Tag Archive for: Jaypirca

CLL Clinical Trials for Molecularly Defined Patient Subgroups

CLL Clinical Trials for Molecularly Defined Patient Subgroups from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.

What’s the latest in chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) clinical trials for molecularly defined patient subgroups? Experts Dr. Jennifer Brown from Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and Dr. Callie Coombs from the University of California, Irvine discuss research updates for CLL patient subgroups, resistance mutations, and drug intolerance.

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 Expert Updates on Diagnostic Tool and Technology Advances

CLL Expert Updates on Diagnostic Tool and Technology Advances

Managing CLL Side Effects | Innovative Strategies and Approaches

Managing CLL Side Effects | Innovative Strategies and Approaches

Transcript:

Dr. Nicole Rochester:

So now we’re going to shift to talking about clinical trials and novel targets focused on molecularly defined patient subgroups. We know that by understanding the molecular profile of a patient’s CLL, that oncologists can choose the most effective therapies. So, Dr. Brown, I’m going to start with you for this one. Can you talk about any emerging CLL trials targeting specific molecular subgroups, and also how can CLL experts stay updated on these advancements in clinical trials?

Dr. Jennifer Brown:

So, as you heard from Dr. Coombs, there’s increasing interest in looking at high-risk patients in particular, and I think looking specifically at patients with p53 aberration in dedicated clinical trials, it’s become increasingly clear that the behavior of the disease when it’s higher risk based on p53 mutation, NOTCH mutation, IGHV status is quite different, particularly with time limited therapy compared to lower risk disease. And so having dedicated trials that evaluate outcomes specifically in certain of these subgroups is increasingly important. We do have more trials than we used to focusing specifically on p53 aberration.

My personal belief is that we would be well served to have trials separately in the IGHV groups that Dr. Coombs mentioned, although that has not gained as much traction. And then what we are seeing is now that there are resistance mutations, it actually has turned out that some of the drugs that we use in that setting, venetoclax (Venclexa) and pirtobrutinib (Jaypirca), seem to have pretty similar activity in patients with and without the mutations. But as drugs are being studied in this context, there’s been an increasing tendency to study them in specific subgroups.

So patients who have the mutation and had clinical progression on a covalent inhibitor, patients who don’t have the mutation and had clinical progression, patients who may have come off their covalent inhibitor for adverse events who may not actually be resistant, what is their response to the next line of therapy? And so all of that is just helping us understand in a more nuanced way what the best benefit for patients will be as we look at these different subgroups of patients.

Dr. Nicole Rochester:

Thank you, Dr. Brown. Appreciate that. Dr. Coombs, do you have anything to add?

Dr. Callie Coombs:

Yeah, so I echo all of Dr. Brown’s comments, and I think I’m the person that is bringing all the practical aspects of CLL care because it’s, she’s so thorough. I just always like to contribute a few little pearls. So, pirtobrutinib has been an exciting drug, to see it become available for our double refractory patients. So the current FDA indication is for patients failed by not only a covalent BTKi but also venetoclax. But it’s the first BTK inhibitor that we can effectively use in the setting of a prior BTK inhibitor.

And that’s because of this unique aspect where instead of forming a covalent bond at the C481 residue, it binds reversibly, and we can still see activity. But the practical aspect is that that’s not an effective strategy when you have a patient progressing on, say, ibrutinib (Imbruvica), you can’t switch them to acalabrutinib (Calquence) or zanubrutinib (Brukinsa) because of their shared mechanism of resistance. They’re all covalent inhibitors. They all share the same mechanism of resistance.

And so that’s one thing I’d like to bring up. However, there’s a very different and very common clinical situation that I encounter really a lot in my clinic, which is intolerance. And so that’s where it would be a very effective strategy to switch a patient from one covalent drug to another. And so literally in the past couple weeks of clinic, I’ve had patients with chronic long-standing toxicities to ibrutinib (Imbruvica) that perhaps went underrecognized where I say, “Hey, you’ve had…notice your blood pressure has gone up a lot.

Let’s switch you over to acalabrutinib,” or other patients, “Oh, you’ve had issues with atrial fibrillation, it…let’s try switching you to zanubrutinib.” Because the rates are a lot lower and a lot of patients can have improvement or just complete resolution of the prior side effect. And so I hope that that emphasizes this is something that we think about every day, and switching is appropriate in the setting of intolerance. It’s not appropriate when you’re staying in the covalent class to switch in the setting of progression. But pirtobrutinib being a non-covalent inhibitor is certainly very effective after a covalent. And I think once we see readout of some of the ongoing Phase III trials, we may be able to use it in that setting under an approved FDA label, though that is to be seen in the future.


Share Your Feedback

How Can CLL HCPs Gain More Understanding of Mutation Profiles?

How Can CLL HCPs Gain More Understanding of Mutation Profiles? from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.

How might chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) HCPs gain more understanding of mutation profiles? Experts Dr. Jennifer Brown from Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and Dr. Callie Coombs from the University of California, Irvine discuss several mutations, how they commonly impact treatment, and acquired resistance to inhibitors.

Download Resource Guide  | Descargar guía de recursos

See More from EPEP CLL

Related Resources:

CLL Expert Updates on Diagnostic Tool and Technology Advances

CLL Expert Updates on Diagnostic Tool and Technology Advances

CLL Clinical Trials for Molecularly Defined Patient Subgroups

CLL Clinical Trials for Molecularly Defined Patient Subgroups

Managing CLL Side Effects | Innovative Strategies and Approaches

Managing CLL Side Effects | Innovative Strategies and Approaches

Transcript:

Dr. Nicole Rochester:

Dr. Brown, how do CLL healthcare providers better understand mutation profiles including the emergence of novel CLL mutations over time?

Dr. Jennifer Brown:

Well, the first thing that’s important to recognize is that CLL is not defined by any particular mutation. The landscape is quite varied and we see a large number of different mutations at low percentages. Well, the second key point to remember is that there are different mutations at baseline and then there can be acquired mutations that include some of what we see at baseline, but also novel resistance mutations that we don’t ever see at base.

So at baseline, the most common mutations, which are somewhere in the 10 to 20 percent range of patients, although less than that if you have very early stage patients, affect the p53 gene, NOTCH1, SF3B1, and ATM. P53 is the most important because that one does influence our thinking about the patients and our choice of therapy in some cases. P53 can be altered in CLL in two different ways. Actually, the most common way is as a deletion, deletion of the short arm of chromosome 17 or 17P deletion. About 75 to 80 percent of patients that have that deletion will have a point mutation usually in the other p53 allele. So they have double knockout of p53.

A small percentage of people with the deletion will not have the mutation. And then a certain number of patients will have just the mutation without the deletion. And one of the things that I’ve been very interested in for a while that we’re still trying to understand better is the implications of these different combinations of the way p53 can be affected in people with CLL, and that it may, in fact, be more adverse to have both alleles knocked out than single, although we don’t have great data for that as yet because most of the data that we have has combined all of it together.

But it’s very important to test for the p53 mutation alone because even if patients have only that one, at present, we consider the treatment implications of it all similarly regardless of how the p53 gene is affected. And then NOTCH1 is a fairly common mutation that always worries us a lot, because it’s associated with Richter’s transformation, which is a very high-risk event, but we don’t know anything to do about that to try and prevent it or to alter our therapy based on it.

So at the moment it’s mostly something that we are aware of that we keep an eye on but not that changes therapy. And SF3B1, ATM, and this long list of other genes that can be mutated in just a few percent of CLL, and mostly what we know about them is some biology that’s been studied, and then the fact that the more of these mutations are mutated in a patient that is associated with a worse prognosis, just a total number.

But that’s not something also that really alters our therapy. And then when patients go through lines of therapy, they can sometimes acquire mutations in these genes. So a patient can acquire a mutation in p53 or in NOTCH after their second or third line of therapy. But the mutations that are hottest right now, or that people are most interested in are some of the mutations that occur as resistance to therapy.

So in particular, that means BTK mutations. Covalent BTK inhibitors have transformed the therapy of CLL, and they bind to the cysteine 481 residue of BTK. So that means, as you might imagine, that if you mutate that cysteine so that the inhibitor can’t bind, that will be associated with resistance. And that, in fact, is what has been found that the cysteine to serine mutation at 481 is the most common resistance mutation in patients on covalent BTK inhibitors.

And in the case of ibrutinib (Imbruvica), it makes the inhibitor into a much weaker and non-covalent inhibitor. In the case of acalabrutinib (Calquence) and zanubrutinib (Brukinsa), it probably abrogates all activity. And so that’s a mutation that we will sometimes look for in patients with clinical progression on those drugs. There’s also a mutation in BCL2 that can occur in patients in venetoclax (Venclexta).

So another example of an on target resistance mutation. The role of that one is a little bit less clear, and testing for it is not as widely available, but we’re still working on that. Resistance to venetoclax is probably more complicated than resistance to BTK inhibitors, although there’s also a subset of patients who will get BTK inhibitors who have novel mechanisms of resistance not related to BTK that we don’t really know anything about as yet.

And then finally, the non-covalent BTK inhibitors are becoming available, pirtobrutinib (Jaypirca) was approved for CLL in the United States in December for patients who’ve had covalent BTK inhibitors and venetoclax. And we’re starting to see different mutations in BTK at different sites, even though pirtobrutinib has activity against the 481 mutation. So there’s going to be a lot of activity in this area in the next few years probably.

Dr. Nicole Rochester:

Thank you so much Dr. Brown, that was a very comprehensive overview of the mutations. Dr. Coombs, do you have anything that you want to add to what Dr. Brown said perhaps specifically around mutations associated with the progression of CLL?

Dr. Callie Coombs:

Sure. So, that’s a hard act to follow. She really took us through a whirlwind of everything mutation-related. I think what I would like to focus on in my answer is, well, what should we be testing for on a day-to-day basis in our CLL practices and what are some common misconceptions? So specific to TP53, I would say this is the most important test as far as all of the genetic tests that influences what we do day to day in the care of patients with CLL. 

I test for this for my newly diagnosed patients who I think may be interested in enrolling in a clinical trial, first of all, so the standard of care in CLL is watch and wait, however, patients with higher risk disease may be eligible for trials looking at early intervention specifically the SWOG EVOLVE trial looking at early treatment. And so that’s one of the risk markers that can get a patient into the higher risk category of CLL where they could be eligible for a trial.

A common misconception I see is that 17p is the same thing as a TP53 mutation, it’s definitely not. So these are two different tests that have to be sent. 17p can be picked up on karyotype testing and on FISH testing where it looks for 17p deletion. However, mutations are a different test. And so I usually send a next gen sequencing assay that includes other genes.

However, you can test purely just for mutations in the TP53 gene, but again, that’s a sequencing test, so I’d like to convey that, somewhat a misunderstanding, but it’s such an important gene in CLL because when patients have TP53 aberrations, whether that’s 17P or a  TP53 mutation or both, given that they can occur in isolation or together, these patients should never get chemotherapy, because they have extremely terrible responses to chemo, and that should not be part of the therapies offered to these patients.

The other interesting, I’d say controversial at least in 2024, is what is the role for mutation testing in the clinic in the setting of acquired resistance to inhibitors? So I think it’s very clearly important in the research setting where I think learning about the C481 mutation among others in the setting of covalent BTK inhibitors has shown us a lot about mechanism of resistance. But in the clinic, I don’t necessarily think that’s something that needs to be universally applied, given that it most of the time doesn’t affect what we would do clinically. And so one example is a patient comes in progressing on ibrutinib, maybe about two-thirds of them may have a mutation in the C481S. However, if they’re clinically progressing, they need to switch therapy.


Share Your Feedback

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

CLL & Relapse: A Look at Available Treatment Options

CLL & Relapse: A Look at Available Treatment Options from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.

What chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) treatment options are available for relapsed patients? Expert Dr. Ryan Jacobs explains options for patients in relapse and for those seeking additional treatments.

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:

Emerging CLL Research: Understanding the CAPTIVATE and MAJIC Studies

Concerned About CLL Watch and Wait? Start Here

CLL and Vaccines | Vital Advice for Protecting Patients


Transcript:

Lisa Hatfield: 

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 (Venclexta). 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 (Imbruvica) or acalabrutinib (Calquence) or zanubrutinib (Brukinsa).

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 inhibitors and venetoclax and are looking for other options.


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