Table 2.
Ibrutinib based Regimens in CLL in the Frontline Setting
| Study | Regimen | N | Phase | PFS (median follow up in months) | uMRD in peripheral blood |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Woyach, 2018 [124] | BR vs Ibr vs Ibr-R | 208 | II | 74% vs 87% vs 88% (24) | 8% vs 1% vs 4% |
| Moreno 2019 [125] | Ibr + O vs Chl + O | 229 | III | 90% vs 31% (30) | 35% vs 25% |
| Shanafelt 2019 [126] | Ibr+R vs FCR | 529 | III | PFS 89.4 vs 72.9% (36) | 8.3 vs 59.2% |
| Tam 2019 [58] Wierda 2021 [60] |
Ibr + Ven | 164 | II | 95% (12)* | 75% |
| Burger 2020 [16] | Ibr vs Chl | 269 | III | 70% vs 12% (60) | N/A |
| Kater 2021 [59] | Ibr + Ven vs Chl-O | 211 | III | NR vs 21 months** | 54.7% vs 39% |
*
end point of disease free survival
**
median progression free survival
Ibr: Ibrutinib; R: Rituximab; FCR: Fludarabine/Cyclophosphamide/Rituximab; BR: Bendamustine/Rituximab; O: Obinutuzumab, Chl: Chlorambucil; Acal: acalabrutinib; Ven: Venetoclax; NR: not reached; uMRD: undetectable MRD