Posts

Which CLL Treatment Is Right for You? What You Need to Know

Which CLL Treatment Is Right for You? What You Need to Know from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo

What do you need to know before deciding which treatment is best for YOUR CLL? Dr. Lindsey Roeker discusses the role of key CLL tests, including biomarker testing, reviews emerging research, and provides tips for partnering with your care team to advocate for the best care. 

Download Guide

See More From INSIST! CLL


Related Resources

 

An Overview of CLL Treatment Types

What Should CLL Patients Know About Clinical Trial Treatment Options?

What Are the Goals of CLL Treatment?


Transcript:

Katherine:

Hello, and welcome. I’m Katherine Banwell, your host for today’s program. Today we’re going to discuss how to access the most personalized CLL treatment for your individual disease, and why it’s essential to insist on key testing. Before we meet our guest, let’s review a few important details. The reminder email you received about this program contains a link to program materials. If you haven’t already, click that link to access information, to follow along during the webinar.

At the end of this program, you’ll receive a link to a program survey. Please take a moment to provide feedback about your experience today, in order to help us plan future webinars. And finally, before we get into the discussion, please remember that this program is not a substitute for seeking medical advice. Please refer to your healthcare team about what might be best for you. Joining me today is Dr. Lindsay Roeker. Dr. Roker, thank you so much for joining us. Would you introduce yourself?

Dr. Roeker:                 

Absolutely. So, my name is Lindsey Roeker, and I am a member of the CLL program at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center in New York City.

Katherine:                  

Excellent, thank you. Let’s start at the beginning. How is CLL diagnosed?

Dr. Roeker:                 

Absolutely. So, for most patients, CLL is diagnosed after a routine blood test shows a high white blood cell count. That’s kinda the most common way that we find people entering into our clinic. Other things that people can notice is they have lumps or bumps that they’ve felt in their neck or under their armpits. Those are some other symptoms that can lead to the diagnosis, but often once a patient finds that their white blood cell count is high, some additional testing is done, and the diagnosis of CLL is made.

Katherine:                  

What are some common symptoms of CLL? You mentioned the lumps and bumps.

Dr. Roeker:                 

Yeah. So, often in early stages, the lumps and bumps in the neck are the most common that people recognize, but fevers or chills, night sweats, where patients are waking up drenched, having to change their pajamas, or weight loss without trying, are some other symptoms that can raise some alarm bells and make people start looking for something.

 And CLL can be a diagnosis that can be found through that, as well.

Katherine:                  

What is watch and wait?

Dr. Roeker:                 

So, after diagnosis, about two-thirds of patients enter this period of watch and wait, and what that means is we have good data to say that treating CLL before it’s causing symptoms doesn’t help people live better or live longer. And for that reason, we use the approach of watch and wait, and what that really means is you see your doctor a few times a year. I see people every three to four months. And you have your labs checked, have a physical exam, and through that process, just ensure that there are no symptoms that the CLL is causing that warrant therapy.

Katherine:                  

That’s very helpful. Thank you for that. Now, what tests are necessary to help understand a patient-specific disease, both at diagnosis and prior to treatment?

Dr. Roeker:                 

So, a diagnosis flow cytometry is the first test done, and what that means is, you take all of your white blood cells in your blood, and you run them through a fancy machine that puts them into buckets. So, you have a bucket of your normal neutrophils, a bucket of your normal lymphocytes, and then you find this bucket of cells that look somewhat unusual. And those have a specific look, if you will, and if they look like CLL cells, that’s how we make the diagnosis.

As you start reading, you’ll find that people talk about monoclonal B-cell lymphocytosis, which is MVL, CLL, and SLL, and a lot of times, it’s confusing because you start reading, and there are all of these – kind of lingo around it. So, what we’re looking for with flow cytometry is how many cells are in the peripheral blood? If it’s fewer than 5,000 per microliter – so, your doctor will talk to you; they’ll either say five or 5,000, depending on what units they’re using.

If it’s lower than that, and you don’t have any lumps or bumps or lymphadenopathy, meaning enlarged lymph nodes, that’s when we make the diagnosis of monoclonal B-cell lymphocytosis.

So, that’s kind of a pre-cancer diagnosis. Then, CLL, the diagnosis, is made in any patient who has greater than 5,000 cells per microliter, or five, if you’re using that unit, and that’s when the diagnosis of CLL is made. If people have lymph nodes that are enlarged, and there are CLL or SLL cells inside of them, but not a lot of involvement in the blood, that’s when we make the diagnosis of SLL, which is small lymphocytic lymphoma. So, CLL and SLL are really the same disease; it’s just where they manifest, primarily. So, whether it’s mostly in the blood, that’s CLL, or mostly in the lymph nodes, and that’s SLL.

Dr. Roeker:                 

Nope. So, that’s the flow cytometry test, and that’s kind of the test that leads to the diagnosis.

Katherine:                  

Got it. What about FISH and TP53 mutation?

Dr. Roeker:                 

So, at diagnosis, I often do this testing. Depending on which provider you go to, you may do it at diagnosis or closer to the time of needing treatment. But FISH is basically a test that looks for big changes in the chromosomes. So, if you remember back to high school biology and you see all of those chromosomes laid out, what FISH is looking for is big changes in those chromosomes. So, is there an entire arm of one of the chromosomes missing? And that’s what FISH does.

There’s also something called karyotyping, or in some institutions, they use something called SNP array. These are more refined tests that look for additional changes in the DNA. So, FISH is kind of a targeted look at a few different chromosomes, whereas karyotype or SNP array looks at all of the chromosomes. Then, there is TP53 mutational testing, and that is done through a bunch of different testing, often next-generation sequencing is what we use.

And we basically use a fancy spellcheck to see if there’s any misspellings, if you will, in TP53.

And TP53 is a gene that we use. It’s called the guardian of the genome. So, its job is basically to make sure that our cells are reproducing. They keep all the genes in working order. If TP53 is missing or misspelled, it doesn’t work as well, and that’s when people can get more issues with their CLL. It tends to be CLL that behaves a little more aggressively.

Katherine:                  

What about IGHV mutation status?

Dr. Roeker:                 

So, IGHV mutation status is a really important feature because it really is, of all of the things, what helps us understand the best way to go about therapy. And IGHV mutational status is basically a signature of the CLL that helps you understand how mature or immature the CLL cells are.

In general, mature cells tend to behave a little bit more predictively, and in ways that behave a bit better with therapy. So, the more mature cells are actually mutated IGHV, and I know that’s backward, because usually we think of mutated as being back. But in this case, mutated is actually those cells that are a bit more mature, and that just has to do with how white blood cells develop in our body. If it’s IGHV-unmutated, those tend to be the more immature cells that can behave a little more erratically.

Katherine:                  

Which tests need to be repeated over time?

Dr. Roeker:                 

So, IGHV mutational status never changes, so that one does not need to be repeated. TP53 mutational status, FISH, and karyotype or SNP array, are ones that I tend to repeat before we start any therapy. So, at the time that you’re going to start your frontline therapy, and then if you have the disease come back and need to be treated again, I usually repeat those tests because those can change over time.

So, that’s both FISH, karyotype or SNP array, and the TP53 mutational testing.

Katherine:                  

Okay. So, it sounds like it’s important for patients to make sure they’ve had this testing. What do the test results reveal about a patient’s prognosis?

Dr. Roeker:                 

So, IGHV mutational status, like I said, really helps us understand how to approach therapy. In general, CLL is a disease that we are increasingly managing with targeted medicines, so drugs that really manipulate the cell biology to either stop the growth of cells or kill the cells so that they pop open. And that has been a trend that has taken place over the last six or seven years, and definitely has revolutionized the treatment of CLL. There is still a small minority of patients, the patients who have IGHV-mutated disease, and are younger, and have fewer other medical problems, that can still be good candidates for chemotherapy.

And the reason that I say that is because in general, chemotherapy for those young, mutated patients cures a subset of patients, so when we look at long-term studies of FCR, which is a combination of chemo and immunotherapy, there are a subset of patients who have a really long period where their disease doesn’t come back, to the point that we call them cured or functionally cured. That’s obviously a word that has a lot of emotional charge around it, and it’s hard because there’s always the possibility of the disease coming back in the future.

But because of those long-term outcomes, we know that there’s some patients that can really have long-term benefit from chemoimmunotherapy.

For IGHV-unmutated patients, and especially for patients with TP53 mutations or deletion of 17p, chemoimmunotherapy really is not the right answer, with all of the medications that we have available to us now.

Katherine:                  

We have an audience question. Mike wants to know, “What does it mean to have high-risk CLL?”

Dr. Roeker:                 

So, great question, and the interesting thing is that I think the answer to that question is evolving. So, deletion of 17p, deletion of 11q, and TP53 mutation have historically been markers of more aggressive disease or unfavorable CLL. In the era where we only had chemo and immunotherapy, we know that patients had less great outcomes. We know that the treatments tended to not work as well, and patients had disease that tended to come back faster, and things like that.

 That’s all evolving in the era of targeted agents. We have some indication that probably patients who have more aggressive underlying disease biology, meaning disease that’s going to behave less well, kind of regardless of what we treat it with, certainly may derive less benefit, meaning that the treatment will work for less long. That being said, these treatments are still really effective for our patients who have traditionally high-risk disease. So, I think it still remains to be seen, in terms of long-term outcomes and what to expect for patients that have these traditionally high-risk characteristics.

Katherine:                  

So, now that we understand how these tests affect prognosis, let’s discuss how they can affect treatment options. Let’s run through a few potential results so we can understand how you might approach each patient type. If someone has deletion 17p, what is the approach?

Dr. Roeker:                 

So, there are two totally reasonable frontline treatment options.

So, BTK inhibitors, which are – the current approved ones are ibrutinib and acalabrutinib, are completely a reasonable approach in the frontline setting, meaning the first treatment that someone gets, and those are pills that you take daily. For ibrutinib, it’s once a day. For acalabrutinib, it’s twice a day, for as long as they’re working. And the idea is, with this approach, you keep on those medicines, and they keep the disease suppressed. So, that’s the first option.

The second totally reasonable option is a combination of venetoclax and obinutuzumab. So, venetoclax is a pill and obinutuzumab is an IV medicine, and the way that this was studied was a total of one year of therapy. So, from the time you start until you’re done with all of your treatments, that’s a one-year course. And the drugs have different side effect profiles, and depending on other medical problems, patient preference about, let’s just take a pill and that’s easy, versus the combination of pill and IV medicines, either can be a completely reasonable choice.

It just depends a lot on patient and doctor preference.

Katherine:                  

What about the TP53 mutation?

Dr. Roeker:                 

So, both of those treatment options seem to work very well for TP53-mutated patients. We had that discussion about the possibility of chemoimmunotherapy for a small minority of patients, and for patients with a TP53 mutation, using chemoimmunotherapy up front is probably not the correct answer. It’s better to go with one of the targeted drug approaches.

Katherine:                  

You mentioned, Dr. Roeker, the IGHV mutated and unmutated. How would you approach each patient type, if a patient is IGHV unmutated?

Dr. Roeker:                 

So, IGHV-unmutated is the same discussion. Chemoimmunotherapy is probably not going to provide a durable, meaning it’s not going to last for a long time. We’re not going to achieve that potential cure. So, for those patients, either the BTK inhibitor approach, or the venetoclax/Obinutuzumab approach is completely a reasonable one to take.

Katherine:                  

And if they’re IGHV-mutated?

Dr. Roeker:                 

IGHV-mutated patients who are young and don’t have a lot of other medical problems, that’s when we add in the third option of chemoimmunotherapy. For many patients, it’s not wrong to choose either a BTK inhibitor or venetoclax/Obinutuzumab, but it does add in that third potential option of chemoimmunotherapy.

Katherine:                  

Are there other markers that patients should know about?

Dr. Roeker:                 

I think those are the big ones.

So, TP53 mutation status, FISH, and karyotype kind of gets you most of them. Some centers do additional next-generation sequencing of other genes that have been associated with higher-risk disease, though really understanding how to interpret those results still remains somewhat unclear, and that’s still an area of research that people are doing, to really understand what those other mutations really mean for people.

Katherine:                  

What about the impact of testing, overall? Why is it so important?

Dr. Roeker:                 

So, as we’ve moved from a disease that was really only treated with chemoimmunotherapy, to one that has targeted drugs available, knowing your IGHV mutational status really impacts what your frontline treatment options are. That’s the major therapy-defining risk factor. The other mutations help you know what to expect. So, for patients who have deletion of 17p or TP53 mutation, it’s possible that the treatments are going to, overall, work for a shorter period of time.

All that being said, every person is an individual, and it’s hard to predict exactly how long someone’s going to respond, from an individual basis. So, what I tell my patients is, “I could tell you what 100 of people with exactly your same disease would do, on average, but I can’t tell you exactly what’s going to happen for you. And that’s a journey that we’re going to take together and really understand over time.”

Katherine:                  

These are really great points, Dr. Roeker. Now, we’ve talked about this a little bit. What are other important factors to consider, like a patient’s age, that can help them access the best treatment for their CLL?

Dr. Roeker:                 

So, age is important. Other medical problems is actually a very important consideration.

So, these medications have different side effect profiles and behave differently in different people. So, the BTK inhibitors, specifically ibrutinib is the one that we have the most data on, has cardiovascular side effects, so it can cause atrial fibrillation. It can cause high blood pressure. So, for patients who have preexisting heart disease, or preexisting atrial fibrillation that has been hard to control, or blood pressure that has been hard to control, for those people, I think adding in a BTK inhibitor can be a bit more of a higher risk situation than in somebody without those preexisting problems.

Venetoclax is a pill that causes the cell to burst open rapidly, and it kills cells very quickly. Because of that, the major side effect is called tumor lysis syndrome, and tumor lysis syndrome is basically the cell opens up and all of the salt inside of it goes into the bloodstream.

And that salt can actually be really hard on the kidneys. So, for people who have kidney problems, venetoclax can be somewhat more challenging to use and just requires a higher level of vigilance. So, for patients who have preexisting kidney disease or the idea of a lot of monitoring and things like that, is more challenging. Then maybe the BTK inhibitors are a better choice.

Katherine:                  

How do you monitor whether a treatment is working?

Dr. Roeker:                 

So, a lot of it has to do with the CBC, so your normal blood count, and what we’re looking for is improvement in hemoglobin and improvement or normalization of platelet count. And for many people, those, either anemia or low platelets, are the symptoms that drive people to be treated in the first place, so we’re looking for those parameters to get better.

With a lot of people with CLL, totally understandably, because it’s the number that’s the most abnormal, really focused on white blood cell count. 100% understandable.

I always tell people that that’s actually the part of the CBC that I care least about, and the reason is that, for patients on BTK inhibitors, we expect to see the white blood count actually get higher before it gets less high. That’s actually just a sign that the drug is working and it’s pulling CLL cells from the lymph nodes into the bloodstream. So, that’s actually a good sign that it’s working, and that lymphocyte count, at least in the beginning, isn’t a great marker of how well the drug is working.

The other thing that’s important is the physical exam, so looking for whether any lymph nodes that were enlarged have normalized or gone away, and also feeling the sides of the spleen, because the spleen can become enlarged with CLL, and it’s important to make sure that’s normalizing, as well.

And then the last piece is talking to people, so making sure that if they were having fatigue, or fevers, or night sweats before they started treatment, to make sure that those symptoms have gone away. And that’s kind of the three things that I use. I use the blood counts, the physical exam, and the interview with a patient to really understand how their disease is responding.

Katherine:                  

Dr. Roeker, why is it important for patients to speak up if they’re experiencing side effects? I know that they sometimes feel like they’re bothering their healthcare team.

Dr. Roeker:                 

Thank you for that question, because it’s really important point. Side effects are easiest to manage when you catch them early. So, when people have, for instance, muscle pain or joint aches, I have lots of tricks up my sleeve to help people, but I need to know about it. So, if people don’t tell me until they have joint pain that’s so bad that they’re not able to exercise or not able to get out of bed easily in the morning, that’s taking it – it’s gone on for a while at that point, and it’s pretty far down the line.

First of all, you wouldn’t have had to suffer for that long because we have ways of fixing it, and second, it’s always harder to fix a problem once it’s further down the line than earlier on. So, I talk to people about what side effects they might experience and what to expect, and then we talk about different management strategies to really nip it early so that we’re not dealing with a really huge problem down the line.

Katherine:                  

We have a question from our audience. Maria asks, “I just found out that I will need to undergo treatment again. I was previously treated with FCR. Does that impact my options now, going forward?”

Dr. Roeker:                 

Great question. So, FCR was a really common treatment strategy before we had all of the drugs that we have available now. We have good data to say that both BTK inhibitors and venetoclax-based treatments work after chemoimmunotherapy. In fact, those were the patients in whom these drugs were really initially studied, so we actually know better in that group of patients how they’re going to work, than in the patients who have never been treated with them, in terms of the amount of data and the long-term follow-up that we have.

So, most likely, your provider will still talk to you about kind of the two therapeutic option being a BTK inhibitor-based approach versus a venetoclax-based approach, and either are completely appropriate in that setting.

Katherine:                  

We have another question from our audience. Eileen is currently in active treatment for her CLL, and she wants to know, “Is the COVID-19 vaccine safe for her?”

Dr. Roeker:                 

Great question. So, here is my take on COVID vaccines. We have great data on the safety of these vaccines, so the risk of a life-threatening allergic reaction is very, very low, less than one in a thousand. We know that it can cause some irritation at the injection site, so pain in your arm. We know that it can cause some kinda flu-like, blah symptoms for a couple of days, totally fine to take ibuprofen and kinda get yourself through that period.

But from a safety perspective, I don’t have concerns about these vaccines. There’s a lot of social media coverage on long-term implications that are either not based on data, at all, and just speculation, and people who are trying to raise alarm, or people who are really bringing up bad things that are happening to people really far out from the vaccine. And I think it’s really hard to attribute that to the vaccine. Obviously, any time there is a new technology, there’s the possibility of things happening, and we’re going to know more with time, but I think, overall, from a scientific perspective, there is no data that makes me worried about the safety of this vaccine.

The efficacy question, I think, is more of an open question, and the reason I say that is two-fold. The first is, we know that patients with CLL who get other vaccines, some get 100% coverage, some get zero percent coverage, and some are somewhere in between.

And it’s hard to predict who is going to fall where. So, that’s the first piece. The second piece is, we’ve looked at patients who had CLL and got COVID, and we saw if they made antibodies, which is kind of a marker of an immune response, and it’s not consistent that every patient who got COVID makes antibodies.

So, the combination of those two pieces of data makes me question exactly how well they’re going to work. So, what I’m telling my patients is, “Definitely go ahead and get it. I think it’s safe. And then pretend that you didn’t get it.” So, I know that’s hard advice to hear, but continue wearing a mask, continue social distancing, and continue to wash your hands. And then, every interaction you have is a risk-benefit discussion or decision. So, that’s different for every person, but in general, I recommend that people continue being cautious.

Once the whole population around you is vaccinated and we have less virus circulating in the community, that’s when it’s going to be substantially safer. So, definitely, I recommend that people get it, regardless of whether you are on watch and wait, getting treatment, have just finished treatment, whatever it is, but I do think there’s reason to be cautious even after getting vaccinated.

Katherine:                  

Are there symptoms or issues CLL patients should be looking out for, post-vaccine?

Dr. Roeker:                 

Not particularly, beyond what people are getting in kind of the general population. If you’re having a lot of those kind of flu-like symptoms, just talk to your provider to make sure that ibuprofen is safe, because if your platelets are really low, that can cause bleeding. But Tylenol is typically pretty safe, and talk to your doctor about which medicines are kinda best for you to take in that situation, but no particular concerns in patients with CLL.

Katherine:                  

Okay. Thank you for the clarification. As I mentioned at the start of this program, patients should insist on essential CLL testing. As we conclude, I think it’s important to point out that some patients may not know if they’ve received these important tests, so how can they take action?

Dr. Roeker:                 

So, the next time you’re at your doctor, ask, “I just want to know more about the prognosis of my CLL, and can we talk through the genetic markers of my disease, to help me understand what to expect?” That’s kind of code for, “Let’s go through all of these test results,” and it also – if you have a provider who doesn’t routinely test them at diagnosis, and for instance, just tests before treatment, they can also kind of give you their sense of when they do the testing, so you know what to expect. And I think that’s an important discussion to have with your provider, for sure.

Katherine:                  

Are there key questions that patients should ask their physicians?

Dr. Roeker:                 

I’m always impressed with the questions that people come up with. I think one of the best is, what should I expect, based on what we’re doing now? It’s always a hard question to answer because, obviously, for any patient, it’s so individualized, but I think understanding what to expect, as a general sense, is a good way to approach both treatment and prognosis, and all of those kinds of things.

Katherine:                  

I’d like to close by asking about developments in CLL research and treatment. What’s new that you feel patients should know about?

Dr. Roeker:                 

So, there are a lot of exciting drugs coming up in CLL. We have the BTK inhibitors, ibrutinib and acalabrutinib approved. We have more BTK inhibitors with different side effect profiles that are in development.

And there’s also a new class of drugs called noncovalent BTK inhibitors, which seem to work well, even when prior BTK inhibitors have stopped working. So, that’s a really exciting development. There is also just lots of studies about how we combine drugs to maximize efficacy while minimizing side effects, and all of these studies that are underway are really looking at refining how we approach treatment so that we can treat people very effectively but also minimize their side effects.

And as we have more results available, the treatment paradigm for CLL is going to continue to shift and evolve, and I think there are a lot of exciting things coming, and there’s definitely a lot of reason to be hopeful, that the future of CLL is even brighter than the present.

Katherine:                  

It all sounds very promising, Dr. Roeker. Thank you so much for joining us today.

Dr. Roeker:                 

Thank you so much for having me. I really appreciate it.

Katherine:                  

And thank you to all of our partners. If you would like to watch this webinar again, there will be a replay available soon. You’ll receive an email when it’s ready. And don’t forget to take the survey, immediately following this webinar. It will help us as we plan future programs. To learn more about CLL and to access tools to help you become a proactive patient, visit powerfulpatients.org. I’m Katherine Banwell. Thanks for joining us.

How to Play an Active Role in Your CLL Treatment Decisions

How to Play an Active Role in Your CLL Treatment Decisions from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.

How can you partner with your healthcare team to feel confident in your CLL decisions? In this webinar replay, Dr. Matthew Davids discusses CLL treatment approaches, developing research and tools for partnering with your healthcare team. Dr. Matthew Davids is the Director of Clinical Research in the Division of Lymphoma at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute.

Download Guide

See More from Engage CLL


Related Resources:

 

Which CLL Treatment Approach Could be Right for You?

Transcript:

Katherine:                  

Hello and welcome. I’m Katherine Banwell, your host for today’s program. Today we’re going to explore the factors that guide CLL treatment decisions, including your role in making those decisions. Before we meet our guest, let’s review a few important details. The reminder email you received about this program contains a link to program materials. If you haven’t already, click that link to access information to follow along during the webinar. And at the end of this program, you will receive a link to a program survey. This will allow you to provide feedback about your experience today, and it will help us plan future webinars.

Finally, before we get into the discussion, please remember that this is not a substitute for seeking medical advice. Refer to your own healthcare team. All right, let’s meet our guest today. Joining me is Dr. Matthew Davids. Dr. Davids, would you please introduce yourself?

Dr. Davids:                  

Hi, Katherine. Thanks so much for having me. It’s great to be with everyone today. I’m Matt Davids. I’m a CLL-focused physician based at Dana Farber Cancer Institute in Boston, and I’m also an associate professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School. And I get to wear many hats here. First and foremost, I take care of patients, particularly patients with CLL, but I also have some administrative roles. I direct our clinical research program in the lymphoma division. I also run a research laboratory focused on CLL and other lymphoid cancers, and I run about a dozen clinical trials mostly focused on developing new treatment options for patients with CLL.

Katherine:                  

Wow. Sounds like you’re a busy guy. I’m glad you have the time to join us today.

Dr. Davids:                  

My pleasure.

Katherine:                  

Let’s start with a question that’s on the mind of many of our audience members. Is the COVID-19 vaccine safe for CLL patients?

Dr. Davids:                 

Very timely question. The simple answer is yes. There are now actually three different vaccines that have been granted emergency use authorization by the FDA.

And I would say that so far, we’ve seen clinical trial evidence suggesting these are very safe vaccines in the general population.

Our own experience with our own CLL patients so far has also suggested safety, so I think it’s very important that our CLL patients get vaccinated as soon as they can. I think the bigger concern more than safety is on the efficacy side of the vaccine, meaning how effective are these vaccines going to be for CLL patients? That’s not something that we know yet from the larger clinical trials that have been done. So, those numbers you see quoted, 95 percent protective, that’s in the general populations.

We do worry a bit based on our experience with other vaccines in CLL patients that they may not be quite as effective, but we don’t know that yet. Fortunately, that’s something that we’re studying now, both at our center and in some nationwide efforts, to look for example at the antibody production that CLL patients can make before and after vaccination. I’m hopeful that over the next few months we’ll start to learn about how effective these vaccines are specifically for CLL patients.

We certainly expect they will have some benefit, so that’s why we recommend vaccination for all of our CLL patients. But once patients are vaccinated, it doesn’t give them a free pass to then take their masks off and go back to normal life. Particularly CLL patients I think need to be careful even after vaccination to continue to do social distancing, hand hygiene, and all these things.

Katherine:                  

Is there one type of vaccine that’s more suited for CLL patients?

Dr. Davids:                 

Nope. As far as we can tell, all three of the approved vaccines so far are safe and should have some good effects for CLL patients.

There’s no benefit of one versus the others, so the best one to get is the one that’s in your muscle and injected. Whatever you can get access to, that’s the best one for you.

Katherine:                  

Dr. Davids, have there been any recent developments in CLL treatment and research that patients should know about?

Dr. Davids:                 

Yeah. We could spend a few hours on this, but I’ll try to summarize it. There’s a lot of exciting developments in the field. and I think we’re going to get into some of the specific treatments in a few minutes, but I would say at a high level obviously, over the last decade the entire field of CLL treatment has been transformed. Whereas we only had chemotherapy-based approaches before, now we have a whole number of different drugs that we call novel agents. And the reason why they’re novel is that they target the CLL cells, but they spare the other cells in the body, so there’s less collateral damage there. What that means is that they have fewer side effects, and they’re more effective, so it’s really a win-win situation for patients.

There’s kind of been two main approaches for this.

One is to start a novel agent drug and to continue it for as long as it’s helping, which fortunately for most patients is a long time, many years. And then, a newer approach is actually to do what’s called time-limited therapy where you start usually at least a couple of these different novel drugs together but hopefully achieve what we call a very deep remission, meaning excellent shrinkage of lymph nodes and improvement of blood counts and bone marrow disease. And by getting these very deep remissions the idea is we can do a finite period of treatment, whether it’s one year or two years, it kind of depends on the regimen. And then, stop therapy and hope that patients can then enjoy many years of remission while off therapy, which can be nice in terms of reducing side effects and costs and all these other things.

So, those are the biggest developments in the field right now, the continuous novel agent therapy and time-limited novel agent therapy. And a lot of the clinical trials that are getting off the ground now are starting to compare these two strategies to figure out really what’s the optimal way to treat CLL patients.

Katherine:                  

How can patients stay up-do-date on developments like these?

Dr. Davids:                 

It’s definitely challenging. It’s challenging even for us who are in the field to keep up with things on the academic side. I think for patients, seeking out patient-friendly sources of information on the web are helpful, but sometimes it can be hard to know what’s reliable information on the web. So websites like this and programs like this I think can be very helpful. Another resource that a lot of my patients find helpful is the CLL Society, so www.cllsociety.org. Brian Koffman really curates a lot of the new developments in the field on that website nicely. He interviews a lot of different CLL experts in this short format that can be very digestible for patients. Patient Power is another great website. So, there are a bunch of them out there, and I think those can be a great resource for our patients.

Katherine:                  

When a person is diagnosed with CLL they have a whole healthcare team. Who’s typically on that team?

Dr. Davids:                 

It’s definitely a multidisciplinary team.

Usually there’s an oncologist-hematologist who’s leading the team as a physician, but there’s a very large team of other people who are involved, whether it’s an advanced practice person such as a nurse practitioner or a physician’s assistant. They’re often very closely involved with the day-to-day patient care. There’s nurse navigators in some places that can help with getting access to these novel agents and with looking into clinical trial opportunities. There’s pharmacy folks who are very helpful sometimes in checking in on side effects, and advising on dosing, and so forth.

That’s more on the provider side of things. But, of course, the care team really includes the caregivers for the patient, whether it’s family members or friends, who are really a crucial part of this. The field is very complicated, and one of the challenges with COVID recently is that I’ve always invited family members and friends to come to visits with patients, because I do think it’s helpful to have many people listening. And that’s been hard because we’ve had to restrict visitors usually to either no visitors or one visitor because of COVID precautions.

Even if that’s the case, you can still have people dial in by phone or use technologies like FaceTime to try to have them there with you, because I think having that extra set of ears can be helpful as you hear all this information coming at you from your oncologist.

Katherine:                  

Yeah, absolutely. So, it really does sound like it’s a whole team approach. We have a question from the audience. Linda writes, “I’ve heard that CLL doesn’t need to be treated right away. Is that true?” 

Dr. Davids:                 

That is true for the majority of CLL patients, and it’s actually a very counterintuitive thing. We’re conditioned that if you have cancer that it’s important to be proactive and get rid of it as quickly as possible, the sooner the better, and that is actually not the case in CLL. And we didn’t just take a guess that that’s the best approach. This is actually something that’s been studied in clinical trials. There were several clinical trials launched in the ‘70s and ‘80s looking at an early intervention strategy using a chemotherapy-based approach to see if treating at the time of diagnosis would be better than waiting until patients developed more significant symptoms.

And all of those studies did not show a benefit to early intervention.

Now, more recently those studies have been challenged as somewhat out of date, which is a fair criticism because they used an older chemotherapy drug. And so, there is a newer study now going on in Europe that is looking at early intervention with the drug ibrutinib, which is one of our novel agents for CLL, looking to see if early intervention with ibrutinib, particularly for patients who have a higher risk form of CLL, may be beneficial.

But we have seen some data now already presented from this study that do not show any improvement in how long the patients live by treating with ibrutinib early, and we do see some of the typical side effects that we’re accustomed to seeing with ibrutinib. So, even with the newer data that we’re seeing, we still do not recommend early intervention for patients with CLL.

Katherine:                  

I’ve heard this term “watch and wait.” What does that mean?

Dr. Davids:                 

Yeah, it’s not the best term because it’s very passive. That refers to this observation strategy. I like to think of it more as “active surveillance.” It seems more proactive because you’re doing something about it.

You’re really checking the blood counts, you’re getting your physical exam, you’re checking in on symptoms, these sorts of things, and really keeping a close eye on the disease. And that’s the approach that we like to take with our patients to really keep them engaged, making sure they’re staying up-to-date on their screenings for other cancers, making sure they’re getting vaccinations, these sorts of things are all the things we do with active surveillance.

Katherine:                  

How is someone monitored during this watch-and-wait period?

Dr. Davids:                 

It varies depending on individual patients. We’ve alluded to the fact that there’s different genetic subgroups of CLL already, so there are some patients that have higher-risk disease. The example of that usually is deletion 17p that people may have heard of on the FISH test. For those patients I usually am seeing them every three months or so, physical exam, checking on their history, checking their bloodwork. But there’s quite a few CLL patients who have lower-risk disease. If they have for example mutated IGHV, if they do not have the 17p for example, those patients may be able to be seen once every six months or so with a similar setup.

 I don’t routinely get CAT scans on a regular basis for most patients. Most patients don’t need bone marrow biopsy tests unless they’re starting treatment. So, it’s mostly it’s exam, talking to patients, and checking the bloodwork.

Katherine:                  

Okay. So, how does CLL progress? When do you know when it’s time to treat?

Dr. Davids:                 

The stages of CLL involve the progression of the disease. When we first meet patients, often they only have cells circulating in the blood, and that’s called stage 0 disease. It’s one of the few cancers where there’s actually a Stage 0 before even Stage I, and the reason for that is that many patients can go for years on Stage 0 disease. But as the burden of the CLL cells begin to accumulate in the body they can start to collect in their lymph nodes, and the lymph nodes can start to swell up whether it’s in the neck or the armpits or elsewhere. That’s stage I disease.

They can accumulate in the spleen, which is an organ in the abdomen. It’s kind of a big filter for your bloodstream, and as the filter traps more of these lymphocytes the spleen can slowly enlarge over time. That’s stage II disease.

And then finally, the CLL cells can get into the bone marrow, which is like the factory for making your blood cells. And if the factory floor gets all gummed up with CLL cells it can’t make the normal red cells, that’s called anemia. Or it can’t make the normal platelet cells, that’s called thrombocytopenia. And when we start to see those more advanced stages III and IV of CLL, that usually does require treatment. And what the treatment does is it clears out the factory floor and it allows for the normal machinery to make the normal blood cells again. So, that’s one of the more common reasons why treatment is needed is due to anemia and low platelets. Second reason can be if the lymph nodes or spleen get so bulky that they’re uncomfortable or threatening organs internally. We want to treat before that becomes a real threat.

And then, the third thing that usually happens as the disease progresses, patients can develop some symptoms, what we call constitutional symptoms. These can be things like unintentional weight loss, drenching night sweats that are happening on a consistent basis, and those sorts of things. So, if that’s happening at the same time as these other factors are progressing, those would be reasons to treat.

And notice that one thing I did not say is the white blood cell count itself.

That’s a common misconception. Some people think that as the white blood cell count goes higher – and people use all different thresholds, 100, 200 – that by crossing that threshold you need to start treatment. And in fact, that’s not the case. We have many patients whose white blood cell count can get very high but then it can kind of level off and plateau for a period of several years, and as long as they don’t meet those other treatment indications, they don’t need to be treated just based on the white count alone.

Katherine:                  

Hmm, okay. Well, once it’s time to treat, of course then it’s time to think about treatment options. Let’s walk through the types of treatments that are used today to treat CLL.

Dr. Davids:                 

As I alluded to before, we historically have had chemotherapy-based approaches to treat CLL. And that was an effective way to temporarily put the disease into remission, but it had a lot of side effects and inevitably the CLL would come back. And the challenge particularly with chemotherapy-based approaches it that when the CLL does come back after chemotherapy, it tends to behave more aggressively and be harder to treat.

So, there have been quite a few studies over the last few years trying to figure out ways that we can avoid using chemotherapy as the first treatment, and this can involve treatments such as monoclonal antibodies. People may have heard of rituximab or a newer drug, obinutuzumab. There are the inhibitors of the B-cell receptor pathway, and this is for example ibrutinib, which targets a protein called BTK, also a newer one called acalabrutinib, which targets BTK. And then, I mentioned at the beginning these fixed-duration therapies that stop after a period of time. Many of those are based on a newer oral drug called venetoclax, which when we give it as a first therapy, we give in combination with that antibody obinutuzumab.

So, a bit of an alphabet soup. I know it gets confusing with all the different treatments, but the good news for CLL patients is, 1.) we have a lot of options, which is great, 2.) we don’t necessarily need to use chemotherapy anymore, and in fact I use it pretty rarely these days. One situation where I do still consider chemotherapy is for younger patients – which in the CLL world is sort of under age 60 or so – if they have very favorable biology to the disease, in particular this mutated IGHV.

That’s a scenario where the older chemotherapy regimen, FCR, can be very effective. It’s a six-month treatment, and we have patients with those molecular characteristics who are now 12, almost 15 years out from their initial six months, and they’re still in a complete remission. So, many of those patients have been functionally cured of their CLL from the six months of treatment. But again, there are some risks to that approach. We worry about other cancers that may be more likely after receiving FCR. We worry about infections, and particularly in the COVID situation, we worry about COVID infection in patients on chemotherapy.

So, it’s been pretty rare that I’ve been using that approach these days. I’ve been opting more for the novel agent-based approaches. So, often now the conversation as an initial therapy comes down to, “Do you prefer more of a continuous treatment strategy with a BTK inhibitor drug like ibrutinib or acalabrutinib, or do you like the idea of a time-limited therapy with one year of venetoclax in combination with obinutuzumab?” And I would say there’s pros and cons to both approaches, and we don’t know which one is the optimal one for CLL patients to start with, but probably I think most patients at some point in their lifetime are going to need one therapy or the other.

So, maybe in the end it doesn’t matter too much which one you start with if you’re going to get both eventually anyway. But we don’t know that yet.

Katherine:                  

Right. Where do clinical trials fit in with the treatment approaches?

Dr. Davids:                 

So, clinical trials are really how we’ve made all these advances in CLL over the last decade. It’s how we learn about new treatments. It’s how we learn about how to optimize the treatments that we have. I think sometimes patients have a misconception that clinical trials are a last resort, the idea that you’ve exhausted all the standard options and then you go to a clinical trial as your last hope. But I actually like to kind of turn that on its head and say that clinical trials are actually the first resort, the first best option for patients. Whenever patients can get access to a clinical trial at any stage of their disease, I would really encourage them to consider it.

We have quite a few clinical trials now in the frontline setting, meaning as an initial treatment for CLL, including some that are in development and will open soon. And these are the studies that are going to really help us define what the optimal regimens are. What’s the optimal sequence of these different novel agents?

And in CLL, really, we’re at a point where the research on the disease is so mature that when you’re in a clinical trial you’re either going to be on one regimen that you know you’re getting and you know it’s going to be an effective regimen, or you might be in a comparative trial where you could be randomized to one of two or three different regiments, but you know that each one of those regimens is one that we think is a great regimen. We just don’t know which one is optimal for individual patients. So, this is not a situation where there’s placebo-controlled trials where you don’t know if you’re going to get an active treatment or not. CLL is an area where we design our clinical trials so that all patients are going to be benefiting from cutting-edge approaches.

And so, not all patients have access to trials, and that’s okay. Again, we’re fortunate that we have many good options that can be given locally, but I do encourage patients even if they’re only able to travel to a CLL specialist once to have an initial consultation to think about doing that to get a CLL specialist on your team, so to speak. That way they can identify clinical trial options that may be a good fit, and even if not, they can advise on what the optimal treatment options are to receive locally with your own oncologist.

Katherine:                  

How do patients find out about these clinical trials?

Dr. Davids:                 

I do think the best way is through a CLL specialist because certainly they would have a great pulse on the trials, they have available at their own center. They should also have a sense for what trials are available maybe at other centers. Some of that can also be, there’s a great resource through The Leukemia & Lymphoma Society where they can help navigate patients toward specific trials that may be applicable to them.

There’s also a website called clinicaltrials.gov. It can be a little challenging if you’re not familiar with it to navigate the site, but it is actually pretty straightforward. You can put in the disease and look at different options for trials based on different drugs, for example. They’ll list the eligibility criteria for the trial. That’s often I find a way that patients can begin to identify whether they may be a candidate. You can’t tell from the website whether you’re definitely a candidate or not. You really need to partner with an investigator who’s on the trial to learn that, but it certainly can be a good starting point to figure out what’s out there.

Katherine:                  

With CLL, what are the goals of treatment?

Dr. Davids:                 

I like to say to patients, “The goals are to make you live longer and live better.” You want to obviously have treatments that prolong life, but you also want to have treatments that are helping with symptoms, and giving patients more energy, and making them feel better, and protecting them from some of the risks of the disease. And so, I think the goals do vary a bit based on the stage of life that patients are at.

I see a lot of patients in their 70s and 80s, and in those patient’s symptom control, having the disease be in a good remission, allowing them to live their life is a good goal. I sometimes see patients in their 40s and 50s, and some of those patients want to be a bit more aggressive and try to do a strategy that will get them a very long-term remission, and even potentially explore potentially curative strategies.

If I have a higher-risk patient with deletion 17p who’s young and fit, and they’ve already had some of the novel treatments, that’s where we start thinking about clinical trials of some of the cellular therapies like CAR-T cells that people may have heard of where you use the T cells from the patient to try to use that as a therapy to kill off the disease. Or even a bone marrow transplant is something that we have used historically in CLL. We don’t use it as often now, but for younger patients with high-risk disease it’s still a consideration to try to achieve a cure of the CLL even though the risks of that are significant.

It sounds like there are several factors to weigh then in making this decision. Lately we’ve been hearing the term “shared decision-making,” which basically means that patients and clinicians collaborate to make healthcare decisions.

And it can help patients take a more active role in their care. What are your thoughts, Dr. Davids, on how best to make this process work?

Dr. Davids:                 

Yeah, I fully support that model. I think for most patients it’s very helpful to be an important decision maker. Really the patient is the ultimate decision maker to say what they want for their own treatment. And sometimes it’s hard for me to predict what a patient will want for themselves, so I see my role for most patients as providing the information that they need to make the best decision possible for themselves.

I do try to steer patients a bit in the directions that I think they should be thinking. I’m not going to necessarily present a laundry list of things to patients. I’m going to try to narrow it down to what I think are the most reasonable choices for a patient to make.

I feel that’s part of my job. I do still have patients who just say, “Just tell me what to do,” and I respect that, too. Not all patients want to be part of shared decision making, and they just want me to decide, and that’s fine. But I do find that most patients like the idea of having a voice and being the one to decide, and that way I can help to guide them, but ultimately, it’s up to them.

Katherine:                  

Well, speaking of patients having a voice, are there questions that patients should consider asking when they’re thinking about a proposed treatment plan?

Dr. Davids:                 

Yeah. I think some of the key ones revolve around basic stuff, but sometimes it’s hard to think of it in the moment. But thinking about, what are the risks of this therapy? What are the specific side effects that are most common? When you look at a package insert or you look at a clinical trial consent form, you’re going to see 100 different side effects listed. I always promise patients, “You won’t have every single side effect that’s listed here, but you may have a couple of them.” And again, my role often is to identify which are the more common side effects that we see and how can those be managed?

And then, I think often you’re just asking simply about what are the potential benefits of this therapy? What are the odds that I’m going to get into remission? How long is this remission likely to last?

And then, something that is often challenging for patients to think about – it can be challenging for me as well – is to think about what’s the next step? So, I think a good question to ask is, “If I choose Therapy A, what happens if I need therapy again in a few years? What are the options at that point?” because we’ve been talking so far mostly about what we call frontline therapy, making that initial choice of treatment. But then, once you get into what we call the relapse setting, a lot of the decision of what to receive at that point depends on what you got as the first therapy. And so, trying to think at least one step ahead as to what the next options are I think can be helpful, certainly for the physicians but also for the patients.

Katherine:                  

Do you have any advice to help patients speak up when they’re feeling like their voice isn’t being heard?

Dr. Davids:                 

That’s always a challenging situation, but I encourage patients not to be shy about asking questions.

There’s often an imbalance in terms of the information where the oncologist may know more than the patient about a particular condition. And so, I think reading up and trying to educate yourself as much as you can. Whenever possible, including a family member or friend as part of the visit to also help advocate for you. And then, if you’re not being heard the way that you think you should be, thinking about seeking out another provider who may be able to listen more.

And sometimes that can be again helpful to have a touchpoint with a CLL specialist who may be able to reinforce some of what you’re thinking. If what you’re reading online or seeing online is different from what your oncologist is telling you, that may be a sign that it’s good to get a second opinion and just make sure you’re on the right track.

Katherine:                  

All really helpful advice, Dr. Davids. Before we end the program, what are your thoughts about the future of CLL treatment and research?

Dr. Davids:                 

I’m very optimistic about where things are right now. We’ve gotten to this point where we have so many different effective options, so it’s fun for us to now design this next wave of clinical trials to really try to optimize the outcomes for patients.

One area I’m particularly interested in is a concept called MRD, which we haven’t talked about yet, but minimal residual disease is a way to look even at a molecular level for tiny amounts of CLL that may be left behind after treatments. And so, one of the things I’m particularly excited about is the idea eventually of using what we call MRD-guided therapy.

So, we talked before about continuous treatment. We talked about what we call fixed-duration treatment where everyone gets a year or everyone gets two years. MRD-guided therapy would actually allow us to vary the length of therapy depending on how a particular patient responds. So, some patients may need one year of a particular combination, but other patients may need two years. This could be a way to really individualize therapy for particular patients. It’s also a way to monitor patients who are in remission after they’ve stopped therapy.

And so, there’s another wave of trials looking at, should we be intervening early when patients develop recurrence of their MRD rather than waiting until they’re having progression of the disease? There’s still a lot of unanswered questions about these sorts of approaches, but I think it’s going to help us get even better at treating CLL.

All of this is contingent though upon the fact that patients continue to be interested in clinical trials and enrolling in trials so that we can really push the boundaries and learn even more about the disease. So, again, if no other message comes through, it’s really to think about clinical trials as a way to continue to improve outcomes for all patients with CLL. I think it’s a great situation where both the individual patient who’s participating in the trial can stand to benefit, but then also you can really be giving back and helping others.

Katherine:                  

Dr. Davids, thank you so much for taking the time to join us today.

Dr. Davids:                 

It’s my pleasure. Thanks so much.

And thank you to all of our partners. If you would like to watch this webinar again, there will be a replay available soon. You’ll receive an email when it’s ready. You’ll receive an email when it’s ready. Don’t forget to take the survey immed – don’t forget to take the survey immediately following this webinar. It will help us as we plan programs for the future. To learn more about CLL and to access tools to help you become a proactive patient, visit powerfulpatients.org. I’m Katherine Banwell. Thanks for joining us.

What You Need to Know Before Choosing a Cancer Treatment

What You Need to Know Before Choosing a Cancer Treatment from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.

Download Guide

Haga clic aquí para ver en español

What steps could help you and your doctor decide on the best treatment path for your specific cancer? This animated video explains how identification of unique features of a specific cancer through biomarker testing could impact prognosis, treatment decisions and enable patients to get the best, most personalized cancer care.


If you are viewing this from outside of the US, please be aware that availability of personalized care and therapy may differ in each country. Please consult with your local healthcare provider for more information.


Related Programs:

 

PEN-Powered Activity Guides

Digitally Empowered™


TRANSCRIPT:

Dr. Jones:

Hi! I’m Dr. Jones and I’m an oncologist and researcher. I specialize in the care and treatment of patients with cancer. 

Today we’re going to talk about the steps to accessing personalized care and the best therapy for YOUR specific cancer. And that begins with something called biomarker testing.

Before we start, I want to remind you that this video is intended to help educate cancer patients and their loved ones and shouldn’t be a replacement for advice from your doctor.

Let’s start with the basics–just like no two fingerprints are exactly alike, no two patients’ cancers are exactly the same. For instance, let’s meet Louis and another patient of mine, Ben. They both have the same type of cancer and were diagnosed around the same time–but when looked at up close, their cancers look very different.  And, therefore, should be treated differently.

We can look more closely at the cancer type using biomarker testing, which checks for specific gene mutations, proteins, chromosomal abnormalities and/or other molecular changes that are unique to an individual’s disease.

Sometimes called molecular testing or genomic testing, biomarker testing can be administered in a number of ways, such as via a blood test or biopsy. The way testing is administered will depend on YOUR specific situation.

The results could help your healthcare team understand how your cancer may behave and to help plan treatment. And, it may indicate whether targeted therapy might be right for you. When deciding whether biomarker testing is necessary, your doctor will also take into consideration the stage of your cancer at diagnosis.

Louis:

Right! My biomarker testing results showed that I had a specific gene mutation and that my cancer may respond well to targeted therapy.

Dr. Jones, Can you explain how targeted therapy is different than chemo?

Dr. Jones:

Great question! Over the past several years, research has advanced quickly in developing targeted therapies, which has led to more effective options and better outcomes for patients.

Chemotherapy is still an important tool for cancer treatment, and it works by affecting a cancer cell’s ability to divide and grow. And, since cancer cells typically grow faster than normal cells, chemotherapy is more likely to kill cancer cells.

Targeted therapy, on the other hand, works by blocking specific mutations and preventing cancer cells from growing and dividing.

These newer therapies are currently being used to treat many blood cancers as well as solid tumor cancers.  As you consider treatments, it’s important to have all of the information about your diagnosis, including biomarker testing results, so that you can discuss your treatment options and goals WITH your healthcare team.

Louis:

Exactly–Dr. Jones made me feel that I had a voice in my treatment decision. We discussed things like potential side effects, what the course of treatment looks like and how it may affect my lifestyle.

When meeting with your healthcare team, insist that all of your questions are answered. Remember, this is YOUR life and it’s important that you feel comfortable and included when making care decisions. 

Dr. Jones:

And, if you don’t feel your voice is being heard, it may be time to consider a second—or third—opinion from a doctor who specializes in the type of cancer you have. 

So how can you use this information to access personalized treatment?

First, remember, no two cancers are the same. What might be right for someone else’s cancer may not work for you.

Next! Be sure to ask if biomarker testing is appropriate for your diagnosis. Then, discuss all test results with your provider before making a treatment decision. And ask whether testing will need to be repeated over time to identify additional biomarkers.

Your treatment choice should be a shared decision with your healthcare team. Discuss what your options and treatment goals are with your doctor.

And, last, but not least, it’s important to inquire about whether a targeted therapy, or a clinical trial, might be appropriate for you. Clinical trials may provide access to promising new treatments.

Louis:

All great points, Dr. Jones! We hope you can put this information to work for you. Visit powerfulpatients.org to learn more tips for advocating for yourself.

Dr. Jones:

Thanks for joining us today. 


This program is supported by Blueprint Medicines, and through generous donations from people like you.

Metastatic BC Research: How Can You Advocate for the Latest Treatment?

Metastatic BC Research: How Can You Advocate for the Latest Treatment? from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.

What do metastatic breast cancer patients need to know about the latest research news? Dr. Megan Kruse shares highlights from the 2020 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium (SABCS), along with her advice for advocating for the right testing to help guide treatment options.

Dr. Megan Kruse is a Breast Medical Oncologist at the Cleveland Clinic. More about this expert here.

See More From INSIST! Metastatic Breast Cancer

Related Resources:

 

What Could Advances in Breast Cancer Research Mean for You?

How Can You Advocate for the Best Breast Cancer Care?

Factors That Guide a Metastatic Breast Cancer Treatment Decision

 


Transcript:

Dr. Kruse:                   

At this year’s San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium, there were a few interesting presentations about the treatment of first-line metastatic triple-negative breast cancer that I think patients should be aware of.

Two of the presentations centered around trials that were presented in the past. Those reporting, patients reported outcomes from the IMpassion 130 study, which looked at chemotherapy for metastatic triple-negative disease plus the immunotherapy atezolizumab. And then, there was also an update on the results from the KEYNOTE-355 study, which was a study again of chemotherapy for metastatic triple-negative patients in combination with pembrolizumab, a different immunotherapy. And both of these studies showed that there was benefit for women in certain sub-groups of triple-negative breast cancer when looking at addition of immunotherapy.

And so, what I’d like to draw patients’ attention to with these presentations is that you have to be aware of if you fall into one of these categories so you know if you’re a candidate for the particular type of immunotherapy that can be added to chemotherapy. There are two different ways to test for if a patient is a candidate for immunotherapy and they are both tests that can be done on biopsies of metastatic or cancer recurrent sites in the body.

They can also be sent off of original breast cancer tumors. And what we now know is that for patients who do not have markers that suggest immune activation or where the immune system would be responsive to immunotherapy the addition of that extra therapy really does not help to improve cancer control over chemotherapy alone. And I think that’s a really important topic because everyone is very interested in immunotherapy, but it does have side effects of its own and it can actually be lasting side effects in terms of inflammation in organs like the liver, the colon, and the lungs.

And then, the third presentation that I’d like to bring up is the IPATunity study, which looked at the addition of a targeted therapy called ipatasertib to, again, chemotherapy for the first treatment of metastatic triple-negative disease.

And so, this is getting into an area of targeted therapy for metastatic triple-negative disease. And again, only looks at patients that have a particular marker that suggests sensitivity to this drug. And those are certain genetic markers, predominately changes in a DNA marker called PIK3CA. In this study, we actually found that there was no benefit for the targeted therapy added to chemotherapy for patients that had that genetic mutation, which was different than what was seen in earlier studies of the same combination. So, I think there’s more work to be done and it’s probably too early to say that this targeted therapy will not be used in treatment of metastatic breast cancer.

But what all of these research studies show together is that metastatic triple-negative cancer is not really just one disease. It’s very clear that within that one name, there are multiple different patient types and tumor types that need to be cared for differently.

And so, again, I think the theme from these abstracts and these research presentations is that we have to look into the right therapy for the right patient at the right time, which largely involved DNA-based testing.

So, when patients are thinking about their treatment options and how to best help with their providers about what treatment options exist for them, I think it’s important to recognize the type of testing that may be advantageous in your cancer type.

And so, for all metastatic breast cancer patients, we really recommend that they’ve had genetic testing to look for DNA changes like BRCA mutations that will lead to treatment options. For metastatic triple-negative disease, it’s important to make sure that you’re providers are testing for PDL1, which would make you a candidate for immunotherapy. And then, the more we learn about clinical trials, the more we have options for patients that have had drug-based DNA or genome-based testing. So, that’s an important term for patients to become familiar with is genomic testing.

And I think when you bring that up with your providers, they’ll know what you’re talking about and they’ll know that what you’re potentially interested in is new targeted therapy for the cancer that may either come in combination with chemotherapy or as a standalone treatment option. If you don’t have those options that are available, and FDA approved basis for regular routine patient care, there is always the option of clinical trials.

And so, if that is something that you’re interested in, genomic testing will often open the way. So, I think as you’re writing notes when you’re talking to your providers, you might wanna jot down whether or not you’ve had genetic testing and whether or not you’ve had genomic testing in the past, as both of those things will help potentially address all of your treatment options.

I’ve very hopeful about the research that is going to lead to new developments for breast cancer treatment in the next few years.

I think what we’ve seen both at this San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium as well as other conferences in the recent past has been a lot of focus on finding the right treatment for the right patient at the right time. And so, patients seem to be very interested in finding out this information. They often come to clinic armed with the most recent data, which allows their providers to have really informed discussions about what the best treatment might be. And to talk about if the new treatments are not great right now, what treatments might look like in the future.

I think the other thing that’s encouraging about the research that we’ve seen presented at this conference is that some of these trials are very, very large. For example, the RxPONDER trial was a trial of over 9,000 patients. And I really think that’s amazing to get that many patients interested in research that may not directly impact their patient care but will impact the care of others moving forward.

It’s just a sign that our breast cancer patients are empowered, and they want to make a difference in the scientific community as a whole.

 

Breast Cancer Research News: SABCS Conference Highlights

Breast Cancer Research News: SABCS Conference Highlights from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo

Expert Dr. Megan Kruse shares highlights from the 2020 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium (SABCS). Dr. Kruse provides an overview of what this news means for early stage breast cancer patients, along with her optimism about the future of breast cancer research and treatment.

Dr. Megan Kruse is a Breast Medical Oncologist at the Cleveland Clinic. More about this expert here.

See More From The Pro-Active Breast Cancer Patient Toolkit

Related Resources:

 

Transcript:

Dr. Kruse:                   

The San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium is a national meeting with international presence that combines all of the latest data from research on breast cancer topics. It involves clinical research, basic science research, a lot of patient, and patient advocate support.

And the idea here is to bring together all the different disciplines that are involved in breast cancer patient care and do the best information and knowledge sharing that we can each year.

This year’s San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium brought us a lot of interesting research focusing on early-stage breast cancer patients. I think the most important presentations that were given had to do with the treatment of high-risk lymph node-positive hormone receptor-positive breast cancer patients. And these were really across three abstracts. The first abstract of interest was the Monarch E study, which looked at high-risk women with hormone receptor-positive HER2-negative breast cancer and optimizing their medical therapy.

So, these patients are typically treated with anti-estrogen therapy and the idea of the research that was presented was if the addition of a targeted medication called abemaciclib or Verzenio could help to improve outcomes for women in this population. And what the trial found was that for women who took their anti-estrogen therapy for the usual length of time but added the abemaciclib for the first two years of that anti-estrogen therapy that there is actually an improvement in cancer-free survival time or an improvement in cure rates. And this was important because these women may not benefit from chemotherapy, as we’ll talk about in another abstract.

An addition research presentation that was given that goes alongside of the monarch E study was that of the Penelope B study. And the Penelope B took a similar population to what was studied in Monarch E. So, again high-risk women with lymph node-positive, hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer; however, in Penelope B, all of these patients had received pre-surgery chemotherapy.

And in order to qualify for the trial, the patients had to have some cancer that remained in the breast or the lymph nodes that was taken out at the time of their surgery. So, these are patients clearly in which chemotherapy did not do the whole job in terms of getting rid of the cancer. And again, the idea here was to add a second targeted therapy to the endocrine therapy to see if that would improve cancer-free time for patients in this population. The difference in this study was that the partner targeted therapy that was used was a drug called palbociclib or Ibrance.

And the drug was actually only used for one year in combination with endocrine therapy rather than two years as was used in the Monarch E study with abemaciclib. Interestingly enough, the Penelope B study was a negative study, meaning that it did not improve the cancer-free survival time for women who took the endocrine therapy plus targeted therapy compared to women who took the endocrine therapy alone.

So, I think that these are two interesting studies that one should look at together. And clearly, may impact what we do for the treatment of high-risk hormone receptor-positive women moving forward. The third abstract that I’d like to touch on that I think was important for women with early-stage breast cancer is the RxPONDER study, also known as SWOG 1007. And this study again was looking at lymph node-positive, hormone receptor-positive HER2-negative breast cancer patients and seeing if the addition of chemotherapy helped to improve their cancer-free survival compared to anti-estrogen therapy alone.

And so, in this study, while the study population was all women with early-stage breast cancer, meeting the one to three lymph node-positive criteria, you really have to break the results down into the results for pre-menopausal women and the results for post-menopausal women.

Because overall the study really showed no significant benefit to chemotherapy on top of endocrine therapy for women in this population; however, we did see that there was a clear benefit for women who were pre-menopausal. So, the women who had no benefit from chemotherapy were largely those who were post-menopausal, while those who were pre-menopausal derived extra benefit from chemo on top of anti-estrogen therapy. And that benefit depended on what the Oncotype recurrent score was.

With women that had the lowest of the recurrent scores having a chemo benefit of about three percent going up to over five percent for women who had Oncotype recurrent scores in the mid-teens to 25 range. In both of these groups, women who had Oncotype scores of 26 or above would have chemotherapy as per our standard of care.

So, I think that this abstract is important because in the past women who had lymph node-positive breast cancer generally received chemotherapy no matter what. More recently we’ve understood that not all of these cancers are created equal and that some cancers may not actually have benefit from chemotherapy in terms of improving cure rate. So, this study is a big step forward to help individualize and specify the treatment for women with lymph node-positive, hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative early breast cancer.

I’ve very hopeful about the research that is going to lead to new developments for breast cancer treatment in the next few years.

I think what we’ve seen both at this San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium as well as other conferences in the recent past has been a lot of focus on finding the right treatment for the right patient at the right time. And so, patients seem to be very interested in finding out this information. They often come to clinic armed with the most recent data, which allows their providers to have really informed discussions about what the best treatment might be. And to talk about if the new treatments are not great right now, what treatments might look like in the future.

I think the other thing that’s encouraging about the research that we’ve seen presented at this conference is that some of these trials are very, very large. For example, the RxPONDER trial was a trial of over 9,000 patients. And I really think that’s amazing to get that many patients interested in research that may not directly impact their patient care but will impact the care of others moving forward.                                   

It’s just a sign that our breast cancer patients are empowered, and they want to make a difference in the scientific community as a whole.

 

Staying Updated on AML Research News: Advice from an Expert

Staying Updated on AML Research News: Advice from an Expert from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.

Dr. Jeffrey Lancet, an AML expert from Moffitt Cancer Center, shares tips for sifting through research news and encourages communication with your healthcare team about what you’ve learned.

Dr. Jeffrey Lancet is Chair and Program Lead in the Department of Malignant Hematology at Moffitt Cancer Center in Tampa, FL. He is nationally and internationally recognized for his clinical research in the field of acute leukemias. Learn more about Dr. Lancet, here.

Download Program Resource Guide

See More From INSIST! AML

Related Resources:

Essential Testing in AML: How Results Impact Care & Treatment Choices

Navigating AML Treatment Decisions

Key AML Testing for Better Care: Understanding Prognosis and Treatment Choices

Transcript:

Katherine:      

Well, patients are often educating themselves about developing research and new treatment options. Do you have advice for patients who, when it comes to talking with their doctors about what they’ve learned?

Dr. Lancet:                   

I think it’s important for patients to speak to their doctors directly and as soon as possible as opposed to going on the internet and doing a Google search for this drug or that because every patient’s situation is unique and how to apply these new drugs is very different amongst patients.

And some patients may qualify for certain approaches and others do not. So, it’s very important to talk to your doctor about how you can individualize your treatment based upon your specific scenario. What type of mutation does a patient have, what is their level of fitness, are they potentially candidates for bone marrow transplant? Those are some of the basic questions that come up all the time to determine what is the best treatment approach.

And as we’re developing new therapies, and more of them, there will be more options for patients and a more personalized approach that can be taken that really can only be decided based upon that individual patient’s unique profile. So, it’s very important to really recognize that one size does not fit all when it comes to treatment of this disease and that certain drugs may be helpful and certain drugs may be unhelpful in that particular site.

Katherine:                   

What would you like to leave patients with today? Are you hopeful about the future of AML treatment and research?

Dr. Lancet:                   

Yes, I’m very hopeful. I think AML is a disease that is really a very diverse and complex one. It doesn’t lend itself well to huge immediate breakthrough therapies that will immediately change the landscape by double digit percentages for example. This is a disease that, again is very complex, and in which advances are made slowly but steadily. And I think we’ve seen that over the past to 5 to 10 years is that we are gradually incorporating new drugs into our treatment regimens with gradually increasing levels of success as we learn more about these drugs starting out as single agents and then beginning to combine them.

I think that we’re learning an awful lot about the molecular landscape about AML and how it impacts treatments and treatment decisions and prognoses. I think our ability now to detect what we recall measurable residual disease is very important. Also, because now we can get a grasp of how well our treatments are working and are we knocking out enough bad cells to expect good outcomes, and if we’re not, then hopefully we can intervene and kind of hit it while it’s down so to speak and use some of these new therapies to knock out what might be left over to give patients better overall long term responses and results.

So, definitely reason to be hopeful, but we have to stay patient as well. It’s difficult because it’s a, it’s a terrible disease but we have to recognize that it’s something that requires very careful research to develop the appropriate clinical trials that will have the highest chance of success.

Katherine:                   

Dr. Lancet, thanks so much for joining us today.

Dr. Lancet:                   

Thank you very much for having me. It was good to be with you and I appreciate the opportunity.

Katherine:

And thank you to our audience. I’m Katherine Banwell.

 

 

 

AML Research Updates: News from ASH 2020

AML Research Updates: News from ASH 2020 from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.

AML expert Dr. Jeffrey Lancet shares the latest news from the 2020 American Society of Hematology (ASH) annual meeting. Dr. Lancet sheds light on headlines from the meeting including FLT3 inhibitor research, combination therapies with venetoclax, a promising inhibitor therapy, and shares his optimism about the future of AML treatment.

Dr. Jeffrey Lancet is Chair and Program Lead in the Department of Malignant Hematology at Moffitt Cancer Center in Tampa, FL. He is nationally and internationally recognized for his clinical research in the field of acute leukemias. Learn more about Dr. Lancet, here.

Download Program Resource Guide

See More From INSIST! AML

Related Resources:

Navigating AML Treatment Decisions

New AML Therapies vs. Traditional Chemotherapy: What’s the Difference?

Transcript:

Katherine:      

Hello, and welcome. I’m Katherine Banwell. Today we’ll discuss the latest news from ASH 2020 and how AML patients can advocate for personalized care. Joining me is Dr. Jeffrey Lancet. Welcome. Would you please introduce yourself?

Dr. Lancet:                   

Hi, sure. My name is Dr. Jeff Lancet. I’m at the Moffitt Cancer Center in Tampa, Florida, where I am the Chair of the Malignant Hematology Department. We spend a lot of time treating patients and conducting clinical trials of Acute Myelogenous Leukemia.

Katherine:                   

Okay. Thank you. Dr. Lancet, the American Society of Hematology Annual Meeting just closed. What are the AML headlines from this year’s meeting?

Dr. Lancet:                   

Yeah, so as usual, AML was a very busy area for clinical presentations this year at the ASH meeting focusing largely on novel and targeted therapies.

I don’t believe that there were many practice changing developments per se, but rather discussions about many promising therapeutic strategies that are still under development and moving forward rapidly largely in the areas of targeted therapy, low intensity therapy, measurable residual disease and things of that nature.

Katherine:                   

What does this research news mean for patients?

Dr. Lancet:                   

Well, I think that there’s a lot to be encouraged about and maybe I’ll take the time to review some of the highlights in what was presented with respect to some of the novel therapeutic approaches that many of our patients can look forward to receiving in the not too distant future.

So, we often talk about you know, targeted therapies and, of course, one of the major targets over the years has been that of mutated FLT3 which is one of the most common mutations in AML.

And at this meeting we saw several presentations on clinical trials resolved to utilizing inhibitors of FLT3, with some emphasis on the most recently approved second generation drug called gilteritinib.

There were I thought three major presentations focusing on gilteritinib and one was an update on a randomized Phase III trial comparing gilteritinib plus azacitidine versus azacitidine alone in newly diagnosed unfit for induction chemotherapy patients with FLT3 mutations, preliminarily showing good tolerability and high composite complete response rates in the combination on.

There was another trial of gilteritinib plus venetoclax in relapsed and refractory FLT3 mutated AML.

And what was interesting was that a very high percentage of patients achieved response with this combination of gilteritinib plus venetoclax, many of whom were heavily pretreated previously and many of whom had also gotten prior FLT3 inhibitor therapy during an early stage of the disease. So, the combination of gilteritinib and venetoclax and this more refractive study, it was encouraging to see these promising responses.

And then we saw some data reporting the effects of gilteritinib in combination with more traditional chemotherapy induction with a couple of studies demonstrating both a high complete response rates as well as high rates of mutation clearance of the FLT3 mutation.

So, those were very encouraging data that were presented with respect to the FLT3 mutated AML population.      

So, another very important drug that reached the marketplace for AML recently is a drug called venetoclax, which is an inhibitor of a protein called BCL2.

And this drug was recently FDA approved for use in combination with low intensity chemotherapy drugs such as azacitidine or decitabine.

And it seems as though the combination of venetoclax plus one of these hypomethylating agent drugs, azacitidine or decitabine has resulted in very, very strong efficacy signals as recently published in a New England Journal of Medicine paper that reported on the results of the Phase III trial of venetoclax plus azacitidine.

So, that has now become standard of care for older less fit adults with newly diagnosed AML; the combination of venetoclax plus a hypomethylating agent such as azacitidine.

And naturally, there’s been interest in really kind of taking it several steps further to advance the role of these combinations and to also look at additional drugs in combination with venetoclax plus hypomethylating agent therapy.

So, we saw some of that at the ASH meeting this year. One approach would be to take venetoclax and then to combine it with more intensive chemotherapy for perhaps more fit patients or younger patients that could undergo a more intensive program.

So, we saw presentations of venetoclax being combined with a drug called CPX-351, which is a novel liposome formulation of two common chemotherapy drugs that had been approved a few years ago for secondary AML. And we also saw a combination strategy with venetoclax, and a regimen known as FLAG-IDA, which is a commonly used induction regimen in acute myeloid leukemia.

And I think it’s important to recognize that although these trials that combine the venetoclax with more intensive chemotherapy showed signs of good efficacy with good response rates, there were definitely signals of increased toxicity, hematologic toxicity primarily, which is not completely unexpected with venetoclax knowing that it can cause significant lowering of white blood cells and platelets and hemoglobin.

And then finally, there is a lot of interest in, you know, doing these types of combinations with venetoclax in different subsets of AML and one subset of AML that has been very important recently is that of the IDH mutated AML population of patients.

IDH is a fairly common mutation that occurs either in the Isoform of IDH1 or IDH2 and there’s about a 15 to 20 percent incidence of IDH mutations in AML.

Now we do have an inhibitor for both of these types of mutations: ivosidenib for IDH1 and enasidenib for IDH2, but there also appears to be a strong role for venetoclax plus azacitidine in IDH mutated AML.

We saw from a series of patients presented by a physician at MD Anderson looking at outcomes with venetoclax plus azacitidine in IDH mutated AML. And the response rates were very high when you give HMA plus venetoclax to these patients with IDH mutated AML.

But I think more importantly was that there were what we call high intro patient response rates when switching between venetoclax and HMA therapy with an IDH inhibitor containing regimen.

In other words, a patient would have a good chance of responding to the initial therapy and then if or when that therapy stops working, having a good effect from a salvage therapy with the other regimen. So, when you see initially azacitidine plus venetoclax and then had a relapse, the IDH inhibitors worked well and vice versa if you had received an IDH inhibitor and then subsequently received HMA-venetoclax at a later time point that also worked well.

So, it’s encouraging to see that you can potentially sequence these drugs and get continued responses along the way and ultimately we think will help a survivor and keep patients in a better state of health even longer.               

So, I just wanted to take a few minutes also and discuss some of the newer more novel therapies that are really hitting or approaching the landscape right now. One of these is called CC486, also known as oral azacitidine or ONUREG. And this drug was shown in recent literature to prolong overall survival in patients who are in first remission from their AML who had received induction chemotherapy.

So, this drug was used as maintenance therapy after a variable number of consolidation regimens. And people who got this ONUREG or oral azacitidine drug as maintenance therapy, it resulted in longer survival compared to those who had received placebo.

And this was presented at last year’s ASH meeting, but this year’s ASH meeting provided an update, a very important update, showing that the overall survival advantage from this drug, this oral azacitidine drug, when used as maintenance was independent of whether a patient had measurable residual disease at the time that they went onto the maintenance therapy.

In other words, whether you had MRD, measurable residual disease or not at the time of the study entry, your responses were still more favorable, your outcomes were more favorable, if you received this oral azacitidine drug.

So, this was FDA approved earlier this year for patients in the maintenance phase of therapy for AML who had gotten prior reduction chemotherapy.

And importantly, this drug was also shown to be able to convert about 25% of patients who were positive for measurable residual disease; convert them from positive to negative. So, even though they were in remission, they had measurable residual disease and this drug in about 25 percent of the cases converted that from positive to negative. So, that’s a very important finding as well.

Another important drug that I think you should keep your eye on is a drug called magrolimab. This is an antibody against a certain type of protein that is present on the immune system cell called the macrophage, and when this magrolimab drug was combined with azacitidine in a recent clinical trial, it was demonstrated very high response rates of over 65 percent.

And, in particular, in patients with P53 mutations, which is a very bad mutation to have in most cancers, including AML, in patients with this high-risk mutation, the combination of magrolimab with azacitidine appears to be effective based upon the early data that we have with high response rates.

And then finally, I just wanted to make mention of another important area in, not really just AML, but in all cancer and that’s  outcomes disparities between different races and ethnic groups. And we saw a very important presentation at the plenary session this year where the authors reported outcomes amongst younger patients with AML who were African American compared with Caucasian.

And the data clearly indicated a worse overall survival amongst Black patients compared with white patients under age 60. And this included patients who were enrolled in clinical trials. So, that it appeared that African American patients have a worse outcome than Caucasian patients with acute myeloid leukemia highlighting the need to better understand various risk factors and other factors that play into these disparate outcomes between our Black American population and a white American population, which I think could shed light on additional disease characteristics that may help everybody as well.

 

Should You Have Prostate Cancer Genetic Testing?

Should You Have Prostate Cancer Genetic Testing? from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.

Should you ask for prostate cancer genetic testing? Dr. Nima Sharifi discusses prostate cancer genetics and shares his perspective on how testing can help ensure the best care for a patient.

Dr. Nima Sharifi is Director of the Genitourinary (GU) Malignancies Research Center at the Cleveland Clinic. Learn more here.

See more from The Pro-Active Prostate Cancer Patient Toolkit

Related Resources

Prostate Cancer Treatment Decisions: How Do Genetic Test Results Impact Your Options?

Prostate Cancer Treatment Decisions: How Do Genetic Test Results Impact Your Options?

Targeted Prostate Cancer Therapies vs. Chemotherapy: What’s the Difference?

Prostate Cancer Staging: What Patients Should Know

 


Transcript:

Dr. Sharifi:

I think it’s okay when you’re speaking with your physician to say that you’re concerned about the genetics of prostate cancer. You can ask about personalized medicine treatment options, and whether genetic testing would make a difference for treatments.

 

And you can also bring up the concern about family members, and that there may be an inherited or heritable component of cancer that could be passed down, for example, from one generation to the next and that could be shared among siblings. I think there’s nothing wrong with bringing that up. And I would suggest that if that’s a concern, that a man does bring that up with their physician.                                   

 

So, it turns out that there are certain germline mutations that can predispose to several different types of cancers.

 

For example, these BRCA mutations can predispose to developing prostate and perhaps more aggressive prostate cancer, but they can also predispose to developing breast cancer. So, if you look, for example, at members of a family who are related, you may see that certain cancers may develop in multiple family members. So, if you see that that – If you look at your family history and you see that that is the case, then you may want to think about genetic testing and perhaps to see a genetic counselor to talk about getting tested.

Prostate Cancer Treatment Decisions: How Do Genetic Test Results Impact Your Options?

Prostate Cancer Treatment Decisions: How Do Genetic Test Results Impact Your Options? from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.

How do genetic test results impact prostate cancer treatment options? Dr. Nima Sharifi explains BRCA mutations, germline genes, and somatic mutations—and discusses when treatment with PARP inhibitors may be appropriate.

Dr. Nima Sharifi is Director of the Genitourinary (GU) Malignancies Research Center at the Cleveland Clinic. Learn more here.

See More From INSIST! Prostate Cancer

Related Resources

Should You Have Prostate Cancer Genetic Testing?

Targeted Prostate Cancer Therapies vs. Chemotherapy: What’s the Difference?

Prostate Cancer Staging: What Patients Should Know

 


Transcript:

Dr. Sharifi:        

There are several types of mutations that occur in prostate cancer. We know about a lot of them. We’re beginning to understand the function of many of them, and the role of just a few of them has become a bit clearer in treatment of prostate cancer. So, the one that I think has the clearest implications is something called BRCA mutations.

So, you can get mutations in genes that regulate DNA damage. This can occur in either inherited genes, or these are mutations that can occur in the cancer itself. And this will allow for tumors to become the developed – actually, greater DNA damage. The implications of using this information, genetic testing for these BRCA mutations, are actually several. One is that it may – if it comes in through the germline, then it tells us something about the hereditary or familial component of it.

So, that has implications not only for the patient but also potentially family members. And then the second set of implications has to do with treatment, and specifically treatment that in more advanced cases where there are now two FDA-approved agents that are used specifically for patients who have mutations in these genes.

And we’re still learning a lot about what these genes mean, or mutations of these genes mean for patients in their clinical course. And we’re learning much more information about other mutations which may occur in prostate cancer as well.

So, we should draw a distinction between two different types of genes. One is germline. Germline has to do with the DNA or the genes that you inherit from your parents. And the second category is somatic mutations, or somatic genetics. And this, specifically, has to do with mutations that occur in the cancer cell itself, but that are not inherited from one’s parents.

It’s a very active area of research. So, again, for the vast majority of mutations that we recognize in prostate cancer, we don’t use that to make clinical decisions. There are a few, such as the DNA damage repair genes or BRCA genes – which tell us something about the potential for a more aggressive disease course or a more aggressive disease – and also the potential appropriateness of using agents called PARP inhibitors, which seem to specifically work in patients who have mutations in the BRCA family of genes.

So, in terms of the treatment options, the major genetic tests that allow us to figure out whether systemic or drug treatment option is appropriate or not, is in DNA damage repair genes such as BRCA.

So, for example, in the case of metastatic disease that’s resistant to hormonal therapy and has already been treated with other therapies, if there is a mutation in BRCA or one of the closely related gene members, then use of a drug called a PARP inhibitor may be appropriate, and that could benefit patients.

Advocating for Key AML Testing: Advice From an Expert

Advocating for Key AML Testing: Advice From an Expert from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.

Dr. Hetty Carraway, an AML specialist at Cleveland Clinic, shares advice on advocating for yourself when diagnosed with AML, underscoring the importance of asking questions, and including your caregiver as part of the conversation.

Dr. Hetty Carraway is Director of the Leukemia Program at Cleveland Clinic. Dr. Carraway cares for patients with acute leukemia and bone marrow failure states. Learn more about Dr. Carraway, here.

See More From INSIST! AML

Related Resources:


 Treatment Approaches in AML: Key Testing for Personalized Care

 New AML Therapies vs. Traditional Chemotherapy: What’s the Difference?

 Understanding Risk in AML: How Molecular Testing Affects Treatment Options

Transcript:

Katherine:

What advice do you have for patients when it comes to asking for appropriate testing and speaking up in their own care?

Dr. Carraway:            

This is so important. I think patients are leery to stir the pot or be difficult. I think coming from a place of inquiry, teach me about this, that, or the other thing, help me understand this, that, or the other thing – I would like you to show me why this decision or talk with me about why this decision versus another decision might be better for me compared to somebody else.

I can’t underscore the importance of advocating for yourself and asking questions about why am I getting this drug? What are the side effects to this drug? What is my prognosis? What is different about my case versus somebody else’s situation? How do I best prepare myself in getting ready for the therapy that I’m about to go through?

Those are all important questions that patients should ask. They should certainly have people, if possible in their family be advocates for them. I welcome that, and I think that that’s a really important part of going through this type of therapy for any patient. Your physician should welcome having your involvement in that. Don’t be shy about that. It’s your health, and any investment in that the most important people in that is inclusive of you and your caregivers. They should be a welcome part of the team.

Understanding AML Induction and Consolidation Therapy

Understanding AML Induction and Consolidation Therapy from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.

Dr. Hetty Carraway, an AML specialist at Cleveland Clinic, provides an explanation of the role of induction and consolidation therapy in AML patients.

Dr. Hetty Carraway is Director of the Leukemia Program at Cleveland Clinic. Dr. Carraway cares for patients with acute leukemia and bone marrow failure states. Learn more about Dr. Carraway, here.

See More From INSIST! AML

Related Resources:


 Treatment Approaches in AML: Key Testing for Personalized Care

 New AML Therapies vs. Traditional Chemotherapy: What’s the Difference?

 Understanding Risk in AML: How Molecular Testing Affects Treatment Options

Transcript:

Katherine:

Would you define induction therapy and consolidation therapy and tell us what the differences are?

Dr. Carraway:            

For most patients that are diagnosed with an acute myeloid leukemia, over the last 30 to 40 years we’ve used an intensive chemotherapy regimen that we call induction. Induction means that we’re trying to get the leukemia into remission with an intensive chemotherapy regimen. Classically, that has been two agents; one, a cytarabine based regimen along with an anthracycline, either idarubicin, danorubicin, or some anthracycline that’s similar.

Now, the cytarabine based therapy is a continuous infusion over seven days. The anthracycline is given over three days as an intravenous IV push, and so that’s why it’s kind of been nicknamed seven and three – seven days of cytarabine and three days of another anthracycline.

Now, that has constituted the induction intensive regimen in the hospital with the idea that that leukemia gets under control and goes away. More recently for patients, they can receive therapy that is not this inpatient, in-hospital, induction chemotherapy but rather use oral therapy combining with venetoclax, which is a Bcl-2 inhibitor, along with azacitidine, which is either IV or subcutaneous given to patients over seven days. The oral, venetoclax is every day.

That type of induction can also be given and is now an outpatient regimen and more often offered to patients that are older, over the age of 75.

That, too can be considered induction with the idea that once a patient is diagnosed with leukemia this regimen is started, and after one month or even two months on venetoclax plus azacitidine patients’ leukemia can get into what we call remission, where the blast percentages are less than 5 percent. Then, normal hematopoiesis of platelets being greater than 100,000 and a neutrophil count greater than 500 or 1,000, and the patient is then transfusion-independent.

In general, induction chemotherapy is that first round of chemotherapy that’s trying to get the leukemia under control.

Consolidation chemotherapy is when you use subsequent cycles of chemotherapy to keep the leukemia under control because we know that if we don’t continue to give some continuation of therapy that the small, little seeds of leukemia will re-emerge and leukemia will relapse.

Essential Testing in AML: How Results Impact Care & Treatment Choices

Essential Testing in AML: How Results Impact Care & Treatment Choices from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.

What tests should follow an AML diagnosis and why? Dr. Hetty Carraway, an AML specialist of Cleveland Clinic, reviews the essential testing for patients with AML and explains how those test results may inform treatment decisions.

Dr. Hetty Carraway is Director of the Leukemia Program at Cleveland Clinic. Dr. Carraway cares for patients with acute leukemia and bone marrow failure states. Learn more about Dr. Carraway, here.

Download Program Resource Guide

See More From INSIST! AML

Related Resources:

What Is the Patient’s Role in Making AML Treatment Decisions?

What Is the Patient’s Role in Making AML Treatment Decisions?

Navigating AML Treatment Decisions

Insist! AML Resource Guide

Transcript:

Katherine:      

Hello, and welcome. I’m Katherine Banwell. Today, we’ll discuss how you can be proactive by insisting on better AML care and personalized treatment options. Joining me is Dr. Hetty Carraway.

Welcome, Dr. Carraway. Would you please introduce yourself?

Dr. Carraway:            

Hi. My name is Dr. Hetty Carraway. I’m one of the physicians at the Cleveland Clinic. I work as the Director of the Leukemia Program, and I spend most of my time caring for patients with acute leukemia and bone marrow failure states.

Katherine:                  

Thank you.  Let’s start with the basics. What essential testing should AML patients undergo following a diagnosis?

Dr. Carraway:            

This is a pretty standard workup for patients that have this diagnosis of acute leukemia.

For most of our patients we always evaluate with a peripheral blood count including a complete blood count with differential, typically a comprehensive metabolic panel, and looking at a test called a uric acid, which looks at the cell turnover and the cellular debris in terms of the burden on the kidney. We often will get a bone marrow biopsy with aspirate for patients, and in the diagnosis of leukemia typically that’s already been done.

There are tests that are sent off of that aspirate called a test for chromosomes, whether it’s comprehensive cytogenetics or FISH, for fluorescence in situ hybridization. We’re often testing using a study called NGS or next generation sequencing looking for specific mutations of genes known to be important in the pathogenesis of leukemia.

Furthermore, we often get a test called flow cytometry from that aspirate looking at the markers on top of the leukemia cells that help us to identify the blast population. So, I would say those by and large are the tests in the bone marrow biopsy that we get, which are innumerable and detailed.

They often take some time to get back, so at the time of the diagnosis patients know that they have a diagnosis of leukemia, but those additional chromosome tests or mutation testing that can take up to two weeks if not longer to get back. And so, it’s important to follow up on that information later on and say, has that testing come back? If so, how does that change any of what the decisions are moving forward?

Katherine:                  

Genetic testing can often be confused with molecular testing. What’s the difference between the two, and why should patients undergo the testing?

Dr. Carraway:            

The chromosome testing and the mutational testing help us to really classify the risk in terms of the leukemia itself, whether or not that leukemia is responsive to chemotherapy alone, or if it means that there’s a higher likelihood of that leukemia not being controlled with leukemia only.

In that setting, we often then move towards transplant for curative intent in addition to the chemotherapy. The reasons to get the information is to really help us better tailor the therapy for each individual patient. That information really does help us guide not only the upfront therapy for some patients but even the long-term therapy. It can be incredibly overwhelming to have too much information at the get-go, so in some senses it’s better to have these pieces as they unfold over time.

For other patients, they want to know what exactly the plan is going to be A to Z from day one. That is of course more challenging now that it just takes time to get this information. I think what they need to know is that we’re working hard to get that information.

As soon as we get it, we don’t hold back. We reveal and share that information and come together to say, this is what this data or information means, and these are some of the choices that we either recommend that you consider, and these are the risks and benefits to those considerations.

Katherine:                  

Let’s look at something that is similar to what you’ve just been talking about. How do test results impact treatment and overall care?

Dr. Carraway:            

They really can. When you asked me how come chromosome or genetic information is different than mutational information, the chromosomes can help us to figure out where patients land in terms of prognosis. That information is different than the mutational testing. Both of those pieces can help us figure that out.

The mutational test, I will tell you, does help us figure out are there targets on the leukemia that allow us to use therapy that’s directed to that mutation. The key example I’ll give is a mutation in a gene called FLT3. That particular mutation has an agent now that is F.D.A. approved called Midostaurin, and so once we know that a leukemia harbors a FLT3 mutation we often add a drug called Midostaurin to the backbone therapy that is used for patients.

Now, that’s important, and now there are more and more genes that when mutated we have novel therapies that direct against that specific tag that’s on the leukemia and helps to improve eradication of the disease or control of the disease if you will.

That’s different than the genetic information when we’re looking at chromosomal changes that may allow us to say in the rare instances of  favorable cytogenetics like a translocation of chromosome 15 and 17 consistent with APL, the treatment for that type of leukemia,  acute promyelocytic leukemia, is very different than what we do for the majority of other leukemias.  

The prognosis for that leukemia is also very different. It helps to tailor the regimens, and it helps to select specific therapy that may be helpful to each individual patient.

Katherine:                  

Dr. Carraway, you just mentioned FLT3. Would you tell us about the common mutations in AML and how these may impact treatment options?

Dr. Carraway:            

There’s a multitude of mutations that we’re now following in patients. The way that we follow them is by doing this next generation sequencing test at the upfront time at diagnosis.

The reason why we’re doing that is because those mutations can regress with therapy, or they can progress where you gain additional mutations that happen as the disease progresses. Even if it’s responding to therapy or as it loses response to therapy and reemerges, it may reemerge with different mutations. As a result of that, it may change what therapy we select. Our ability at this point in being to recommend exactly at what time points we are checking the next generation sequencing we’re still learning right now as to what are the key times to do that testing.

In general, most institutions are doing that next generation sequencing at the time of diagnosis, and then also for some patients before they go to bone marrow transplant and even after bone marrow transplant.

For some of those patients that unfortunately relapse, we’re also making sure to retest the next generation sequencing mutation testing to see are there new mutations that have come about that weren’t there before?

Katherine:                 

I understand there’s something called IDH. 

Dr. Carraway:            

You were also asking about what other mutations besides FLT3 happen in patients with AML. FLT3 is one such mutation. NPM1 is another mutation that often it frequents patients that have AML. Those two mutations happen in about 30 percent of patients with AML. There are other mutations such as DNMT3A, ASXL1, and TET2 that we typically see in patients with MDS or even a pre-leukemia state called CHIP. For other patients, we have mutations that are targetable like IDH1 or IDH2.

Those two mutations happen in probably 10 percent to 15 percent of patients diagnosed with AML. Why are those important? They’re important because we have oral medications that are pills that patients can take. In the relapse setting for many patients after induction or intensive chemotherapy, they can use these oral therapies to try and control their leukemia. These are pretty exciting. 

All of these oral therapies have been approved in the last two to three years in the space of leukemia, so it’s been a game-changer in terms of identifying these mutations and then identifying drugs that target those mutations. It’s really changed the landscape for patients with AML. It’s new information, and that’s why as patients you want to hear about this so you know what questions to ask and you know, can you tell me, am I a candidate for one of these oral medications that is now available for patients with AML?

Katherine:                  

Dr. Carraway, thanks so much for joining us today.

Dr. Carraway:            

Thank you for the opportunity to be here. 

Katherine:                  

And thank you to our audience. I’m Katherine Banwell.

Navigating AML Treatment Decisions

Navigating AML Treatment Decisions from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.

What factors can help determine the best treatment path for your AML? This animated video walks through important considerations that may help in navigating treatment decisions, including how genetic testing results, treatment goals and patient preference can impact your choice.

See More From INSIST! AML

Related Resources:

Genetic Mutations That Affect AML Prognosis and Treatment

Confused About AML Genetic Testing and Treatment? What You Need to Know

Effective AML Combination Treatment

Transcript:

Hi, I’m Gina. I’m a nurse practitioner and I specialize in acute myeloid leukemia, or AML.

When diagnosed with AML, it’s important to take steps to get a deeper understanding of your disease, and the available treatment options, so that you can feel confident in your care decisions.

Before we walk through the important steps to decide on a treatment path, I want to remind you that this video is intended to help educate AML patients and their loved ones and shouldn’t be a replacement for advice from your doctor.

OK, let’s get started.

The first step is to understand your diagnosis, so that you can find out what treatments are available to you. Unlike solid tumor cancers, such as lung or breast cancer, AML is not staged. Instead, your physician will use lab testing, including blood and bone marrow tests, to determine the subtype of your AML and if you have any chromosomal abnormalities to determine if your AML is low, intermediate or high-risk.

Knowing your risk can impact your prognosis and help establish the best treatment option for you. If you don’t know your subtype, ask your doctor for the information and if you may need further testing to reach a more accurate diagnosis.

Testing that identifies characteristics unique to YOUR AML can impact your treatment options and determine if a targeted therapy or immunotherapy might be more effective. These tests include:

  • Molecular testing
  • Cytogenetic analysis (or karyotyping), and
  • Fluorescence in situ hybridization also known as a FISH test

Before you start any treatment, it’s essential to insist that you have had relevant testing.

Next, you should understand treatment goals. The first goal of AML therapy is to get into remission. The second goal is to maintain that remission.

Induction therapy, or the first phase of treatment, is meant to induce remission. This first-line treatment kills as much of the disease as possible and returns blood counts back to normal.

Consolidation treatment, also referred to as post-remission therapy, is used to prevent leukemia cells from returning and maintain remission. In some patients, stem cell transplant acts as a consolidation therapy. In others, additional treatment options to maintain remission can be explored.

The next step is to consider your treatment options with your doctor. It’s important to understand the approaches available for YOUR individual disease. AML treatments can include:

  • Chemotherapy
  • Targeted therapy
  • Stem cell transplant
  • Immunotherapy
  • Clinical trials, which may provide access to treatments that are not yet approved.

Or, you may receive a combination of one or more of these treatments.

Once you understand the therapies that are available to you, it’s time to talk to your doctor about the risks and benefits of each option. Your doctor will also consider your age, overall health, and existing conditions before suggesting a treatment course.

So, what questions should you address when discussing your treatment goals with your doctor? Consider asking:

  • Is stem cell transplant a viable option for you?
  • Can you tolerate high-intensity therapy or is low-intensity therapy better for you?
  • How will the treatment impact your quality of life and lifestyle?
  • Are there short or long-term treatment side effects that may occur after you have completed treatment?
  • What is the plan if the first approach to treatment isn’t effective?
  • Is there a clinical trial that might be right for you?
  • Is there a member of the team, such as a social worker, that can help you understand the potential treatment costs? And is there access to financial resources that can help you if needed?

Remember that you have a role in making decisions regarding your care. Insist that all of your questions are answered when making a decision with your healthcare team. If you don’t feel supported or you don’t feel heard by your healthcare team, then it is always best to seek a second opinion.

Finally, once you have gathered all the information, it may be helpful to talk it out with people you trust, such as a partner, friend or family member, to help you make a decision that you feel confident about.

Now, how can you put this information to work for you?

  • Ensure that you have an accurate understanding of your diagnosis.
  • Make sure you have had appropriate testing to establish your subtype and risk.
  • Understand your treatment options and talk with your doctor about what’s best for YOUR AML.
  • Remember, you are a partner in your care and have an active voice in finding the best treatment for you.

Visit powerfulpatients.org/aml to learn more about AML.

Navigating Lung Cancer Treatment Decisions

Navigating Lung Cancer Treatment Decisions from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.

What steps could help you and your doctor decide on the best treatment path for your individual disease? This animated video walks through key considerations, including molecular testing results, lifestyle factors and patient preference.

See More From the The Pro-Active Lung Cancer Patient Toolkit

Related Programs:

Diagnosed with Lung Cancer? Why You Should Seek a Second Opinion

Why You Should Consider a Clinical Trial for Lung Cancer Treatment

Diagnosed with Lung Cancer? An Expert Outlines Key Steps


Transcript:

Hi, I’m Kendra. I’m a nurse practitioner and I specialize in lung cancer.

When diagnosed with lung cancer, it’s important to take steps to get a deeper understanding of your disease, and the available treatment options, so that you can feel confident in your care decisions.

Before we walk through the actions that can help you decide on a treatment path, I want to remind you that this video is intended to help educate lung cancer patients and their loved ones and shouldn’t be a replacement for advice from your doctor.

OK, let’s get started.

The first step is to understand your diagnosis—including the type of lung cancer and stage of disease—so that you can find out what treatments are available to you. Your physician will use tests, including biopsies and imaging, such as X-rays and CT scans, to ensure you have an accurate diagnosis.

The next step is to understand the approaches available for YOUR individual disease.
Depending on your stage and type of lung cancer, treatments can include:

  • Surgery
  • Radiation therapy
  • Chemotherapy
  • Targeted therapy or
  • Immunotherapy

Or, you may receive a combination of one or more of these treatments.

Other testing that can impact your treatment options is molecular testing, which is used to identify specific mutations that are unique to your lung cancer. This may help in deciding if targeted therapies are an appropriate option for you.

Before you start any treatment, it’s essential to ask your doctor if you have had relevant molecular testing.

Another option that your physician may discuss with you is clinical trials, which may provide access to treatments that are not yet approved. At different points on your path with lung cancer, it’s important to talk with your doctor about whether there is a clinical trial that could be right for you.

Once you understand the treatments that are available to you, it’s time to talk to your doctor about the risks and benefits of each option and walk through the goals of your treatment.

One of the most important factors that your healthcare team will consider is YOUR treatment goals. Remember, you are a partner in your care and have an active voice in finding the best treatment for you. Physicians also typically consider a patient’s age, overall health, and existing conditions before they suggest a course.

So, what questions should you address when you are discussing your treatment goals with your doctor? Consider asking:

  • Is the goal of the treatment to cure your disease or to obtain long-term control your disease?
  • How effective will the treatment be and how will it impact your quality of life and lifestyle?
  • What are the treatment side effects–both the short-term effects as well as long-term effects that may occur after you have completed treatment?
  • Is there a member of the team, such as a social worker, that can help you understand the potential treatment costs? And is there access to financial resources that can help you if needed?
  • Are there supportive care options that can help with symptoms and pain management at any stage of your cancer?

It also may be a good idea to consider a second, or even third opinion consultation with a specialist. And, if you don’t feel supported or you don’t feel heard by your healthcare team, then it is always best to get another opinion.

Finally, once you have gathered all the information, it may be helpful to talk it out with people you trust, such as a partner, friend or family member, to help you make a decision that you feel confident about.

Now, how can you put this information to work for you?

  • Make sure you understand your type and stage of your lung cancer and the goals of your treatment options.
  • Talk to your physician about what you’ve learned.
  • Consider a consultation with a lung cancer specialist.
  • Ask about molecular testing and what testing results mean for you.
  • Discuss whether clinical trials are an option for your cancer.
  • Visit credible online resources to stay up to date on lung cancer information.
  • Visit powerfulpatients.org/lungcancer to learn more about lung cancer.

How Can You Insist on Better Prostate Cancer Care?

How Can You Insist on Better Prostate Cancer Care? from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo

How can prostate cancer patients access the best care in an evolving treatment landscape? Prostate cancer survivor Jim Schraidt shares his advice for staying up-to-date about treatment developments and for accessing support and resources

Jim Schraidt is a prostate cancer survivor and Chairman of the Board of Directors for Us TOO International. Learn more about Jim Schraidt here.

See More From INSIST! Prostate Cancer

Related Resources

How Does Us TOO International Support Prostate Cancer Patients and Their Loved Ones?

How Does Us TOO International Support Prostate Cancer Patients and Their Loved Ones?

How Could You Benefit from Joining a Prostate Cancer Support Group?

Newly Diagnosed with Prostate Cancer? Consider These Key Steps

Newly Diagnosed with Prostate Cancer? Consider These Key Steps

 


Transcript:

Jim Schraidt:              

The really great news is that sort of across the board, from early stage disease through metastatic prostate cancer patients, there are advances that are occurring very rapidly at this point, so rapidly that practitioners have difficulty keeping up with them.

And, honestly, those of us who do some patients support likewise have difficulty keeping up with them. I think, once again, these support groups can serve a useful function in that you have specific questions, you hear about it, you bring together a group of individuals, and somebody in that group may know something about it.

And they can tell you, they can give you information, or they can give you direct Internet links where you can find more information. The other source of information is some of the Us TOO publications, our monthly hot sheet, as well as the website.

There are a couple other websites that I personally regard as excellent. The first would be the Prostate Cancer Foundation. The second would be Prostate Cancer Research Institute. And then finally, ZERO. So, I think if you attend a support group, and talk to other guys, and look at some of these websites, I think that’s a very good starting point for research and trying to get the best and most up-to-date information possible.

There’s a lot of progress being made across the disease spectrum, and it’s very exciting. I mean, for many years, all we had was surgery, radiation, and hormone therapy. But new things are coming online all the time. There are immunotherapies that are frequently genetically based. And there’s new knowledge about the disease itself and making active surveillance available to more patients.

And this is extremely critical because many men can go on with prostate cancer, with low-grade disease, really for their entire lives, and avoid the side effects of treatment.

And even if they don’t, if they delay definitive treatment for a period of years, there may be something new that comes down the pike that is both effective and has a better side-effect profile. This is the kind of research that is a part of what Prostate Cancer Foundation is funding.

So, there’s a lot out there. There’s a lot that’s happening. And I think that should give encouragement to prostate cancer patients. In terms of somebody who is later in the process and having difficulty coping with side effects or disease progression, I think the encouragement is that there are people out there that you can talk to about it, that you’re really not alone, and there are people out there that are anxious to help you, to hear from you, and provide assistance.

For those of us who have been at it a while, we find that helping others enhances our own healing. And so, don’t be reticent about asking for help. Because it’s out there, and it can really make a difference.