Fludarabine plus alemtuzumab versus fludarabine alone in patients with previously treated chronic lymphocytic leukaemia: a randomised phase 3 trial. Consolidation with alemtuzumab in patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) in first remission--experience on safety and efficacy within a randomized multicenter phase III trial of the German CLL Study Group (GCLLSG). Alemtuzumab compared with chlorambucil as first-line therapy for chronic lymphocytic leukemia.
Chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (CLL) is an incurable and chronic disorder, with worsening prognosis for patients as their disease progresses. We compared the efficacy and safety of the combination of fludarabine and alemtuzumab with fludarabine monotherapy in previously treated patients with relapsed or refractory CLL.
                Patients (aged ≥ 18 years) with CLL Binet stage A, B, or C or Rai stages I-IV were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio according to a computer-generated allocation schedule to open-label combination treatment (fludarabine 30 mg/m(2) per day and alemtuzumab 30 mg per day on days 1-3) or monotherapy (fludarabine 25 mg/m(2) on days 1-5) by use of an interactive voice response system. Both regimens were given intravenously for a maximum of six 28-day cycles. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Analysis was by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00086580.
                Fludarabine plus alemtuzumab (n=168) resulted in better PFS than did fludarabine monotherapy (n=167; median 23·7 months [95% CI 19·2-28·4] vs 16·5 months [12·5-21·2]; hazard ratio 0·61 [95% CI 0·47-0·80]; p=0·0003) and overall survival (median not reached vs 52·9 months [40·9-not reached]; 0·65 [0·45-0·94]; p=0·021) compared with fludarabine alone. All-cause adverse events occurred in 161 (98%) of 164 patients in the combination treatment group and 149 (90%) of 165 in the fludarabine alone group. Patients in the fludarabine plus alemtuzumab group had more cytomegalovirus events (23 [14%] vs one [<1%]) and grade 1 or 2 potentially alemtuzumab infusion-related adverse reactions (102 [62%] vs 22 [13%]). Grade 3 or 4 toxicities in the combination treatment and monotherapy groups were leucopenia (121 [74%] of 164 vs 55 [34%] of 164), lymphopenia (149 [94%] of 158 vs 53 [33%] of 161), neutropenia (93 [59%] of 157 vs 110 [68%] of 161), thrombocytopenia (18 [11%] of 164 vs 27 [17%] of 163), and anaemia (14 [9%] of 163 vs 28 [17%] of 164). The incidence of serious adverse events was higher in the combination treatment group (54 [33%] of 164 vs 41 [25%] of 165); deaths due to adverse events were similar between the two groups (ten [6%] vs 12 [7%]).
                The combination of fludarabine and alemtuzumab is another treatment option for patients with previously treated CLL.
                Genzyme.
                Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Patients with CLL responding to initial chemotherapy with fludarabine alone (F) or in combination with cyclophosphamide (FC) were randomized for treatment with alemtuzumab (30 mg i.v. TIW, 12 weeks) or observation. Of 21 evaluable patients, 11 were randomized to alemtuzumab before the study was stopped due to severe infections in seven of 11 patients. These infections (one life-threatening pulmonary aspergillosis IV; four CMV reactivations III requiring i.v. ganciclovir; one pulmonary tuberculosis III; one herpes zoster III) were successfully treated and not associated with cumulative dose of alemtuzumab. In the observation arm, one herpes zoster infection II and one sinusitis I were documented. At 6 months after randomization, two patients in the alemtuzumab arm converted to CR, while three patients in the observation arm progressed. After alemtuzumab treatment, five of six patients achieved a molecular remission in peripheral blood while all patients in the observation arm remained MRD-positive (P=0.048). At 21.4 months median follow-up, patients receiving alemtuzumab showed a significant longer progression-free survival (no progression vs mean 24.7 months; P=0.036). In conclusion, a consolidation therapy with alemtuzumab is able to achieve molecular remissions and longer survival in CLL, but a safe treatment regimen needs to be determined. We conducted a randomized trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of intravenous alemtuzumab compared with chlorambucil in first-line treatment of chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL).
                Patients received alemtuzumab (30 mg three times per week, for up to 12 weeks) or chlorambucil (40 mg/m(2) every 28 days, for up to 12 months). The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary end points included overall response rate (ORR), complete response (CR), time to alternative therapy, safety, and overall survival.
                We randomly assigned 297 patients, 149 to alemtuzumab and 148 to chlorambucil. Alemtuzumab had superior PFS, with a 42% reduction in risk of progression or death (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.58; P = .0001), and a median time to alternative treatment of 23.3 versus 14.7 months for chlorambucil (HR = 0.54; P = .0001). The ORR was 83% with alemtuzumab (24% CR) versus 55% with chlorambucil (2% CR); differences in ORR and CR were highly statistically significant (P < .0001). Elimination of minimal residual disease occurred in 11 of 36 complete responders to alemtuzumab versus none to chlorambucil. Adverse events profiles were similar, except for more infusion-related and cytomegalovirus (CMV) events with alemtuzumab and more nausea and vomiting with chlorambucil. CMV events had no apparent impact on efficacy.
                As first-line treatment for patients with CLL, alemtuzumab demonstrated significantly improved PFS, time to alternative treatment, ORR and CR, and minimal residual disease-negative remissions compared with chlorambucil, with predictable and manageable toxicity.
In summary, the currently available evidence suggests an OS, CRR and PFS benefit for alemtuzumab compared with no further therapy, but an increased risk for infections in general, CMV infections and CMV reactivations. The role of alemtuzumab versus rituximab still remains unclear, further trials with longer follow-up and overall survival as primary endpoint are needed to evaluate the effects of both agents compared with each other. Alemtuzumab compared with chlorambucil seems to be favourable in terms of PFS, but a longer follow-up period and trials with overall survival as primary endpoint are needed to determine whether this effect will translate into a survival advantage.