throbber
3 URNAL OF
`
`T, E AMERiCAN
`
`VOLUME 96
`
`av MBER 16, 2000 I
`
`1 OF 2 PARTS
`
`800:};E‘TY OF
`MATOLOGY ;
`
`
`
`~ ~
`
`ematology
`I ~
`~
`
`ty-second
`~ 1 ~
`
`al meeting
`4 I
`
`~
`
`ber1-5, 2000 V
`
`Francisgb,
`
`DR. REDDY’S LABS., INC. EX. 1047 PAGE 1
`
`DR. REDDY’S LABS., INC. EX. 1047 PAGE 1
`
`

`

`168a
`
`MYELOMA/CLL - NOVEL APPROACHES INCLUDING BIOLOGICAL AGENTS, IMMUNE THERAPY, AND THALIDC)MIDE
`
`Witzig.'Hematology,
`
`py
`
`I
`
`h
`
`722-I
`Poster Board ¹-Session:
`722
`Abstract¹
`THALIDOMIDE PLUS DEXAMETHASONE (THAL/DEX) AND
`THALIDOMIDE ALONE (THAL) AS FIRST LINE THERAPY FOR
`NEWLY DIAGNOSED MYELOMA (MM). S.V. Rajkumar,'.
`Hayman,'. Fonseca,'. Dispenzieri,'.Q. Lacy,'. Geyer"','.
`Wellik4,( J.A. Lust,'.A. Kyle,'R. Greipp,( M.A. Gertz,'E.
`Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
`V~k'ldph
`dThl
`fThVfy*
`lll
`l
`fl
`hl
`1
`conelative
`studies
`(mtenm analysis).
`m new untreated MM with laboiatory
`Methods: Patients
`(pts) with active MM werc treated with the Thai/Dex combmation.
`or mdolent MM (SMM/IMM) were treated with Thai alone Thai
`Pts with smoldenng
`was given orally at a dose of 200 mg/day
`for 2 weeks, and then increased as tolerated by
`every 2 weeks to a maximum dose of 800 mg/day. Dex was given orally at a
`200 mg/day
`days 1-4
`orally on days 1-4, 9-12, 17-20 (odd cycles) and 40 mg/day
`dose of 40 mg/day
`(even cycles) repeated monthly. Response was defined as a decrease in serum and urine
`(M) protein by 50% or greater. Bone marrow (BM) microvessel
`monoclonal
`density
`for CD34 was estimated by determming
`(MVD) using immunostainmg
`the average number
`of vessels in 3 hot spots at 400x magnification. BM angiogenesis was also visually graded
`as Iow, intermediate
`and high.
`Results: 42 pts (26 with active MM and 16 with smoldering/mdolent
`MM) were
`arm, 2 pts had grade 3-4 skin toxicity among the first 7 pts
`In the Thai/Dex
`studied
`at Thai dose of 400mg. The Thai/Dex
`to stop dose
`then amended
`treated,
`arm was
`and keep Thai dose constant at 200mg. An objective response was seen in 20
`escalation,
`'I'he iesponse rate was 86% with Thai
`pts (77%) with active MM treated with Thai/Dex.
`dose escalation {6of 7 pts), and 74% with Thai dose constant
`at 200mg (14 of 19 pts),
`Ma)or grade 3-4 toxicities were rash in 3 pts, and sedation, constipation
`and myalgias
`in
`I pt each. In the SMM/IMM arm, 6 pts (38%) achieved a response with Thai alone
`Median pre-treatment MVD was 27 in the active MM arm, and 7 m the SMM/IMM arm
`grade was high in 64% of active MM and 8% of SMM/IMM,
`(p&0.001). Angiogenesis
`(p&0.001) The proportion of pts with a high(&1) PCLI was 67%, 9%, 0% for high,
`(p&0.001). No significant
`and low grade angiogenesis
`intermediate,
`changes
`respectively
`were observed m MVD following treatment; pre-treatment MVD and angiogenesis
`grade
`did not appear
`to be associated with response to therapy.
`Conclusions: Thai/Dex is strikingly
`effective as first
`(and an oral
`line therapy
`to mfusional VAD) for new, active MM. SMM/IMM pts also appear
`to
`alternative
`responses with Thai alone, However,
`achieve significant
`these results are preltmina(y
`and
`in the final
`are still being evaluated
`responses/toxicities
`confirmation
`and need further
`analysis of this trial.
`
`Poster Board ¹-Session: 723-1
`Abstract¹ 723
`A PHASE II TRIAL OF THALIDOMIDE IN THE TREATMENT OF
`RELAPSED MULTIPLE MYELOMA (MM) WITH LABORATORY
`CORRELATIVE STUDIES. S.V.Rajkumar,'. Fonseca,'. Dispenzieri,'.Q.
`
`Lacy '.Geyer* '.Wellik*,'. Hayman,'.A. Lust,'.A. Kyle,'.R.
`
`Greipp,'.A. Gertz,'.E. Witzig.'Hematology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester,
`MN, USA.
`Aim: A phase II trial of thalidomide
`correlative
`in relapsed MM with laboratory
`studies examimng bone marrow (BM) angiogenesis
`and plasma cell proliferation.
`Methods: 32 patients
`(pts), 22 male and 10 female, with relapsed MM were tteated
`between April 1999 and July 2000. Thalidomide was given orally at a dose of 200 mg/day
`then increased as tolerated by 200 mg/day
`for 2 weeks,
`every 2 weeks, up to a maximum
`daily dose of 800 mg/day. Response was defined as a decrease in serum and urine monoclonal
`(M) protein by 50% or greater, and confirmed by repeat measurements
`at leas( 2 weeks
`apart. BM angiogenesis was studied in a bhnded manner using immunohistocheinical
`in 27 pts (84%). Microvessel density (MVD)
`staming for CD34 to identify riucrovessels
`the ave(age number of vessels
`in 3 hot spots examined
`was estima(ed by deternuning
`at
`400x magmfication. Angiogenesis was also visually graded as low,
`intermediate
`and high
`Plasma cell (PC) proliferation was studied using a slide based immunofluorescent
`assay (plasma cell labeling uidex, PCLI).
`bromodeoxyuridine mcoiporation
`(range, 36-78) All pts had failed poor
`Results: The median
`age was 67 years
`and 5 (16%) had failed stem cell transplantation.
`Response is still bemg
`chemotherapy
`two cycles of data are evaluable
`and currently 26 patients with at least
`for
`evaluated,
`rate of 38%. No complete
`response. 10 responses were confirmed,
`a response
`yieldmg
`responses were seen. Ma)or grade 3 toxicities were sedation (10%) and neuropathy
`(10%). One pt each had grade 3 constipation,
`rash and vertigo. Pre-treatment MVD
`ranged 5-47 per 400x field (median 20) Angiogenesis grade was high in 52%, intermediate
`in 30%, and low in 18% No sigiuficant changes were observed in MVD followmg treatment
`on whom at least 2 BM samples were available
`in 4 responders
`for study Pre-treatment
`MVD and angiogenesis
`grade did not appear
`to be associated with response
`(o therapy
`in pts with a high PCLI (&I) compared to those
`Response rates were significantly
`higher
`with a low PCLI, 57% versus 21%, respectively,
`(p=0.02)
`is effective in the treatment of relapsed MM with a
`Conclusions: Thahdomide
`response rate of 38% ui this study. Its mechanism of action remains unclear. These results
`that a high PCLI is a potential predictor of iesponse to therapy.
`suggest
`
`Poster Board ¹-Session.
`724
`Abstract¹
`72(I I
`ANGIOGENESIS FACTORS AND SENSITIVITY TO THALIDOMIDE
`IN PREVIOUSI Y UNTREATED MULTIPLE MYELOMA (MM). D.IVI
`Weber, K. Rankin", M. Gav(no4, K. Delasalle*, A. Aguayo*, M. Albitar
`of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Cen(e,.
`R Alexanian
`University
`Hoes(on, TX.
`Between 5/99 — I/00 plasma levels of multiple
`factors (VEGF, bFGF
`angiogenesis
`(11.-6, IL-8, EGF, IL-lb) were assessed ni 19
`HGF, TNF-a, angiogemn)
`and cytokines
`patients with asymptomatic MM. The median level of VEGF
`untreated
`previously
`(100 8 pg/mL) was 3.8 tunes higher
`than that of 11 control pts. with solid tumors
`(26 7
`than pnor median levels measured for all categories of leukem,c
`(p& 05), and higher
`pg/mL)
`disordeis Values of bFGF, HGF, and angiogenin were approximately
`double
`that pf
`in leukemia. Only minunal
`controls and similai
`to those observed previously
`elevatipii pf
`density was increased (median 14.5 blppd
`cytokmcs was noted. Marrow miciovascular
`field) m 8 untreated pts with available samples compared to control pts. Because
`vessels/
`effect of thalidomide,
`of (he pos(ula(ed antiangiogenic
`an agent effective in resistant
`myeloma, we treated 26 previously
`pts. with thalidomide
`untreated
`asymptomatic
`in
`doses of 200 mg p o q. h s, increasing to a maximum of 600 mg. Partial response, defined
`protein and/or & 75% reduction of Bence Jones
`by & 50% reduction of serum myeloma
`protein, was aclneved in 9 pts. (35%). Onset of response was rapid (median 1.5 months),
`and the piojected mean remission duration was 14 months. Median VEGF of responding
`patients was 4 times that of nonresponding
`pts. (p.06); response was observed in I of 10
`pts with VEGF & 100, and in 3 of 8 pts with VEGF & 100 (p.16). Microvascular
`density
`was available m only one respondmg pt., and the level of 23 vessels/field was the highest
`occurred with high dose
`specimens. Subsequent
`noted among 8 available
`remissions
`ui 2 of 5 pts. with disease resistant
`to thalidomide. These observations
`dexamethasone
`Justify fu(ther correlations of angiogenesis markers with thalidomide
`trials, extend tbe
`spectrum of thahdomide
`to previously
`untreated disease, and support
`ant(myeloma
`further
`trials in combination with other active agents.
`
`Kienast,'Department
`
`Poster Board ¹-Session:
`Abstract¹ 725
`725-I
`HYPKRFRACTIONATED CYCLOPHOSPHAMIDE IN COMBINATION
`WITH PUI (sED DEXAMKTHASONE AND THALIDOMIDE (HYPER-CDT)
`IN PRIMARY REFRACTORY OR RELAPSED MULTIPLE MYELOMA,
`Martin H. Kropff*,'eorg Innig"','anfred Mitterer",'hristian
`Strakaa,4
`Helmut Ostermann,'laf M. Koch,'olfgang E.Berdel,'oachim
`of Internal Med(cine, Hematology/Oncology,
`University of
`of Internal Medicine,
`'Department
`Muens(er, Muenster, Germany;
`'Abteitung fur Hamatologie
`Paracelsuskl(n(k, Osnabrueck, Germany;
`und
`Italy&; Medical Clinic, Kh'nikum
`KMT, Reg(onalkrankenhaus,
`IIozen,
`Innenstad( of Ludwig -Maxi ini lian s- Uni vers i(y, Munich, Germany; Medical
`Clinic Ill, Klinikuni Graf)hadern, Mumch, Germany.
`is active in = 30 % of patients with advanced multiple myeloma
`Thalidonude
`(MM)
`has been reported to restore the sensitivity of myeloma
`Moreover,
`thahdonude
`cells to
`(DEX) The present phase II trial was intitiated to study the combination
`dexamethasone
`of thalidomide with pulsed DEX and hyperfracuonated
`cyclophosphainide
`(HyperC).
`at the schedule employed in this study and combined with VAD has
`HyperC administered
`been shown to mduce 40 % iesponses
`in VAD-resistant MM. 20 patients
`previously
`courses of HyperC (300 mg/ni
`with advanced (VIM were treated with 2 to 6 monthly
`IV
`ovei 3 h q 12 h x 6 doses, days 1 — 3, total dose 1800 mg/m')
`combined with pulsed DEX
`PO, days 1 —4, 9 - 12, 17 - 20) and once daily thalidomide
`(20 mg/m'/d
`at individually
`escalating doses (100 to 400 mg/d)
`care included G-CSF, ciprofloxacin and
`Supportive
`non-absorbable
`agents. Responding patients were maintained on daily thalidomide
`annfungal
`and monthly DEX pulses. 6 patients had primary
`refractory disease on VAD or ID. 14
`Patient characteristics
`had relapsed aftei high-dose melphalan
`patients
`included median
`age 63 years, B2M & 2,5 mg/L, 25 %; CRP & 4,0 mg/L, 10 %; and poor standard therapy
`& 12 mo, 80 % Among 14 evaluable patients, 12 (86 %) achieved a partial
`remission (PR);
`(2 - 14), all 12 PR
`as yet, no complete (emission. After a median follow-up of 7 months
`are ahve and free of disease progression,
`experienced grade 4
`10/20 patients
`pa(ients
`during ai least one cycle; no grade 4 thrombocytopenia.
`neutropenia
`There were two grade
`3/4 infections, one patient died dunng neutropenic
`another patient developed
`pneumonia;
`colitis but recovered Other side effects included grade 2 constipation (35 %),
`neutropenic
`grade 2/3 skm reactions (15 %), and 1 deep venous
`thrombosis.
`In 3 patients
`thalidomide
`(2) or stun reaction (1), and treatment was continued
`was stopped due to neurotoxicity
`requued a dose linutation of thalidomide
`to 300 mg
`In addition, 5 patients
`with HypeiCD.
`(1), 200 mg (1), oi 100 mg (3) due to neurotoxicity. HyperCDT appears
`to be a highly
`active and ieasonably well
`tolerated regimen in advanced MM
`
`Poster Board ¹-Session: 726-I
`Abstract¹ 726
`ENDURABLE RESPONSE TO THALIDOMIDE IN RELAPSED/
`REFRACTORY MULTIPLE MYELOMA (MM). Syed N. Raza~,'uliya
`Veksler*,'ariq Sabir','ujun Li','orraine Anderson4,'undar
`Jagannath.'S(. Vincentr Comprehensive Cancer Center, New York Medical
`College, New York, NY, USA.
`Recently Thalidomide
`anti-cancer
`as a promising
`has re-emerged
`agent
`in many
`(via b-FGF) and on
`due to its mhibitory
`effects on angiogenegis
`refractory mahgnancies
`TNF-(( Last year we repoi ted the impressive eflicscy of Thalidomide
`in re) apsedhefractor)'M
`An update with more patients
`(pts) and longer
`follow-up
`is presented here'e
`(F/U)
`have treated 35 pts with ielapsed/refractory MM from March 1998 to July 2000
`with a median F/U ot'2 montlis
`(mo) {(ange 6-28+) Median age was 58yrs (range 33-77)
`Median number of piro( cheniotheiapies was 3 (range 1-8). 12 pts had one and 3 pts had
`
`DR. REDDY’S LABS., INC. EX. 1047 PAGE 2
`
`

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

Still Working On It

This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.

Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.

throbber

A few More Minutes ... Still Working

It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.

Thank you for your continued patience.

This document could not be displayed.

We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

Set your membership status to view this document.

With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll get a whole lot more, including:

  • Up-to-date information for this case.
  • Email alerts whenever there is an update.
  • Full text search for other cases.
  • Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.

Become a Member

One Moment Please

The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.

Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.

Your document is on its way!

If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.

Sealed Document

We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.

If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.


Access Government Site

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket