All content on this site is intended for healthcare professionals only. By acknowledging this message and accessing the information on this website you are confirming that you are a Healthcare Professional. If you are a patient or carer, please visit the Lymphoma Coalition.
The Lymphoma Hub uses cookies on this website. They help us give you the best online experience. By continuing to use our website without changing your cookie settings, you agree to our use of cookies in accordance with our updated Cookie Policy
Introducing
Now you can personalise
your Lymphoma Hub experience!
Bookmark content to read later
Select your specific areas of interest
View content recommended for you
Find out moreThe Lymphoma Hub website uses a third-party service provided by Google that dynamically translates web content. Translations are machine generated, so may not be an exact or complete translation, and the Lymphoma Hub cannot guarantee the accuracy of translated content. The Lymphoma Hub and its employees will not be liable for any direct, indirect, or consequential damages (even if foreseeable) resulting from use of the Google Translate feature. For further support with Google Translate, visit Google Translate Help.
The Lymphoma & CLL Hub is an independent medical education platform, sponsored by Beigene, Johnson & Johnson and Roche, and supported through educational grants from Bristol Myers Squibb, Incyte, Lilly, and Pfizer. View funders.
MURANO: Final analysis and substudy results of VenR in R/R CLL
Bookmark this article
|
High-level expression of the antiapoptotic protein BCL2 is a key feature of CLL, making it an ideal therapeutic target.1 The phase III MURANO trial (NCT02005471) evaluated the efficacy of venetoclax-rituximab (VenR) vs bendamustine-rituximab (BR) in patients R/R CLL.1,2 Patients were randomly assigned to receive VenR (n = 194) or BR (n = 195).1 The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed PFS, with MRD status a key secondary endpoint.1 In the substudy, patients with PD received VenR as retreatment (n = 25) or crossover from BR (n = 9) and patient outcomes were analyzed based on patient’s genetic profiles.2 Results were published by Kater et al. in Blood.2 |
| Key learnings |
| The mPFS was significantly higher for VenR vs BR at 54.7 months vs 17 months, respectively (p < 0.0001). The 7-year PFS rate was 23% for VenR, with no BR-treated patients remaining progression-free at this time.1 |
| For VenR-treated patients with uMRD/no PD at EOT, the mPFS was 52.5 months, vs 18.0 months for those with MRD at EOT (p < 0.0001).1 |
| The substudy results showed encouraging outcomes with VenR-retreated and VenR-crossover patients; mPFS was 23 months and 27 months, and best ORR was 72% and 89%, respectively.2 |
| The results of the MURANO trial demonstrate long-term deep and durable efficacy for VenR. The data provide continued support for the treatment of R/R CLL with fixed-duration VenR, and suggest that VenR retreatment is a viable option.1 |
Abbreviations: BR, bendamustine-rituximab; CLL, chronic lymphocytic leukemia; EOT, end of treatment; mPFS, median progression-free survival; MRD, minimal residual disease; ORR, overall response rate; OS, overall survival; PD, progressive disease; R/R, relapsed/refractory; uMRD, undetectable MRD; VenR, venetoclax-rituximab.
- Seymour JF, Kipps TJ, Eichhorst B, et al. Venetoclax–rituximab in relapsed or refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia. N Engl J Med. 2018;378:1107-1120. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1713976
- Kater AP, Harrup RA, Kipps TJ, et al. The MURANO study: final analysis and retreatment/crossover substudy results of VenR for patients with relapsed/refractory CLL. Blood. 2025. Online ahead of print. DOI: 10.1182/blood.2024025525
Understanding your specialty helps us to deliver the most relevant and engaging content.
Please spare a moment to share yours.
Please select or type your specialty
Thank youYour opinion matters
2 votes - 2 days left ...
Newsletter
Subscribe to get the best content related to lymphoma & CLL delivered to your inbox