Andrew Davies1, Francesco Merli2, Biljana Mihaljevic3, Noppadol Siritanaratkul4, Phillippe Solal-Céligny5, Martin Barrett6, Claude Berge7, Beate Bittner7, Axel Boehnke7, Christine McIntyre8, David Macdonald9. 1. Cancer Research UK Centre, University of Southampton Faculty of Medicine, Southampton, UK. Electronic address: A.Davies@southampton.ac.uk. 2. Hematology Unit, Arcispedale Santa Maria Nuova-IRCCS, Reggio Emilia, Italy. 3. Clinic of Hematology, CCS, and Faculty of Medicine, University of Belgrade, Serbia. 4. Division of Hematology, Department of Medicine, Siriraj Hospital, Bangkok, Thailand. 5. Institut de Cancérologie de l'Ouest, Nantes, France. 6. Clinical Development, Roche Products, Welwyn Garden City, UK. 7. Clinical Development, F Hoffmann-La Roche, Basel, Switzerland. 8. Clinical Pharmacology, Roche Products, Welwyn Garden City, UK. 9. Queen Elizabeth II Health Sciences Centre, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada.
Abstract
BACKGROUND:Intravenous rituximab is a mainstay of treatment for follicular lymphoma. A subcutaneous formulation that achieves equivalent rituximab serum concentrations might improve convenience and save health-care resources without sacrificing clinical activity. We aimed to assess pharmacokinetic non-inferiority of 3 week cycles of fixed-dose subcutaneous rituximab versus standard intravenous rituximab. METHODS: In our two-stage, randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial, we enrolled patients with previously untreated grade 1-3a, CD20-positive follicular lymphoma at 67 centres in 23 countries. In stage 1, we randomly allocated patients 1:1 with the Pocock and Simon algorithm to intravenous rituximab (375 mg/m(2)) or fixed-dose subcutaneous rituximab (1400 mg), stratified by induction chemotherapy regimen (cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, prednisone or cyclophosphamide, vincristine, prednisone), Follicular Lymphoma International Prognostic Index score, and region. After randomisation, patients received one induction dose of intravenous rituximab in cycle 1 and then allocated treatment for cycles 2-8. Patients with a complete or partial response following induction therapy continued intravenous orsubcutaneous rituximab as maintenance every 8 weeks. The primary endpoint was the ratio of observed rituximab serum trough concentrations (Ctrough) between groups at cycle 7 (before cycle 8 dosing) of induction treatment in a per-protocol population. Patients were analysed as treated for safety endpoints. Stage 2 follow-up is ongoing and is fully accrued. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01200758. FINDINGS: Between Feb 4, 2010, and Oct 21, 2011, we enrolled 127 patients. Pharmacokinetic data were available for 48 (75%) of 64 patients randomly allocatedintravenous rituximab and 54 (86%) of 63 patients randomly allocated subcutaneous rituximab. Geometric mean Ctrough was 83·13 μg/mL in the intravenous group and 134·58 μg/mL in the subcutaneous group (ratio 1·62, 90% CI 1·36-1·94), showing non-inferiority of subcutaneous rituximab. 57 (88%) of 65 patients in the intravenous rituximab safety population had adverse events (30 [46%] grade ≥3), as did 57 (92%) of 62 patients in the subcutaneous rituximab safety population (29 [47%] grade ≥3). The most common grade 3 or worse adverse event in both groups was neutropenia (14 [22%] patients in the intravenous group and 16 [26%] patients in the subcutaneous group). Adverse events related to administration were mostly grade 1-2 and occurred in 21 (32%) patients in the intravenous group and 31 (50%) patients in the subcutaneous group. INTERPRETATION: Stage 1 data show that the pharmacokinetic profile of subcutaneous rituximab was non-inferior to intravenous rituximab and was not associated with new safety concerns. Stage 2 will provide data for efficacy and safety of the subcutaneous administration. FUNDING: F Hoffmann-La Roche.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Intravenous rituximab is a mainstay of treatment for follicular lymphoma. A subcutaneous formulation that achieves equivalent rituximab serum concentrations might improve convenience and save health-care resources without sacrificing clinical activity. We aimed to assess pharmacokinetic non-inferiority of 3 week cycles of fixed-dose subcutaneous rituximab versus standard intravenous rituximab. METHODS: In our two-stage, randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial, we enrolled patients with previously untreated grade 1-3a, CD20-positive follicular lymphoma at 67 centres in 23 countries. In stage 1, we randomly allocated patients 1:1 with the Pocock and Simon algorithm to intravenous rituximab (375 mg/m(2)) or fixed-dose subcutaneous rituximab (1400 mg), stratified by induction chemotherapy regimen (cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, prednisone or cyclophosphamide, vincristine, prednisone), Follicular Lymphoma International Prognostic Index score, and region. After randomisation, patients received one induction dose of intravenous rituximab in cycle 1 and then allocated treatment for cycles 2-8. Patients with a complete or partial response following induction therapy continued intravenous or subcutaneous rituximab as maintenance every 8 weeks. The primary endpoint was the ratio of observed rituximab serum trough concentrations (Ctrough) between groups at cycle 7 (before cycle 8 dosing) of induction treatment in a per-protocol population. Patients were analysed as treated for safety endpoints. Stage 2 follow-up is ongoing and is fully accrued. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01200758. FINDINGS: Between Feb 4, 2010, and Oct 21, 2011, we enrolled 127 patients. Pharmacokinetic data were available for 48 (75%) of 64 patients randomly allocated intravenous rituximab and 54 (86%) of 63 patients randomly allocated subcutaneous rituximab. Geometric mean Ctrough was 83·13 μg/mL in the intravenous group and 134·58 μg/mL in the subcutaneous group (ratio 1·62, 90% CI 1·36-1·94), showing non-inferiority of subcutaneous rituximab. 57 (88%) of 65 patients in the intravenous rituximab safety population had adverse events (30 [46%] grade ≥3), as did 57 (92%) of 62 patients in the subcutaneous rituximab safety population (29 [47%] grade ≥3). The most common grade 3 or worse adverse event in both groups was neutropenia (14 [22%] patients in the intravenous group and 16 [26%] patients in the subcutaneous group). Adverse events related to administration were mostly grade 1-2 and occurred in 21 (32%) patients in the intravenous group and 31 (50%) patients in the subcutaneous group. INTERPRETATION: Stage 1 data show that the pharmacokinetic profile of subcutaneous rituximab was non-inferior to intravenous rituximab and was not associated with new safety concerns. Stage 2 will provide data for efficacy and safety of the subcutaneous administration. FUNDING: F Hoffmann-La Roche.
Authors: Saad Z Usmani; Hareth Nahi; Maria-Victoria Mateos; Niels W C J van de Donk; Ajai Chari; Jonathan L Kaufman; Philippe Moreau; Albert Oriol; Torben Plesner; Lotfi Benboubker; Peter Hellemans; Tara Masterson; Pamela L Clemens; Man Luo; Kevin Liu; Jesus San-Miguel Journal: Blood Date: 2019-07-03 Impact factor: 22.113
Authors: Gabriela Maria Wiedemann; Severin Johannes Jacobi; Michael Chaloupka; Angelina Krächan; Svetlana Hamm; Stefan Strobl; Roland Baumgartner; Simon Rothenfusser; Peter Duewell; Stefan Endres; Sebastian Kobold Journal: Oncoimmunology Date: 2016-05-31 Impact factor: 8.110