New research study reported in NEJM: Ibrutinib... - CLL Support

CLL Support

23,335 members40,040 posts

New research study reported in NEJM: Ibrutinib–Rituximab or Chemoimmunotherapy for Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia

jdolinger profile image
6 Replies

Found this to be a good news article. I know some will say study was funded heavily by drug companies, but so what....I base my opinion on the integrity of the researchers.

nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/N...

This post by Dr Koffman provides very valuable context for this study - explaining why the Rituximab appears to be unnecessary - Admin

healthunlocked.com/cllsuppo...

Written by
jdolinger profile image
jdolinger
To view profiles and participate in discussions please or .
Read more about...
6 Replies
PlanetaryKim profile image
PlanetaryKim

Great results and conclusion: "The ibrutinib–rituximab regimen resulted in progression-free survival and overall survival that were superior to those with a standard chemoimmunotherapy regimen [FCR] among patients 70 years of age or younger with previously untreated CLL."

But what I don't understand is that an earlier study comparing ibrutinib with or without rituximab to BR chemo found that ibrutinib with rituximab was no more effective than ibrutnib alone as monotherapy. (And both were superior to BR.) So why is anyone still trialing ibrutinib with rituximab, since that exposes patient to unnecessary toxicity, since ibrutinib as monotherapy delivers same overall survival and progression free survival?

Benlewis profile image
Benlewis in reply toPlanetaryKim

I was wondering the same thing

AussieNeil profile image
AussieNeilPartnerAdministrator in reply toBenlewis

I think that this would all be explainable by the amount of time it takes to collect and analyze the results. Also, valuable data can be gained by continuing the trial beyond 3 years. How would we know which trial gave longer remissions if we stopped one trial?

Smakwater profile image
Smakwater in reply toAussieNeil

BeeBopAlooLa Neil.

The Broader your view, The more You see!

I love it when the complex issues are stated in simple terms.

Thank You

JM

SethB34 profile image
SethB34 in reply toPlanetaryKim

Yep, I'm wondering the exact same thing. Who needs 2 drugs when only one is needed for efficacy? Perhaps the pharmaceutical company marketing rituximab is worried they won't be able to fund their Christmas ski vacation to the Alps if their drug is proven to be not essential.

schmitthj007 profile image
schmitthj007

It is a landmark trial especially since it was positive for almost all subgroups. I would love to see how this trial develops over the years to come to see if the results remain the same. For one subgroup with low risk mutation and mutated, FCR seems similar and might still be an option for those patients.

Not what you're looking for?

You may also like...

Health Canada approves Ibrutinib plus Rituximab for First Line Treatment of Patients with Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia (CLL)

Good News for our untreated Canadian members! This latest approval is based on...
AussieNeil profile image
Partner

Cellular and humoral immune response to SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines in patients treated with either Ibrutinib or Rituximab

For more than a year we have been reminding each other that even if we don't produce antibodies in...

Ibrutinib Plus Venetoclax in Relapsed/Refractory Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia: Update on The CLARITY Study

Published on line July 11, 2019, Accepted by JCO May 31 2019 Dr P Hillmen We have some members who...
Jm954 profile image
Administrator

FDA Approves Zanubrutinib for Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia or Small Lymphocytic Lymphom

FDA Approves Zanubrutinib for Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia or Small Lymphocytic Lymphoma Jan 19,...
lankisterguy profile image
Volunteer

Immunoglobulin substitution in patients with secondary antibody deficiency in chronic lymphocytic leukemia and multiple myeloma...

Please excuse me, but I believe that this study will be "lost" if I cite it in connection with the...
Yalokin profile image