Current State and Future Prospects of Diagnosis and Management of TP53-Mutated Myeloid Neoplasms.

TP53-mutated myeloid neoplasms including acute myeloid leukemia (AML) and myelodysplastic neoplasms (MDS) are notoriously treatment resistant with uniformly poor outcomes. TP53 status is an important prognostic indicator and early knowledge of the TP53 mutation/allelic state may assist in appropriate management including clinical trial enrollment for eligible patients. Thus far, no therapy has shown to demonstrate durable response or incremental survival benefit in TP53-mutated AML or MDS. Therefore, there is an urgent need for innovative therapies to improve the outcomes in this notoriously recalcitrant genomic subset. In this review, we dissect the biology, classification, prognosis, current treatment landscape, and the early phase evaluation of investigational agents in TP53-mutated AML and MDS.

A retrospective study of cladribine and low-dose cytarabine-based regimens for the treatment of chronic myelomonocytic leukemia and secondary acute myeloid leukemia.

BACKGROUND: Patients with higher risk chronic myelomonocytic leukemia (CMML) have limited therapeutic options beyond hydroxyurea and hypomethylating agents (HMAs). Regimens based on a backbone of cladribine (CLAD), low-dose cytarabine (LDAC), and an HMA are effective low-intensity therapies for acute myeloid leukemia (AML). METHODS: The authors conducted a retrospective chart review to evaluate the efficacy of CLAD/LDAC/HMA in CMML and secondary acute myeloid leukemia (sAML) arising from CMML. Responses were evaluated according to the 2006 International Working Group criteria for CMML and the 2017 European LeukemiaNet criteria for AML. The overall survival (OS), leukemia-free survival (LFS), and duration of response were evaluated with the Kaplan-Meier method. Patients were stratified on the basis of prior HMA exposure. RESULTS: The authors identified 21 patients with CMML (eight with HMA-naive CMML and 13 with HMA-failure CMML) and 33 patients with sAML (11 with HMA-naive sAML and 22 with HMA-failure sAML) treated with CLAD/LDAC/HMA-based regimens. The CMML cohort was enriched for high-risk features (proliferative type, elevated blasts, and RAS/MAPK mutations). The overall response rate was 33% in CMML (50% in HMA-naive CMML and 23% in HMA-failure CMML) and 48% in sAML (82% in HMA-naive sAML and 32% in HMA-failure sAML). The median OS was 14.4, 8.8, 42.9, and 2.9 months for HMA-naive CMML, HMA-failure CMML, HMA-naive sAML, and HMA-failure sAML, respectively. The median LFS was 14.4 and 3.9 months for HMA-naive CMML and HMA-failure CMML, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: CLAD/LDAC/HMA-based regimens are effective in a subset of patients with higher risk CMML and sAML arising from CMML who have not previously experienced HMA failure. These findings must be confirmed in prospective studies.

Differential prognostic impact of RUNX1 mutations according to frontline therapy in patients with acute myeloid leukemia.

RUNX1-mutated (mRUNX1) acute myeloid leukemia (AML) has historically been associated with poor outcomes in the setting of conventional chemotherapy. The prognostic impact of mRUNX1 AML is not well-established in the current era of lower-intensity treatment regimens incorporating venetoclax. We retrospectively analyzed 907 patients with newly diagnosed AML, including 137 patients with mRUNX1 AML, who underwent first-line therapy with intensive chemotherapy (IC), low-intensity therapy without venetoclax (LIT without VEN), or LIT with VEN. When stratified by RUNX1 status, there was no statistically significant difference in outcomes between mRUNX1 and wild-type (wtRUNX1) AML, regardless of therapy received. However, among patients who received LIT with VEN, there was a trend towards superior overall survival (OS) in those with mRUNX1 AML (median OS for mRUNX1 vs. wtRUNX1: 25.1 vs. 11.3 months; 2-year OS 54% vs. 33%; p = 0.12). In patients without another adverse-risk cyto-molecular feature, the presence of mRUNX1 conferred inferior OS in patients who received IC (p = 0.02) or LIT without VEN (p = 0.003) but not in those who received LIT with VEN (mRUNX1 vs. wtRUNX1: 25.1 vs. 30.0 months; 2-year OS 59% vs. 54%; p = 0.86). A multivariate analysis showed possible interaction between RUNX1 mutation status and treatment, suggesting a differential prognostic impact of RUNX1 mutations when patients received IC versus LIT with VEN. In summary, the prognostic impact of mRUNX1 AML may be treatment-dependent, and the presence of RUNX1 mutations may not impact clinical outcomes when venetoclax-based regimens are used.

Outcomes in patients with newly diagnosed TP53-mutated acute myeloid leukemia with or without venetoclax-based therapy.

BACKGROUND: Venetoclax (VEN) in combination with a hypomethylating agent (HMA) has become the standard of care for patients aged >75 years and for those not eligible for intensive chemotherapy who have newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia (AML). The benefit of VEN-based therapy in patients who have newly diagnosed AML with mutations in the TP53 gene (TP53mut ) over standard therapy is undefined. METHODS: In this single-institutional, retrospective analysis, the authors assessed the clinical outcomes of 238 patients with newly diagnosed TP53mut AML and compared the clinical characteristics, response to different therapies, and outcomes of those who received VEN-based (n = 58) and non-VEN-based (n = 180) regimens. RESULTS: Patients who received VEN-based regimens were older (aged >65 years: 81% vs 65%; P = .02) and had higher response rates (complete remission, 43% vs 32%; P = .06) than those who received non-VEN-based regimens. Compared with patients who received non-VEN-based regimens, no difference in overall survival (median, 6.6 vs 5.7 months; P = .4) or relapse-free survival (median, 4.7 vs 3.5 months; P = .43) was observed in those who received VEN-based regimens, regardless of age or intensity of treatment. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of VEN to standard treatment regimens did not improve outcomes in younger or older patients who had TP53mut AML. These data highlight the need for novel therapies beyond VEN to improve the outcome of patients with TP53mut AML.

Oral decitabine plus cedazuridine and venetoclax in patients with higher-risk myelodysplastic syndromes or chronic myelomonocytic leukaemia: a single-centre, phase 1/2 study.

BACKGROUND: Hypomethylating agents are approved in higher-riskmyelodysplastic syndromes. The combination of a hypomethylating agent with venetoclax is standard of care in acute myeloid leukaemia. We investigated the safety and activity of the first totally oral combination of decitabine plus cedazuridine and venetoclax in patients with higher-risk-myelodysplastic syndromes and chronic myelomonocytic leukaemia. METHODS: We did a single-centre, dose-escalation and dose-expansion, phase 1/2, clinical trial. Patients with treatment-naive higher-risk-myelodysplastic syndromes or chronic myelomonocytic leukaemia (risk level categorised as intermediate-2 or higher by the International Prognostic Scoring System) with excess blasts (>5%). Treatment consisted of oral decitabine 35 mg plus cedazuridine 100 mg on days 1-5 and venetoclax (variable doses of 100-400 mg, day 1 to 14, 28-day cycle). The primary outcomes were safety for the phase 1 part and the overall response for the phase 2 part of the study. The trial is ongoing and this analysis was not prespecified. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04655755, and is currently enrolling participants. FINDINGS: Between Jan 21, 2021, and Jan 20, 2023, we enrolled 39 patients (nine in phase 1 and 30 in phase 2). The median age was 71 years (range 27-94), 28 (72%) patients were male, and 11 (28%) were female. The maximum tolerated dose was not reached, and the recommended phase 2 dose was established as oral decitabine 35 mg plus cedazuridine 100 mg for 5 days and venetoclax (400 mg) for 14 days. The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were thrombocytopenia (33 [85%] of 39), neutropenia (29 [74%]), and febrile neutropenia (eight [21%]). Four non-treatment-related deaths occurred on the study drugs due to sepsis (n=2), lung infection (n=1), and undetermined cause (n=1). The median follow-up time was 10·8 months (IQR 5·6-16·4). The overall response rate was 95% (95% CI 83-99; 37/39). 19 (49%) patients proceeded to hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation. INTERPRETATION: This early analysis suggests that the combination of oral decitabine plus cedazuridine with venetoclax for higher-risk-myelodysplastic syndromes and chronic myelomonocytic leukaemia is safe in most patients, with encouraging activity. Longer follow-up will be needed to confirm these data. FUNDING: MD Anderson Cancer Center, MDS/AML Moon Shot, Genentech/AbbVie, and Astex Pharmaceuticals.

Cytogenetic and Molecular Associations with Outcomes in Higher-Risk Myelodysplastic Syndromes Treated with Hypomethylating Agents plus Venetoclax.

PURPOSE: Hypomethylating agents (HMA) combined with venetoclax are an emerging therapeutic strategy for higher-risk myelodysplastic syndromes (HR-MDS). The cytogenetic and molecular factors associated with outcomes with this combination for HR-MDS are incompletely understood. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: We pooled patient data from 3 prospective trials evaluating HMA-venetoclax in HR-MDS to study associations between cytogenetic and molecular factors and overall response rate (ORR), overall survival (OS), and event-free survival (EFS). The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate time-to-event endpoints. Univariate and multivariate analyses using logistic regression (for ORR) or the Cox proportional hazards model (for OS and EFS) were used to identify associations between clinical, cytogenetic, and molecular factors and outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 80 patients (52 HMA-naïve, 28 HMA-failure) were included. ORR was 90% in HMA-naïve and 57% in HMA-failure. Median OS was 28.2 and 8.3 months in HMA-naïve and HMA-failure, respectively. Median EFS was 17.9 and 5.5 months in HMA-naïve and HMA-failure, respectively. In addition, 24/52 (46%) of the HMA-naïve and 3/28 (11%) of the HMA-failure patients proceeded to allogeneic stem cell transplantation (SCT). Factors associated with inferior outcomes were prior HMA failure, complex cytogenetics, trisomy 8, TP53 mutations, and RAS pathway mutations. Mutations in RNA splicing, DNA methylation, and ASXL1 appeared favorable. Blast percentage was not predictive of outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Knowledge of cytogenetic and molecular alterations may help identify which patients with HR-MDS benefit the most from venetoclax.

Olutasidenib: from bench to bedside.

The discovery of isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 (IDH1) mutations in acute myeloid leukemia (AML) and the resounding success of molecularly targeted therapies in related myeloid malignancies swiftly prompted the development of IDH1mut inhibitors. Olutasidenib (formerly known as FT-2102) is an orally administered novel IDH1mut inhibitor that entered clinical development in 2016, proceeded briskly through the developmental process, and was granted regular approval to treat patients with R/R IDH1mut AML on 1 December 2022. Single agent olutasidenib, a potent and selective IDH1mut inhibitor, demonstrated highly durable remission rates along with meaningful outcomes, such as transfusion independence, in patients with R/R IDH1mut AML. This review will examine the preclinical and clinical development and the positioning of olutasidenib in the IDH1mut AML treatment landscape.

The future paradigm of HMA + VEN or targeted inhibitor approaches: sequencing or triplet combinations in AML therapy.

The routine use of next-generation sequencing methods has underscored the genetic and clonal heterogeneity of acute myeloid leukemia (AML), subsequently ushering in an era of precision medicine-based targeted therapies exemplified by the small-molecule inhibitors of FLT3, IDH1/IDH2, and BCL2. This advent of targeted drugs in AML has broadened the spectrum of antileukemic therapies, and the approval of venetoclax in combination with a hypomethylating agent has been a welcome addition to our AML patients unable to tolerate intensive chemotherapy. Mounting evidence demonstrates that molecularly targeted agents combined with epigenetic therapies exhibit synergistic augmented leukemic cell kill compared to single-agent therapy. With such great power comes greater responsibility in determining the appropriate frontline AML treatment regimen in a molecularly defined subset and identifying safe and effective combination therapies with different mechanisms of action to outmaneuver primary and secondary resistance mechanisms in AML.

Raising the bar for lower-risk myelodysplastic syndromes.

Myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) are broadly categorized as lower- and higher-risk with lower-risk dominated by cytopenias and higher-risk plagued by the risk of transformation to acute myeloid leukemia (AML). The management of MDS utilize a risk-adapted approach aimed at ameliorating cytopenias in lower-risk MDS (LR-MDS) and preventing AML transformation in higher-risk MDS. Hematopoietic stem cell transplantation is a potentially curative intent therapy in higher-risk MDS; however, it is not routinely recommended in LR-MDS in view of unfavorable risk/benefit ratio. Therefore, the goal of treatment in LR-MDS is aimed at improving the transfusion burden and health related quality of life. Currently, erythropoiesis stimulating agents (recombinant erythropoietin), erythroid maturation agents (luspatercept), disease modifying agents (lenalidomide) and hypomethylating agents are the agents of choice in the treatment of LR-MDS. This review will discuss the current treatment standards, meaningful clinical outcomes, and emerging therapies in LR-MDS.

An overview of novel therapies in advanced clinical testing for acute myeloid leukemia.

INTRODUCTION: The past decade has seen a sea change in the AML landscape with vastly improved cognizance of molecular pathogenesis, clonal evolution, and importance of measurable residual disease. Since 2017, the therapeutic armamentarium of AML has considerably expanded with the approval of midostaurin, enasidenib, ivosidenib, gilteritinib, and venetoclax in combination with hypomethylating agents and others. Nevertheless, relapse and treatment refractoriness remain the insurmountable challenges in AML therapy. This has galvanized the leukemic research community leading to the discovery and development of agents that specifically target gene mutations, molecularly agnostic therapies that exploit immune environment, apoptotic pathways, leukemic cell surface antigens and so forth. AREAS COVERED: This article provides an overview of the pathophysiology of AML in the context of non-cellular immune and molecularly targeted and agnostic therapies that are in clinical trial development in AML. EXPERT OPINION: Ever growing understanding of the molecular pathogenesis and metabolomics in AML has allowed the researchers to identify targets directed at specific genes and metabolic pathways. As a result, AML therapy is constantly evolving and so are the escape mechanisms leading to disease relapse. Therefore, it is of paramount importance to sequentially evaluate the patient during AML treatment and intervene at the right time.

Oral therapy for myelodysplastic syndromes/neoplasms and acute myeloid leukemia: a revolution in progress.

INTRODUCTION: Patients with myeloid neoplasms such as myelodysplastic syndromes/neoplasms (MDS) and acute myeloid leukemia (AML) are generally older, and many are not eligible for curative intent intensive therapies and/or allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. While lower intensity, hypomethylating agent (HMA)-based therapies such as azacitidine+venetoclax have improved patient outcomes significantly, responses are not durable, and most patients die from disease-related complications. The approvals of oral HMAs such as cedazuridine-decitabine (C-DEC) and oral azacitidine (CC-486) have kindled the hope that myeloid malignancies may soon be treated with total oral therapy. AREAS COVERED: We review all-oral therapies including the approvals of C-DEC and CC-486 in MDS and AML, respectively, in addition to emerging all-oral therapies, both monotherapy and combination, in higher-risk (HR) MDS and AML. EXPERT OPINION: Oral HMAs have the potential to be a convenient and efficacy-equivalent treatment option for patients with HR-MDS or AML and improve their quality of life by reducing clinic visits for medication administration. Total-oral therapy combinations, largely including an oral HMA 'backbone,' are in the early phases of clinical development, and it is our hope that well-designed trials employing these agents may soon allow the identification of optimal regimens that deliver effective disease-directed therapy with good tolerability.

Clinical outcomes associated with NPM1 mutations in patients with relapsed or refractory AML.

Mutations in Nucleophosmin 1 (NPM1) are associated with a favorable prognosis in newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia (AML), however, their prognostic impact in relapsed/refractory (R/R) settings are unknown. In a retrospective analysis, we identified 206 patients (12%) with mutated NPM1 (NPM1c) and compared their outcomes to 1516 patients (88%) with NPM1 wild-type (NPM1wt). NPM1c was associated with higher rates of complete remission or complete remission with incomplete count recovery compared with NPM1wt following each line of salvage therapy (first salvage, 56% vs 37%; P < .0001; second salvage, 33% vs 22%; P = .02; third salvage, 24% vs 14%; P = .02). However, NPM1 mutations had no impact on relapse-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) with each salvage therapy with a median OS following salvage 1, 2 or 3 therapies in NPM1c vs NPM1wt of 7.8 vs 6.0; 5.3 vs 4.1; and 3.5 vs 3.6 months, respectively. Notably, the addition of venetoclax to salvage regimens in patients with NPM1c improved RFS and OS (median RFS, 15.8 vs 4.6 months; P = .05; median OS, 14.7 vs 5.9 months; P = .02). In conclusion, NPM1 mutational status has a minimal impact on prognosis in relapsed or refractory AML; therefore, novel treatment strategies are required to improve outcomes in this entity.

Targeted therapy with the mutant IDH2 inhibitor enasidenib for high-risk IDH2-mutant myelodysplastic syndrome.

The isocitrate dehydrogenase enzyme 2 (IDH2) gene is mutated in ∼5% of patients with myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS). Enasidenib is an oral, selective, mutant IDH2 inhibitor approved for IDH2-mutated (mIDH2) relapsed/refractory acute myeloid leukemia. We designed a 2-arm multicenter study to evaluate safety and efficacy of (A) the combination of enasidenib with azacitidine for newly diagnosed mIDH2 MDS, and (B) enasidenib monotherapy for mIDH2 MDS after prior hypomethylating agent (HMA) therapy. Fifty patients with mIDH2 MDS enrolled: 27 in arm A and 23 in arm B. Median age of patients was 73 years. The most common adverse events were neutropenia (40%), nausea (36%), constipation (32%), and fatigue (26%). Hyperbilirubinemia from off-target UGT1A1 inhibition occurred in 14% of patients (8%; grades 3 and 4), and IDH-inhibitor-associated differentiation syndrome (IDH-DS) in 8 patients (16%). In the combination arm, the overall response rate (ORR: complete remission [CR] + marrow CR [mCR] + partial remission) was 74%, including 70% composite CR (CRc: CR + mCR). Median time to best response was 1 month (range, 1-4), and a median of 4 cycles was received (1-32). The median overall survival (OS) was 26 months (range, 14 to not reached). In the enasidenib monotherapy cohort after HMA failure, ORR and CRc were both 35% (n = 8), with 22% CR (n = 5). Median time to first response was 27 days, and time to best response was 4.6 months (2.7-7.6 months). A median of 7 cycles was received (range, 1-29), and the median OS was 20 months (range, 11 to not reached). Enasidenib is an effective treatment option for mIDH2 MDS, both in combination with azacitidine for treatment-naïve high-risk MDS, and as a single agent after prior HMA therapy. This trial is registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT03383575.

The odyssey of pacritinib in myelofibrosis.

Myelofibrosis (MF) can present with symptomatic splenomegaly and/or cytopenias including thrombocytopenia. Disease-related thrombocytopenia is a poor prognostic factor with a median overall survival of less than 2 years. Currently approved JAK1/2 inhibitors have not been evaluated in patients with platelets ≤ 50 × 109/L and in fact could potentiate thrombocytopenia because of their combined JAK1/2 inhibitory activity. Pacritinib (PAC), a selective JAK2, fms-like tyrosine kinase 3, interleukin-1 receptor-associated kinase 1 multikinase inhibitor was developed to meet this unmet need. PAC was evaluated in 2 randomized phase 3 trials in the frontline setting (PERSIST-1, PAC 400 mg daily vs best available therapy) and second-line setting in patients with MF with platelets ≤ 100 × 109/L (PERSIST-2, PAC 400 mg daily or 200 mg twice daily vs best available therapy). PERSIST-1 met its primary end point; however, the development of PAC hit a brief pause because of a US Food and Drug Administration-mandated clinical hold for excess of bleeding and cardiac events in the PAC 400 mg daily arm in the PERSIST-1 study. Although the PERSIST-2 study was terminated abruptly because of this clinical hold, it met its splenic response end point and demonstrated a trend toward symptom improvement. Subsequent, diligent review of the PERSIST-1 and PERSIST-2 studies did not confirm an excess of severe bleeding or cardiac events on the PAC arm. Additionally, the dose finding PAC203 study endorsed the safety and efficacy of 200 mg twice daily, leading to the approval of PAC for the treatment of patients with MF with platelets ≤ 50 × 109/L.

BTK inhibitor selection for chronic lymphocytic leukemia: which drug for which patient?

INTRODUCTION: The development of BTK inhibitors has revolutionized the management of CLL. Currently, there are 3 BTK inhibitors available to treat CLL: ibrutinib, acalabrutinib, and zanubrutinib (the latter not yet approved for this disease but included in the NCCN guidelines). In this review, we will elucidate our approach to the selection of BTK inhibitor and provide insight into the future of BTK directed therapy. AREAS COVERED: This review utilizes data from published prospective trials, specifically RESONATE, RESONATE-2, ELEVATE-TN, ASCEND, ELEVATE-RR, and the ongoing FLAIR, SEQUOIA, and ALPINE trials. EXPERT OPINION: The choice of BTK inhibitor is guided by the setting (frontline vs relapsed) in conjunction with patient disease characteristics and comorbidities. In this review, we will elucidate our approach to the selection of BTK inhibitor and provide insight into the future of BTK directed therapy.

Efficacy and safety of enasidenib and azacitidine combination in patients with IDH2 mutated acute myeloid leukemia and not eligible for intensive chemotherapy.

Preclinically, enasidenib and azacitidine (ENA + AZA) synergistically enhance cell differentiation, and venetoclax (VEN), a small molecule Bcl2 inhibitor (i) is particularly effective in IDH2 mutated acute myeloid leukemia (IDH2mutAML). This open label phase II trial enrolled patients (pts) with documented IDH2mutAML. All patients received AZA 75 mg/m2/d x 7 d/cycle and ENA 100 mg QD continuously. Concomitant Bcl2i and FLT3i were allowed (NCT03683433).Twenty-six pts received ENA + AZA (median 68 years, range, 24-88); 7 newly diagnosed (ND) and 19 relapsed/refractory (R/R). In R/R AML patients, three had received prior ENA and none had received prior VEN. The composite complete remission rate (CRc) [complete remission (CR) or complete remission with incomplete hematologic recovery (CRi)] was 100% in ND AML, and 58% in R/R AML. Median OS was not reached in ND AML with median follow-up of 13.1 months (mo); Pts treated in first relapse had improved OS than those with ≥2 relapse (median OS not reached vs 5.2 mo; HR 0.24, 95% CI 0.07-0.79, p = 0.04). Two patients received ENA + AZA with a concomitant FLT3i, one responding ND AML patient and one nonresponding R/R AML patient. Seven R/R AML pts received ENA + AZA + VEN triplet, and with median follow up of 11.2 mo, median OS was not reached and 6-mo OS was 70%. The most frequent treatment-emergent adverse events include febrile neutropenia (23%). Adverse events of special interest included all-grade IDH differentiation syndrome (8%) and indirect hyperbilirubinemia (35%). ENA + AZA was a well-tolerated, and effective therapy for elderly pts with IDH2mut ND AML as well as pts with R/R AML. The addition of VEN to ENA + AZA appears to improve outcomes in R/R IDH2mutAML.Clinical trial registration information: https://clinicaltrials.gov/.NCT03683433.