Which Treatment Strategies Work Best in CLL Management?

Commentary
Video

Fixed-duration therapy may be more suitable for younger patients, while continuous therapy may benefit those who are older with more comorbidities.

Scott Huntington, MD, MPH, MSc, spoke with CancerNetwork® about his strategies for selecting the most appropriate therapies for patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). He detailed how relevant molecular factors and patient characteristics may influence the types of usable therapy across different populations.

According to Huntington, 2 primary treatment strategies in CLL management include continuous therapy—often with a Bruton’s tyrosine kinase inhibitor—and fixed-duration therapy, which typically includes a venetoclax (Venclexta) backbone. He stated that patients with lower-risk disease, such as those who are younger, may benefit from fixed-duration therapy and treatment-free intervals that last several years. On the other hand, those who are older and have more competing comorbidities may be candidates to receive continuous therapy and other strategies intended to ease administration and minimize visits to the clinic.

Huntington is an associate professor of Internal Medicine (Hematology) at Yale School of Medicine and the Medical Director of Yale Cancer Center's Hematology Outpatient Program.

Transcript:

For patients these days, we have 2 strategies. One strategy is continuous therapy with the Bruton's tyrosine kinase inhibitor, and then the other strategy is what we call fixed-duration treatment with a backbone of venetoclax. We are moving towards combining both orally administered therapies, the Bruton's tyrosine kinase inhibitors with the venetoclax, to allow [intravenous]-free, all-oral, fixed-duration treatments. When selecting either continuous or fixed-duration treatment, we think about both molecular factors—what is driving the CLL—and then also patient factors. In terms of molecular features that might lead us to one decision over another—17p status mutation in a TP53 gene, or those that have an unmutated heavy chain—we view those as a little more aggressive. Historical data support often using a continuous approach, at least in the first-line setting. When we think about patients who have lower-risk disease, where they will likely benefit from fixed-duration treatment, and then have treatment-free intervals lasting many years, that's when we often will favor fixed-duration venetoclax-based therapy.

Also, there are patient factors. If a patient is older [and] has competing comorbidities, the therapy might be focused on ease of administration and minimizing the [number] of visits to clinic, and that often favors this continuous kind of single-agent Bruton's tyrosine kinase inhibitor approach. [Alternatively], if you have a patient who is young, having a treatment-free interval with a fixed-duration therapy with venetoclax-based therapy is often favored. Again, in CLL, we think about the actual disease characteristics molecularly. Also, [we consider], “What are the patient's values and desires for their treatment plan?”

Recent Videos
Computational models help researchers anticipate how ADCs may behave in later lines of development, while they are still in the early stages.
ADC payloads with high levels of potency can sometimes lead to higher levels of toxicity, which can eliminate the therapeutic window for patients with cancer.
According to Greg Thurber, PhD, target-mediated uptake is the biggest driver of efficacy for antibody-drug conjugates as a cancer treatment.
Combining daratumumab with other agents is one strategy that investigators are exploring in the smoldering multiple myeloma field.
Antibody-drug conjugates are effective, but strategies such as better understanding the mechanisms of action may lead to enhanced care for patients with cancer. Antibody-drug conjugates are effective, but strategies such as better understanding the mechanisms of action may lead to enhanced care for patients with cancer.
Co-hosts Kristie L. Kahl and Andrew Svonavec highlight what to expect at the 43rd Annual Chemotherapy Foundation Symposium, such as new chemotherapeutics and targeted therapies.
A substantial portion of patients who received daratumumab in the AQUILA study were able to delay disease progression to active multiple myeloma.
Results showed no “deleterious reactions” with chlorotoxin-directed cellular therapy in a small cohort of patients with recurrent glioblastoma.
Although 1 of 21 patients with liver-dominant NETs died due to RILD in the phase 1 study, no RILD-induced deaths were observed in the phase 2 trial.
A novel CAR T-cell therapy may bind with more avidity, rather than affinity, to glioblastoma cells, said Michael Barish, PhD.
Related Content