successful, I think would lead to the approval of giving those two drugs together. But then the extra credit question is, who should get the combination and who should get the drugs separately? And we don’t have an answer for that right now, and that’s a long topic of debate among CLL specialists.

Lisa Hatfield:

Great. Well, thank you. So for that trial you spoke of that you’re conducting right now, is that…is it only relapsed patients who are eligible for that? Or is that for front-line therapy?

Dr. Ryan Jacobs:

No, this is a first-line therapy that the MAJIC study is.

Lisa Hatifield:

Oh good. That’s promising for patients too.

Dr. Ryan Jacobs:

And it has a really good comparator arm, so that won’t be a problem that the standard arm on that study is venetoclax plus obinutuzumab, so it’s comparing against one of our best treatments, and so we really will get the answer of does it look better to use the BTK with the Bcl-2? Or is it not really that much better than just giving an venetoclax with obinutuzumab? And then the one obvious element that I didn’t mention that would be nice for most patients in addition to being efficacious and well-tolerated is if you could get an all-oral combination. Of course, venetoclax with obinutuzumab, you’re still getting quite a few infusions with the obinutuzumab over the first six months. So that’s a lot of time in the infusion center that you could avoid with just the combination of two oral targeted agents. So that would be a breakthrough for patients too, I think.

Lisa Hatfield:

Well, you commented also on something that’s really important for patients to know, and that is that if you go into a clinical trial, you won’t be given nothing for cancer clinical trials, you’re going to be given the standard of care or whatever it’s being compared to. So for patients who are considering that.

Dr. Ryan Jacobs:

That’s a Phase III. Yeah, for Phase III. If you go on an earlier phase trial, you know exactly what you’re getting. There’s usually not any randomization for earlier phase studies, you just get the intended treatment.

Lisa Hatfield:

Okay, great. Well, thank you so much for explaining that. So we have some pretty specific questions, and we have a patient who wrote in and asked, “What is the difference between IGHV-mutated and IGHV-unmutated CLL? And can you talk about treatment considerations for those?”

Dr. Ryan Jacobs:

Yeah. So that’s part of a bigger discussion around the prognostic work-up of CLL and not all CLL is the same, and we’ve done a really good job of figuring out tests to separate out the CLL patients that tend to behave more aggressively and respond to certain kind of therapies, versus those that are more of what we call indolent or slow growing and respond to other kinds of therapies. I do want to say, I haven’t mentioned it yet, we still don’t treat CLL if it’s not causing any problems. And about half of patients get diagnosed as sort of an accident, and they get a blood test for something else, and their white count is elevated, and that leads to a diagnosis, but they feel fine. We still leave those patients alone. Even with these good treatment options we have, we recognize that there are a select percentage of CLL patients that don’t ever need treatment, and so we don’t just want to start treatment in everybody.

But I do still like to check this prognostic work-up, even if I’m not going to start treatment, but I make sure and ask the patient if that’s what…iIn line with what they want. But certainly, if you’re going to start treatment, you’re required by guidelines to check a prognostic work-up, and I would really encourage the CLL patients tuning in to ask their oncologist, “What is my prognostic work-up?” if they’re going to start treatment.  Because of the oncologists, unfortunately, that have to deal with lots of other cancers, maybe don’t always know the right test to send. I’m very spoiled in that I get to just treat lymphoma and specifically focus a lot of my research in CLL and get to stay up with all this. I don’t know how a general oncologist keeps up with everything, honestly.

But the big three tests are going to be the FISH analysis, fluorescence in situ hybridization. And then IGHV mutational analysis, and then also a TP53 mutation analysis. And I don’t really have time to go through all of those, but IGHV is the question I get a lot. “What is that?” It’s one of these rare findings where it’s actually normal to have a mutation at the IGHV. IGHV stands for immune globulin heavy chain variable region, and it is usually mutated in B lymphocytes because it’s part of the process of a mature lymphocyte that is able to make a lot of different kinds of antibodies. And it undergoes somatic hypermutation, is what it’s called, as the B cell matures. Generally in oncology, the more mature a cancer is, the less aggressive it behaves and usually the easier it is to manage, and that is the case with CLL. So think of an unmutated IGHV CLL cancer as a more primitive or a more immature cancer clone, and as such, it is harder to treat.

In about half of patients will be found to be unmuted at the IGHV and historically, all we had was chemo and we knew these patients weren’t going to respond for near as long as the IGHV-mutated patients were to chemo. What’s nice is, with our targeted treatments, particularly the long-term data with the BTK inhibitors, it doesn’t look like it matters whether you’re mutated or you’re unmutated. So that’s one of the really great things with our new treatments for CLL, is it has, the people that have benefited the most are the ones that were doing the worst, so that’s great. It’s not just the patients that were already doing well, that are doing even better.

Lisa Hatfield:

So I just want to take a step back and kind of looking at this through the lens of a newly diagnosed CLL patient. You’d mention that sometimes you don’t treat every CLL patient. So is there something, if you find a patient who does not need treatment, is there something you tell the patients as far as regular monitoring? Will you monitor them to see if it progresses to the point where it requires treatment?

Dr. Ryan Jacobs:

Yeah. And we’re fortunate that this is a blood cancer that most of the time we can follow with a simple blood count and follow the white count, follow how the…follow the health of the bone marrow by looking at things like anemia, low red cell count, or a low platelet count that we call thrombocytopenia. So that’s the easiest thing to follow, but I’m also talking with my patients and examining my patients. I want to know if their length nodes are causing them a lot of pain, because we should treat that, there’s no reason they should live in pain.I want to know if they’re waking up drenched in sweat all the time, if their quality of life has been really affected by that. Or are a dramatic amount of fatigue that we can’t explain by some other cause. And I also, of course, examine the nodes myself and make sure that there’s no alarming findings there. So that’s really what’s involved with checking on a CLL patient that’s on active surveillance, that’s what we call it. And there’s a list of criteria that the oncologist should know in terms of deeming who needs treatment and who doesn’t. And so we’re kind of following the same rules, so to speak, in terms of who gets treated for CLL.

Lisa Hatfield:

Okay, thank you. So we have a patient who asked a series of questions here, and I think you already…you spoke pretty well to the role of the BTK inhibitors in treating CLL. I’m going to kind of clump these together.  So I guess three questions. What treatments do you think are the most beneficial for patients whose CLL has relapsed? What are the poor prognostic indicators for CLL? And along the same lines, what are the high-risk genetic markers for CLL?

Dr. Ryan Jacobs:

It’s a little more complicated discussion in the first line setting because both are options. At this point in time, we haven’t been…at least those that are, I would say, staying up to date on the CLL data, we have not been using chemotherapy for a long time. So most of the relapsed patients will have seen either one of the BTK inhibitors or venetoclax. And so what we do in the second-line setting is just use the other option that they haven’t seen. The data tells us, when you look at what treatments are being prescribed, most patients are going on BTK inhibitors, and they have been around longer than venetoclax in general. So for a lot of patients, that relapsed treatment is going to be venetoclax. Because that has the best data in terms of treating patients that have progressed on a BTK inhibitor like ibrutinib or acalabrutinib or zanubrutinib.

In the near future, we’ll have pirtobrutinib (Jaypirca) and so maybe, maybe some will get that drug before venetoclax, and that’s probably okay. And so we’ll have that additional option. The complicated patients, and I’ve alluded to this, or what do we do after BTK and Bcl-2? What are we left with? I mentioned PI3 kinase, that’s not a great option. There’s still stem cell transplant out there for young patients that are running out of options. Clinical trial is really what I would like to emphasize there.  If you’re a patient that can get to a high volume referral cancer center with a CLL specialist, I would do that. If you have seen BTK inhibitor and venetoclax and are looking for other options.

Lisa Hatfield:  

Great, thank you. So the next question is actually a really good question, I think we can broaden it a little bit. But the question is, “How can I ask my doctor to make sure I am being tested for serum markers?” And more broadly, I think a lot of patients are a little bit nervous about asking questions of their doctor, because they don’t want to feel like they’re questioning their expertise or doubting them. So how in general can we ask our doctor questions if we hear something? Or how we approach our doctor with those types of questions?

Dr. Ryan Jacobs:

So I mentioned asking your doctor, “What’s my prognostic markers?” I think this is probably the easiest way to get that information. And your doctor should be checking those. The question comes up like, what are the “high-risk” markers? We talked about mutated versus unmutated. Thankfully, our novel treatments that doesn’t seem to matter. Same goes with…there’s on FISH there used to be, if you found three copies of chromosome 12, that’s called trisomy 12, that doesn’t seem to matter With our newer treatments. A deletion at chromosome 11, again, used to not do as well with chemo. Novel therapies…doesn’t seem to matter. The one that is still potentially affecting outcomes, even with our novel treatments, are chromosome 17 aberrations, which stately are rare in the initial diagnostic setting. That or a TP53. A deletion at 17p or TP53 mutation probably is only going to be around 10 percent of patients or so. And in the relapse setting though, that number goes up because of the more aggressive cancers emerge, we call that clonal evolution. So maybe in the 20-ish percent range. These patients, we tend to prioritize indefinite therapies first, because it seems like these patients do better if you keep treatment going, as opposed to interrupted therapies like venetoclax. And so we tend to treat those patients with a drug like acalabrutinib or zanubrutinib first and then think about the venetoclax later for those patients.

Lisa Hatfield:

Okay. Okay. And just to clarify, for patients too, I know that a lot of cancers, there are discussions about the 17 deletion, 17p, and then also the TP53 gene. So if I understand correctly, the TP53 gene is housed on chromosome number 17. So if that is missing, then that patient may be missing that gene, that is considered a tumor suppressor gene, which we want. Is that correct?

Dr. Ryan Jacobs:

Right. So it’s either missing, which is what we see on FISH with a deletion, or it can be mutated and that’s the next gen sequencing, and often it will be both in those patients.

We think with indefinite, there’s some really good data that was just released with zanubrutinib. When they looked at 17p-deleted patients, there’s some long-term follow-up with ibrutinib-treated 17p-deleted patients. With chemo these patients would only get about a year or so, but we’re getting maybe even close to normal outcomes with long-term BTK. But we do know if you just give them a year of venetoclax and obinutuzumab for six months and then stop, they do relapse quicker than the other patients. So they relapse after about four years. As opposed to with five years of follow-up with that first line venetoclax approach, there are 62 percent of patients are still free of progression.

Lisa Hatfield:

Oh wow, okay. Thanks for explaining that too. I know that that chromosome 17 and the TP53 gene, that’s talked about in a lot of different cancers and it often come up, “How are those connected?” So thanks for just describing that a bit. So this patient is asking, “For patients who may be eligible for BTK inhibitors, are there specific comorbidities that might contribute to adverse side effects?”

Dr. Ryan Jacobs:

Yeah, so we screen…all BTK inhibitors have some cardiac toxicity. They have been shown with the second-generation BTK inhibitors to have less cardiac toxicity than ibrutinib, specifically atrial fibrillation. So if you have atrial fibrillation, maybe that’s a reason why you might go on venetoclax first as opposed to a BTK inhibitor. But it’s not a contraindication to getting a BTK inhibitor if the atrial fibrillation is under good control.  Other cardiac risk factors would include difficult to control hypertension at baseline, or heart failure. These are all things that might make us think twice about using a BTK inhibitor as our first therapy, because venetoclax has no cardiac toxicities. The other thing to consider is BTK inhibitors all to a degree have, and I describe it to patients, like an aspirin-like effect on the platelets. They do interfere with the platelet binding, which so universally, patients will know to varying levels some easier bruising.

And if patients are on, because of say, they’ve had a heart attack in the past and they’re on aspirin at baseline, or what would even be more concerning if they were on a drug like Plavix because they’ve had a stent placed, that would be something that would really concern me and would definitely push me more towards venetoclax, that again, doesn’t have those anti-platelet interactions. Also, patients who are on blood thinners because of a history of blood clot or atrial fibrillation, there is the potential increased risk for bleeding and bruising there as well. None of these are absolute contraindications, they’re just all what goes into the blender, if you will, of putting lots of information in and coming up with the best treatment decision as personalized for the CLL patient. We’re blessed to have multiple options, but it does make it more of a challenge to find the “best” option.

Lisa Hatfield:

Yeah. Thank you for that. We have several questions from a couple of patients regarding side effects. So the question, “How long will my side effects of my CLL treatment last? And what can be done to reduce those?” And specifically, a patient is asking if there’s a connection with CLL and gastrointestinal issues?

Dr. Ryan Jacobs:

So all of the treatments, including venetoclax, the BTK inhibitors, will have diarrhea listed as a possible side effect. It’s usually low grade. But generally, I have found the gastrointestinal toxicities abate some over time. So if they are present earlier, if you’re able to stick with therapy, they do tend to get better. For the once daily meds, I encourage those patients to try to take the drug in the evening. The GI tract tends to be less active later in the day, and you can sleep off some of the potential gastrointestinal issues. So I’ve had success there. Sometimes we have to lower the dose to just find the best dose to help mitigate some of these. There’s the antidiarrheals that can help if you need them. Imodium. I had a patient I saw earlier this week that Imodium didn’t really work, but good old Pepto Bismol did the trick from time to time. So certainly though, if the gastrointestinal issues are significantly affecting quality of life, we need to come up with a new plan, whether that’s reducing the dose or changing to a different option. Specifically, what’s nice about the BTK inhibitors is they all have data that show if you’re having problems with one, you can switch to the other and likely not have the same problem occur. So that’s nice.

Lisa Hatfield:

Have you ever seen any uncharacteristic side effects several times in your practice? Anything really unique? I’m just curious about that.

Dr. Ryan Jacobs:

Yeah. There’s always the patients, they can have a more severe form of maybe, of a more common side effect, like the…we were talking about diarrhea, I’ve had a patient that actually had a difficult, with venetoclax, had difficulties with the stool incontinence. So that was kind of a severe form of that. It wasn’t so much diarrhea that was the problem. But we were able to ultimately mitigate that with a dose reduction. I would say the way, particularly if it’s an unusual side effect, the best thing to do is to take a break. If it’s a serious side effect that needs to be addressed and it’s affecting quality of life or causing problems, take a break from the treatment. If you take a week off these treatments, particularly venetoclax, taking breaks doesn’t matter. We like not to take long breaks with the BTK inhibitors. But if you take a week off, these drugs don’t have very long half-lives. So if the issue is not getting any better and you’ve been off of treatment for a week, it’s unlikely that that issue is coming from the treatment. So that’s a way I try to sort through some…particularly if they’re unusual side effects sometimes. And certainly, if we deem that the issue is connected to the treatment, I’ll usually try lowering the dose before just giving up.

Lisa Hatfield:

Okay. Thank you. A patient had asked, and I love this question because I often wonder myself when I get up in the morning, my bones are creaking and popping, “How do you know the difference between,” this patient’s talking about fatigue. How does a patient discern, “Well, this is fatigue from my cancer or my treatment,” versus just normal aging? Whether it’s fatigue or bruising or any side effect.

Dr. Ryan Jacobs:  

Yeah. Fatigue is a really…I had an attending physician when I was in my training that said, “Treating fatigue makes me fatigued.” But it’s hard. If it’s really the only problem the CLL patient is having, it can be. All those other problems I had mentioned earlier, the low red cells, the low platelets, the painful nodes, the night sweats, I with close to 100 percent certainty know I can fix those with treatment.Fatigue, I’m not as confident when that’s the only issue that a patient’s having. I try to differentiate between fatigue from other causes and old age, and specifically to CLL. 

They try to put it as a metric and say, if you’re having to spend half the day or more just lying around and you’re not able to do your normal activities of daily living, like that’s a severe level of fatigue and treatment should be considered.I’m looking for somewhat of a precipitous decline, not necessarily just kind of the gradual fatigue that you might more relate to aging. The problem with treating fatigue is you’ll look, if you look at the possible side effects of all of these medicines I talked about, fatigue will be a potential side effect.So you’re sometimes trading one problem and getting another, or maybe the fatigue does get better, but then the patient has some different side effect that’s even worse than the fatigue. So it’s hard to really help when fatigue’s the only issue. But certainly, I have helped some patients with fatigue. We don’t have a test that we can do to know for sure is the fatigue coming from the cancer, or is it coming from something else. 

Lisa Hatfield:

Great. Well, that wraps up our program for today. Thank you so much for joining us, Dr. Jacobs.  I am Lisa Hatfield from Patient Empowerment Network.


Share Your Feedback

Create your own user feedback survey