TriangleHEALTH PROFESSIONAL · SOURCE READING
Ibrutinib versus acalabrutinib
Source: Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia Treatment (PDQ®)–Health Professional Version, National Cancer Institute.
Source updated: April 25, 2025 · Captured 2026-09-09.
Selected source text with whitespace normalised. This Triangle page is not an NCI PDQ summary.
Evidence (ibrutinib vs. acalabrutinib):
A prospective randomized trial of 533 previously untreated patients compared the BTK inhibitors acalabrutinib and ibrutinib.[7]
Source links and citations
A prospective randomized trial of 533 previously untreated patients compared the BTK inhibitors acalabrutinib and ibrutinib.[7]
With a median follow-up of 41 months, acalabrutinib was noninferior to ibrutinib, with a median PFS of 38.4 months for patients in both arms of the trial (HR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.79–1.27).[7][Level of evidence B1]
Source links and citations
A prospective randomized trial of 533 previously untreated patients compared the BTK inhibitors acalabrutinib and ibrutinib.[7]
The incidence of atrial fibrillation of any grade was lower for patients who received acalabrutinib than for patients who received ibrutinib (9.4% vs. 16.0%, P = .02). In this trial, the incidence of diarrhea and headaches was significantly higher in patients who received acalabrutinib (P < .05), while musculoskeletal pain was higher in patients who received ibrutinib (P = .0229).[8]
Source links and citations
A prospective randomized trial of 533 previously untreated patients compared the BTK inhibitors acalabrutinib and ibrutinib.[7]
Ventricular arrhythmias and sudden death events appear to be a side effect of all the BTK inhibitors. For acalabrutinib, these events occur with a relative risk of 8.2 over age-matched controls.[9]
Source links and citations
Publication references
Read the original reference and check its publication notices.
Preserved source evidence · Not medical advice