A phase I study of pevonedistat, azacitidine, and venetoclax in patients with relapsed/refractory acute myeloid leukemia.

Azacitidine/venetoclax is an active regimen in patients with newly diagnosed AML. However, primary or secondary resistance to azacitidine/venetoclax is an area of unmet need and overexpression of MCL-1 is suggested to be a potential resistance mechanism. Pevonedistat inhibits MCL-1 through activation of NOXA, and pevonedistat/azacitidine has previously shown activity in AML. To assess the tolerability and efficacy of adding pevonedistat to azacitidine/venetoclax in relapsed/refractory AML, we conducted a phase I multicenter openlabel study in 16 adults with relapsed/refractory AML. Patients were treated with azacitidine, venetoclax along with pevonedistat intravenously on days 1, 3 and 5 of each 28-day cycle at 10, 15 or 20 mg/m2 in successive cohorts in the dose escalation phase. The impact of treatment on protein neddylation as well as expression of pro-apoptotic BCL2 family members was assessed. The recommended phase II dose of pevonedistat was 20 mg/m2. Grade 3 or higher adverse events included neutropenia (31%), thrombocytopenia (13%), febrile neutropenia (19%), anemia (19%), hypertension (19%) and sepsis (19%). The overall response rate was 46.7% for the whole cohort including complete remission (CR) in 5 of 7 (71.4%) patients who were naïve to the hypomethylating agent/venetoclax. No measurable residual disease (MRD) was detected in 80.0% of the patients who achieved CR. The median time to best response was 50 (range: 23 - 77) days. Four patients were bridged to allogeneic stem cell transplantation. The combination of azacitidine, venetoclax and pevonedistat is safe and shows encouraging preliminary activity in patients with relapsed/refractory AML. (NCT04172844).

Prognostic impact of 'multi-hit' versus 'single hit' TP53 alteration in patients with acute myeloid leukemia: results from the Consortium on Myeloid Malignancies and Neoplastic Diseases.

While there is clear evidence to suggest poorer outcome associated with multi-hit (MH) TP53 mutation compared to single-hit (SH) in lower-risk myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS), data are conflicting in both higher-risk MDS and acute myeloid leukemia (AML). We conducted an indepth analysis utilizing data from 10 US academic institutions to study differences in molecular characteristics and outcomes of SH (n= 139) versus MH (n= 243) TP53MTAML. Complex cytogenetics (CG) were more common in MH compared to SH TP53MT AML (p <0.001); whereas ASXL1 (p= <0.001), RAS (p<0.001), splicing factor (p= 0.003), IDH1/2 (p= 0.001), FLT3 ITD (p= <0.001) and NPM1 (p= 0.005) mutations significantly clustered with SH TP53MT AML. Survival after excluding patients who received best supportive care alone was dismal but not significantly different between SH and MH (event free survival [EFS]: 3.0 vs 2.20 months, p= 0.22/ overall survival [OS]: 8.50 vs 7.53 months, respectively, p= 0.13). In multivariable analysis, IDH1 mutation and allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HCT) as a time-dependent covariate were associated with superior EFS (HR; 0.44, 95% CI: 0.19-1.01, p= 0.05/ HR; 0.34, 95% CI: 0.18-0.62, p<0.001) and OS (HR; 0.24, 95% CI: 0.08-0.71, p= 0.01/ HR; 0.28, 95% CI: 0.16-0.47, p<0.001). While complex CG (HR; 1.56, 95% CI: 1.01-2.40, p= 0.04) retained unfavorable significance for OS. Our analysis suggests that unlike in MDS, multihit TP53MT is less relevant in independently predicting outcomes in patients with AML.

Clinical outcomes of hypomethylating agents plus Venetoclax as frontline treatment in patients 75 years and older with acute myeloid leukemia: Real-world data from eight US academic centers.

Venetoclax (VEN) combined with hypomethylating agents (HMAs) is the standard of care for the treatment of patients with newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia (AML) unfit for intensive chemotherapy. To date, real-world data published on HMAs plus VEN have been either single-center studies or using community-based electronic databases with limited details on mutational landscape, tolerability, and treatment patterns in elderly patients. Therefore, we conducted a multicenter retrospective study to assess the real-world experience of 204 elderly patients (≥75 years) with newly diagnosed AML treated with HMAs plus VEN from eight academic centers in the United States. Overall, 64 patients achieved complete remission (CR; 38%) and 43 CR with incomplete count recovery (CRi; 26%) for a CR/CRi rate of 64%, with a median duration of response of 14.2 months (95% CI: 9.43, 22.1). Among responders, 63 patients relapsed (59%) with median overall survival (OS) after relapse of 3.4 months (95% CI, 2.4, 6.7). Median OS for the entire population was 9.5 months (95% CI, 7.85-13.5), with OS significantly worse among patients with TP53-mutated AML (2.5 months) and improved in patients harboring NPM1, IDH1, and IDH2 mutations (13.5, 18.3, and 21.1 months, respectively). The 30-day and 60-day mortality rates were 9% and 19%, respectively. In conclusion, HMAs plus VEN yielded high response rates in elderly patients with newly diagnosed AML. The median OS was inferior to that reported in the VIALE-A trial. Outcomes are dismal after failure of HMAs plus VEN, representing an area of urgent unmet clinical need.

Real-world outcomes of intensive induction approaches in core binding factor acute myeloid leukemia.

Core-binding factor acute myeloid leukemia (CBF-AML) is characterized by the presence of inv(16)/t(16;16) or t(8;21) and is classified as a favorable risk by the 2022 European LeukemiaNet (ELN) guidelines. The CD33-targeting antibody-drug conjugate, gemtuzumab ozogamicin (GO), is commonly added to intensive chemotherapy (IC) in CBF-AML. We sought to compare outcomes in patients treated with IC with or without GO in CBF-AML. We included 200 patients with CBF-AML treated with IC across seven academic centers. Induction treatment regimens were categorized as IC alone, IC with GO, or IC with KIT inhibitor (dasatinib or midostaurin). Median follow-up for the whole cohort was 2.5 years. Three-year overall survival (OS) was 70% and 3-year event-free survival (EFS) was 51%. Patients treated with IC with GO experienced a 3-year EFS of 50% compared to those treated with IC alone who experienced a 3-year EFS of 47%, with no statistically significant difference (p = 0.62). Similarly, those treated with IC with GO did not experience an improved OS compared to those treated with IC alone (p = 0.67). Patients treated with IC with KIT inhibitor experienced a significantly improved 3-year EFS of 85% compared to those with IC with or without GO (p = 0.04). We find in our study that there is no survival benefit in patients treated with IC with the addition of GO; improved EFS was seen in patients with CBF-AML treated with IC plus KIT inhibitors, consistent with outcomes noted in prospective studies utilizing this approach.