Display options
Share it on

Biomark Res. 2014 Sep 08;2:16. doi: 10.1186/2050-7771-2-16. eCollection 2014.

Tolerability to romidepsin in patients with relapsed/refractory T-cell lymphoma.

Biomarker research

Francine Foss, Bertrand Coiffier, Steven Horwitz, Barbara Pro, H Miles Prince, Lubomir Sokol, Matthew Greenwood, Adam Lerner, Dolores Caballero, Eugeniusz Baran, Ellen Kim, Jean Nichols, Barbara Balser, Julie Wolfson, Sean Whittaker

Affiliations

  1. Yale Cancer Center, PO Box 208028, 333 Cedar Street, TMP 3, New Haven, CT 06520-8028, USA.
  2. Hospices Civils de Lyon, Lyon, France.
  3. Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
  4. Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
  5. Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre and University of Melbourne, East Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
  6. Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL, USA.
  7. Royal North Shore Hospital, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
  8. Boston Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA.
  9. Hospital Universitario de Salamanca, Salamanca, Spain.
  10. Wroclaw Medical University, Wroclaw, Poland.
  11. University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
  12. J Nichols LLC, Swampscott, MA, USA.
  13. Veristat, LLC, Holliston, MA, USA.
  14. Guy's and St Thomas' Hospital, London, England, United Kingdom.

PMID: 25279222 PMCID: PMC4181623 DOI: 10.1186/2050-7771-2-16

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Histone deacetylase inhibitor romidepsin has demonstrated durable clinical responses and tolerability in patients with relapsed/refractory peripheral and cutaneous T-cell lymphoma (PTCL, CTCL). Selection of novel drug therapies for patients with relapsed/refractory aggressive lymphoma requires not only considerations regarding efficacy but also careful evaluation of toxicities as well as overall clinical benefit. The purpose of this analysis was to examine common adverse events (AEs) reported in pivotal trials of romidepsin in relapsed/refractory PTCL or CTCL and to more clearly define the overall AE profile in these populations.

METHODS: Patients with relapsed/refractory PTCL or CTCL were treated with romidepsin at 14 mg/m(2) as a 4-hour intravenous infusion on days 1, 8, and 15 of 28-day cycles for up to 6 cycles; patients with at least stable disease could extend therapy until progressive disease or another withdrawal criterion was met. All enrolled patients who received ≥ 1 dose of romidepsin were included in the AE analyses.

RESULTS: Overall, safety profiles of common AEs were similar, although patients with relapsed/refractory PTCL had more frequent hematologic toxicities and grade ≥ 3 infections. In both patient populations, the greatest incidence of grade ≥ 3 AEs and the majority of discontinuations due to AEs occurred during cycles 1-2. Early discontinuations were primarily related to infection, thrombocytopenia, or electrocardiogram abnormalities, confirming the need to closely monitor patients with poor bone marrow reserve or other comorbidities. Despite this, 28% of patients with relapsed/refractory PTCL and 36% of patients with relapsed/refractory CTCL continued on romidepsin treatment for ≥ 6 cycles.

CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that patients with relapsed/refractory PTCL or CTCL have similar AE profiles with romidepsin treatment, although patients with PTCL experienced more frequent and more severe hematologic toxicities and more frequent grade ≥ 3 infections. The greatest incidence of grade ≥ 3 AEs and the majority of discontinuations due to AEs occurred during treatment cycles 1-2. Extended dosing of romidepsin can be tolerated in responding patients.

TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT00426764,NCT00106431.

Keywords: Adverse events; CTCL; Discontinuations; PTCL; Romidepsin

References

  1. Curr Opin Oncol. 2007 Sep;19(5):438-43 - PubMed
  2. Oncologist. 2002;7(1):65-72 - PubMed
  3. Acta Derm Venereol. 2010;90(1):12-7 - PubMed
  4. J Clin Oncol. 2008 Sep 1;26(25):4124-30 - PubMed
  5. J Hematol Oncol. 2010 Feb 04;3:5 - PubMed
  6. Ann Pharmacother. 2003 Sep;37(9):1276-86 - PubMed
  7. Clin Cancer Res. 2002 Mar;8(3):718-28 - PubMed
  8. J Clin Oncol. 2010 Nov 1;28(31):4730-9 - PubMed
  9. Clin Cancer Res. 2006 Jun 15;12(12):3762-73 - PubMed
  10. Clin J Oncol Nurs. 2012 Apr;16(2):195-204 - PubMed
  11. Dermatol Nurs. 2006 Dec;18(6):566-70, 573-5 - PubMed
  12. Nat Chem Biol. 2010 Mar;6(3):238-243 - PubMed
  13. Blood. 2001 Nov 1;98(9):2865-8 - PubMed
  14. Cancer Control. 2001 Mar-Apr;8(2):185-8 - PubMed
  15. Blood. 2011 Jun 2;117(22):5827-34 - PubMed
  16. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2006 Sep;5(9):769-84 - PubMed
  17. J Clin Oncol. 2011 Mar 20;29(9):1182-9 - PubMed
  18. Blood. 2011 Jun 23;117(25):6756-67 - PubMed
  19. J Clin Oncol. 2012 Feb 20;30(6):631-6 - PubMed
  20. J Hematol Oncol. 2014 Jan 23;7:11 - PubMed
  21. JAMA. 1992 Mar 11;267(10):1354-8 - PubMed
  22. J Clin Oncol. 2010 Oct 10;28(29):4485-91 - PubMed
  23. Blood. 2007 Sep 15;110(6):1713-22 - PubMed
  24. Hematol Oncol Clin North Am. 2008 Oct;22(5):979-96, x - PubMed
  25. Blood. 2011 Mar 31;117(13):3658-68 - PubMed
  26. Clin Cancer Res. 2006 Jul 1;12(13):3997-4003 - PubMed
  27. J Clin Oncol. 2009 Nov 10;27(32):5410-7 - PubMed

Publication Types