RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Many older adults with B-cell precursor acute lymphoblastic leukemia (BCP-ALL) have a relapse despite having a measurable residual disease (MRD)-negative complete remission with combination chemotherapy. The addition of blinatumomab, a bispecific T-cell engager molecule that is approved for the treatment of relapsed, refractory, and MRD-positive BCP-ALL, may have efficacy in patients with MRD-negative remission. METHODS: In a phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned patients 30 to 70 years of age with BCR::ABL1-negative BCP-ALL (with :: indicating fusion) who had MRD-negative remission (defined as <0.01% leukemic cells in bone marrow as assessed on flow cytometry) after induction and intensification chemotherapy to receive four cycles of blinatumomab in addition to four cycles of consolidation chemotherapy or to receive four cycles of consolidation chemotherapy alone. The primary end point was overall survival, and relapse-free survival was a secondary end point. RESULTS: The data and safety monitoring committee reviewed the results from the third efficacy interim analysis and recommended that they be reported. Complete remission with or without full count recovery was observed in 395 of 488 enrolled patients (81%). Of the 224 patients with MRD-negative status, 112 were assigned to each group. The characteristics of the patients were balanced between the groups. At a median follow-up of 43 months, an advantage was observed in the blinatumomab group as compared with the chemotherapy-only group with regard to overall survival (at 3 years: 85% vs. 68%; hazard ratio for death, 0.41; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.23 to 0.73; P = 0.002), and the 3-year relapse-free survival was 80% with blinatumomab and 64% with chemotherapy alone (hazard ratio for relapse or death, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.32 to 0.87). A higher incidence of neuropsychiatric events was reported in the blinatumomab group than in the chemotherapy-only group. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of blinatumomab to consolidation chemotherapy in adult patients in MRD-negative remission from BCP-ALL significantly improved overall survival. (Funded by the National Institutes of Health and others; E1910 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02003222.).
Assuntos
Anticorpos Biespecíficos , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica , Neoplasia Residual , Leucemia-Linfoma Linfoblástico de Células Precursoras B , Humanos , Anticorpos Biespecíficos/efeitos adversos , Anticorpos Biespecíficos/uso terapêutico , Anticorpos Biespecíficos/administração & dosagem , Adulto , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Masculino , Feminino , Idoso , Leucemia-Linfoma Linfoblástico de Células Precursoras B/tratamento farmacológico , Leucemia-Linfoma Linfoblástico de Células Precursoras B/mortalidade , Leucemia-Linfoma Linfoblástico de Células Precursoras B/patologia , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapêutico , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/efeitos adversos , Quimioterapia de Consolidação , Indução de Remissão , Intervalo Livre de Doença , Estimativa de Kaplan-Meier , Análise de Sobrevida , Recidiva , Antineoplásicos/uso terapêutico , Antineoplásicos/efeitos adversos , Quimioterapia de InduçãoRESUMO
With emerging new drugs in myelofibrosis (MF), a robust and harmonized framework for defining the severity of anemia and response to treatment will enhance clinical investigation and facilitate inter-study comparisons. Accordingly, the lead authors on the 2013 edition of the International Working Group-European LeukemiaNet (IWG-ELN) response criteria in MF were summoned to revise their document with the intent to i) account for gender-specific differences in determining hemoglobin levels for eligibility criteria, ii) revise definition of transfusion-dependent anemia (TDA) based on current restrictive transfusion practices, and iii) provide a structurally simple and easy to apply response criteria that are sensitive enough to detect efficacy signals (minor response) and also account for major responses. The initial draft of the 2024 IWG-ELN proposed criteria was subsequently circulated around a wider group of international experts and their feedback incorporated. The proposed articles include new definitions for TDA (≥3 units in the 12 weeks prior to study enrollment) and hemoglobin thresholds for eligibility criteria (<10 g/dL for women and <11 g/dL for men). The revised document also provides separate (TDA vs. non-TDA) and graded (major vs. minor response) response criteria while preserving the requirement for a 12-week period of screening and observation on treatment.
RESUMO
Importance: In newly diagnosed Philadelphia chromosome-positive (Ph+) acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL), disease progression due to acquired resistance to first- or second-generation BCR::ABL1 tyrosine kinase inhibitors is common. Ponatinib inhibits BCR::ABL1 and all single-mutation variants, including T315I. Objective: To compare frontline ponatinib vs imatinib in adults with newly diagnosed Ph+ ALL. Design, Setting, and Participants: Global registrational, phase 3, open-label trial in adults aged 18 years or older with newly diagnosed Ph+ ALL. From January 2019 to May 2022, eligible patients at 77 sites were randomized 2:1 to ponatinib (30 mg/d) or imatinib (600 mg/d) with reduced-intensity chemotherapy, followed by single-agent ponatinib or imatinib after the cycle 20 phase of the trial. The last date of follow-up for this analysis was August 12, 2022. Intervention: Patients received ponatinib, 30 mg/d, or imatinib, 600 mg/d, with reduced-intensity chemotherapy, followed by single-agent ponatinib or imatinib after cycle 20. The ponatinib dose was reduced to 15 mg on achievement of minimal residual disease-(MRD) negative complete remission. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point of this interim analysis was MRD-negative complete remission (≤0.01% BCR::ABL1 [MR4] centrally assessed by reverse transcriptase-quantitative polymerase chain reaction), with complete remission maintained for at least 4 weeks at the end of cycle 3. The key secondary end point was event-free survival. Results: Of 245 patients randomized (median age, 54 years; 133 [54.3%] female), 232 (ponatinib, n = 154; imatinib, n = 78) who had p190 or p210 dominant isoforms verified by the central laboratory were analyzed for the primary end point. The MRD-negative complete remission rate (primary end point) was significantly higher with ponatinib (34.4% [53/154]) vs imatinib (16.7% [13/78]) (risk difference, 0.18 [95% CI, 0.06-0.29]; P = .002). At the data cutoff, event-free survival had not met the prespecified number of events. Median event-free survival was not reached in the ponatinib group and was 29 months in the imatinib group. The most common adverse events were similar between treatment groups. Arterial occlusive events were infrequent and comparable between groups (ponatinib, 2.5%; imatinib, 1.2%). Conclusions and Relevance: Ponatinib demonstrated a superior rate of MRD-negative complete remission at the end of induction vs imatinib when combined with reduced-intensity chemotherapy in adults with newly diagnosed Ph+ ALL. The safety profile of ponatinib was comparable with imatinib. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03589326.
Assuntos
Antineoplásicos , Mesilato de Imatinib , Imidazóis , Leucemia-Linfoma Linfoblástico de Células Precursoras , Piridazinas , Adulto , Idoso , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Adulto Jovem , Antineoplásicos/uso terapêutico , Antineoplásicos/efeitos adversos , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapêutico , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/efeitos adversos , Proteínas de Fusão bcr-abl/genética , Mesilato de Imatinib/uso terapêutico , Mesilato de Imatinib/efeitos adversos , Imidazóis/uso terapêutico , Imidazóis/efeitos adversos , Imidazóis/administração & dosagem , Cromossomo Filadélfia , Leucemia-Linfoma Linfoblástico de Células Precursoras/tratamento farmacológico , Leucemia-Linfoma Linfoblástico de Células Precursoras/genética , Intervalo Livre de Progressão , Inibidores de Proteínas Quinases/uso terapêutico , Inibidores de Proteínas Quinases/efeitos adversos , Piridazinas/uso terapêutico , Piridazinas/efeitos adversos , Indução de Remissão , AdolescenteRESUMO
Prefibrotic primary myelofibrosis (prefibrotic PMF) is a myeloproliferative neoplasm with distinct characteristics comprising histopathological and clinico-biological parameters. It is classified as a subtype of primary myelofibrosis. In clinical practice, it is essential to correctly distinguish prefibrotic PMF from essential thrombocythemia especially but also overt PMF besides other myeloid neoplasms. Risk stratification and survival outcomes for prefibrotic PMF are worse than that of ET but better than that of overt PMF. Rates of progression to overt PMF and blast phase disease are also higher for prefibrotic PMF than ET. In this review we first discuss the historical context to the evolution of prefibrotic PMF as an entity, its presenting features and diagnostic criteria. We emphasize the differences between prefibrotic PMF, ET, and overt PMF with regards to presenting features and disease outcomes including thrombohemorrhagic events and progression to fibrotic and blast phase disease. Next, we discuss the risk stratification models and contextualize these in the setting of clinical management. We share our view of personalizing treatment to address unique patient needs in the context of currently available management options. Lastly, we discuss areas of critical need in clinical research and speculate on the possibility of future disease course modifying therapies in prefibrotic PMF.
Assuntos
Mielofibrose Primária , Humanos , Mielofibrose Primária/terapia , Mielofibrose Primária/diagnóstico , Mielofibrose Primária/patologia , Gerenciamento Clínico , Progressão da Doença , PrognósticoRESUMO
In a meta-analysis of 5 trials, the addition of gemtuzumab ozogamicin (GO) to intensive induction chemotherapy led to a survival benefit in patients with core-binding factor (CBF) acute myeloid leukemia (AML). Given the heterogeneous incorporation of GO in clinical trials, the ideal dose and schedule remains unclear. We conducted a single-center retrospective analysis to compare outcomes of patients with CBF-AML treated with intensive induction chemotherapy, with or without a single dose of GO 3â¯mg/m2, during induction only. We included 87 patients (GO=32, control=55). The composite complete remission (cCR) rate was higher in the control group (93%) compared to the GO group (82%) (p<0.001). The rate of measurable residual disease (MRD) negative cCR, by flow cytometry, was similar between both groups. There were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of toxicity. The 3-year relapse-free survival (RFS) for both groups was similar (71% vs 68%, p=0.5). The 3-year overall survival (OS) for the GO group was 68%, compared to 66% for the control group (p=0.9).In multivariable analysis, age and MRD positive status were risk factors for inferior outcomes. We find that survival of patients with CBF-AML is favorable in the real-world setting. The addition of single-dose GO, during induction, did not lead to a higher remission rate or survival benefit, when compared to intensive chemotherapy without GO. Further investigation into the incorporation of GO in the treatment algorithm for CBF-AML is needed.
Assuntos
Anticorpos Monoclonais Humanizados , Leucemia Mieloide Aguda , Humanos , Gemtuzumab/uso terapêutico , Quimioterapia de Indução , Estudos Retrospectivos , Intervalo Livre de Doença , Citarabina , Aminoglicosídeos/uso terapêutico , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/efeitos adversos , Resposta Patológica Completa , Fatores de Ligação ao CoreRESUMO
Interferons are cytokines with immunomodulatory properties and disease-modifying effects that have been used to treat myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs) for more than 35 years. The initial use of interferons was limited due to difficulties with administration and a significant toxicity profile. Many of these shortcomings were addressed by covalently binding polyethylene glycol to the interferon structure, which increases the stability, prolongs activity, and reduces immunogenicity of the molecule. In the current therapeutic landscape, pegylated interferons are recommended for use in the treatment of polycythemia vera, essential thrombocythemia, and primary myelofibrosis. We review recent efficacy, molecular response, and safety data for the two available pegylated interferons, peginterferon alfa-2a (Pegasys) and ropeginterferon alfa-2b-njft (BESREMi). The practical management of interferon-based therapies is discussed, along with our opinions on whether to and how to switch from hydroxyurea to one of these therapies. Key topics and questions related to use of interferons, such as their safety and tolerability, the significance of variant allele frequency, advantages of early treatment, and what the future of interferon therapy may look like, will be examined. Pegylated interferons represent an important therapeutic option for patients with MPNs; however, more research is still required to further refine interferon therapy.
A review of what interferons are and how they are used in the treatment of the myeloproliferative neoplasms polycythemia vera, essential thrombocythemia, and primary myelofibrosis Why was this paper written? This paper was written to summarize the current clinical landscape of the use of interferons for the treatment of myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPN). What are interferons and how are they used in MPNs? Interferons are small proteins involved in cellular signaling that have been used to treat MPNs, polycythemia vera (PV), essential thrombocythemia (ET), and primary myelofibrosis (PMF), for more than 35 years. They can have modulatory effects on the immune system and on the fundamental causes of disease. The use of interferons as treatment was initially limited due to difficulties with their administration and the potential for significant adverse effects. Many of these shortcomings were addressed by chemically binding a biocompatible polymer, polyethylene glycol (PEG), to the structure of the interferon, which increases the stability of the protein, prolongs the time during which it is active, and reduces negative effects to the immune system. The combined chemical structure of PEG and interferon (pegylated interferon or peginterferon) is recommended for use in the treatment of PV, ET, and PMF. What topics are discussed in this paper? In this review paper we evaluate the clinical effectiveness and safety of two available pegylated interferons, peginterferon alfa-2a (Pegasys) and ropeginterferon alfa-2b-njft (BESREMi) and discuss the practical clinical management of interferon-based therapies, along with the authors' opinions on whether to and how to switch therapy from hydroxyurea. Key topics and questions related to the use of interferons, such as their safety and tolerability, the significance of their effects on mutated cells, advantages of early treatment, and what the future of interferon therapy may look like, will be examined. What do the findings mean? Pegylated interferons represent an important therapeutic option for patients with MPNs; however, more research is still required to further refine interferon therapy.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Pacritinib is a JAK2/IRAK1/ACVR1 inhibitor that is approved in the United States for the treatment of patients with myelofibrosis who have a platelet count < 50 × 109/L. Phase 3 clinical studies of pacritinib included patients across a wide range of baseline platelet and hemoglobin levels. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In order to assess the impact of baseline blood counts on pacritinib efficacy, an analysis of efficacy outcomes by baseline platelet and hemoglobin levels was performed using data pooled from 2 Phase 3 studies of pacritinib in patients with MF (PERSIST-1 and PERSIST-2). RESULTS: Of 276 patients evaluable for spleen response, spleen volume reduction occurred consistently across platelet subgroups (< 100 × 109/L or ≥ 100 × 109/L) and hemoglobin subgroups (< 8 g/dL, ≥ 8 to < 10 g/dL, or > 10 g/dL), with no diminution in treatment effect in patients with severe thrombocytopenia or anemia. Among 159 patients evaluable for symptoms response, improvement in total symptom score (TTS) was similar across platelet subgroups. A ≥ 50% improvement of TSS occurred more frequently in patients with baseline hemoglobin < 8 g/dL compared with those with baseline hemoglobin ≥ 8 to < 10 g/dL or > 10 g/dL. Patients with baseline hemoglobin < 8 g/dL also experienced improved hemoglobin sustained over 24 weeks, whereas subgroups with less severe anemia had stable hemoglobin levels over time. Symptom improvement as assessed using the Patient Global Impression of Change instrument was generally consistent across platelet and hemoglobin subgroups. CONCLUSION: Pacritinib demonstrates consistent efficacy in patients with MF regardless of baseline platelet and hemoglobin counts.
RESUMO
AMG 330, a bispecific T-cell engager (BiTE®) that binds CD33 and CD3 on T cells facilitates T-cell-mediated cytotoxicity against CD33+ cells. This first-in-human, open-label, dose-escalation study evaluated the safety, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and preliminary efficacy of AMG 330 in adults with relapsed/refractory acute myeloid leukemia (R/R AML). Amongst 77 patients treated with AMG 330 (0.5 µg/day-1.6 mg/day) on 14-day or 28-day cycles, maximum tolerated dose was not reached; median duration of treatment was 29 days. The most frequent treatment-related adverse events were cytokine release syndrome (CRS; 78%) and rash (30%); 10% of patients experienced grade 3/4 CRS. CRS was mitigated with stepwise dosing of AMG 330, prophylactic dexamethasone, and early treatment with tocilizumab. Among 60 evaluable patients, eight achieved complete remission or morphologic leukemia-free state; of the 52 non-responders, 37% had ≥50% reduction in AML bone marrow blasts. AMG 330 is a promising CD33-targeted therapeutic strategy for R/R AML.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Indolent systemic mastocytosis (ISM) is a clonal mast-cell disease driven by the KIT D816V mutation. We assessed the efficacy and safety of avapritinib versus placebo, both with best supportive care, in patients with ISM. METHODS: We randomized patients with moderate to severe ISM (total symptom score [TSS] of ≥28; scores range from 0 to 110, with higher numbers indicating more severe symptoms) two to one to avapritinib 25 mg once daily (n=141) or placebo (n=71). The primary end point was mean change in TSS based on the 14-day average of patient-reported severity of 11 symptoms. Secondary end points included reductions in serum tryptase and blood KIT D816V variant allele fraction (≥50%), reductions in TSS (≥50% and ≥30%), reduction in bone marrow mast cells (≥50%), and quality of life measures. RESULTS: From baseline to week 24, avapritinib-treated patients had a decrease of 15.6 points (95% CI, −18.6 to −12.6) in TSS compared to a decrease of 9.2 points (−13.1 to −5.2) in the placebo group; P<0.003. From baseline to Week 24, 76/141 patients (54%; 45% to 62%) in the avapritinib group compared to 0/71 patients in the placebo group achieved a ≥50% reduction in serum tryptase level; P<0.001. Edema and increases in alkaline phosphatase were more common with avapritinib than placebo; there were few treatment discontinuations because of adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: In this trial, avapritinib was superior to placebo in reducing uncontrolled symptoms and mast-cell burden in patients with ISM. The long-term safety and efficacy of this approach for patients with ISM remain the focus of the ongoing trial. (Funded by Blueprint Medicines Corporation; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03731260.)