Oral decitabine and cedazuridine plus venetoclax for older or unfit patients with acute myeloid leukaemia: a phase 2 study.

BACKGROUND: Hypomethylating agents combined with venetoclax are effective regimens in patients with acute myeloid leukaemia who are ineligible for intensive chemotherapy. Decitabine and cedazuridine (ASTX727) is an oral formulation of decitabine that achieves equivalent area-under-curve exposure to intravenous decitabine. We performed a single centre phase 2 study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of ASTX727 plus venetoclax. METHODS: This study enrolled patients with newly diagnosed (frontline treatment group) acute myeloid leukaemia who were ineligible for intensive chemotherapy (aged ≥75 years, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group [ECOG] performance status of 2-3, or major comorbidities) or relapsed or refractory acute myeloid leukaemia. Being aged 18 years or older and having an ECOG performance status of 2 or less were requirements for the relapsed or refractory disease treatment cohort, without any limits in the number of previous lines of therapy. Treatment consisted of ASTX727 (cedazuridine 100 mg and decitabine 35 mg) orally for 5 days and venetoclax 400 mg orally for 21-28 days in 28-day cycles. The primary outcome was overall response rate of ASTX727 plus venetoclax. Living patients who have not completed cycle one were not evaluable for response. Safety was analysed in all patients who started treatment. This study was registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04746235) and is ongoing. The data cutoff date for this analysis was Sept 22, 2023. FINDINGS: Between March 16, 2021, and Sept 18, 2023, 62 patients were enrolled (49 frontline and 13 relapsed or refractory) with a median age of 78 years (IQR 73-82). 36 (58%) were male; 53 (85%) were White, 4 (6%) Black, 2 (3%) Asian and 3 (5%) other or did not answer. 48 (77%) of 62 patients were European LeukemiaNet 2022 adverse risk, 24 (39%) had antecedent myelodysplastic syndromes, 12 (19%) had previously failed a hypomethylating agent, ten (16%) had therapy-related acute myeloid leukaemia, and 11 (18%) had TP53 mutations. The median follow-up time was 18·3 months (IQR 8·8-23·3). The overall response rate was 30 (64%) of 47 patients (95% CI 49-77) in frontline cohort and six (46%) of 13 patients (19-75) in relapsed or refractory cohort. The most common grade 3 or worse treatment-emergent adverse events were febrile neutropenia in 11 (18%) of 62 patients, pneumonia in eight (13%), respiratory failure in five (8%), bacteraemia in four (6%), and sepsis in four (6%). Three deaths occurred in patients in remission (one sepsis, one gastrointestinal haemorrhage, and one respiratory failure) and were potentially treatment related. INTERPRETATION: ASTX727 plus venetoclax is an active fully oral regimen and safe in most older or unfit patients with acute myeloid leukaemia. Our findings should be confirmed in larger multicentric studies. FUNDING: MD Anderson Cancer Center Support Grant, Myelodysplastic Syndrome/Acute Myeloid Leukaemia Moon Shot, Leukemia SPORE, Taiho Oncology, and Astex Pharmaceuticals.

Ten-day decitabine with venetoclax versus intensive chemotherapy in relapsed or refractory acute myeloid leukemia: A propensity score-matched analysis.

BACKGROUND: Relapsed/refractory (R/R) acute myeloid leukemia (AML) has poor outcomes. Although lower-intensity venetoclax-containing regimens are standard for older/unfit patients with newly diagnosed AML, it is unknown how such regimens compare with intensive chemotherapy (IC) for R/R AML. METHODS: Outcomes of R/R AML treated with 10-day decitabine and venetoclax (DEC10-VEN) were compared with IC-based regimens including idarubicin with cytarabine, with or without cladribine, clofarabine, or fludarabine, with or without additional agents. Propensity scores derived from patient baseline characteristics were used to match DEC10-VEN and IC patients to minimize bias. RESULTS: Sixty-five patients in the DEC10-VEN cohort were matched to 130 IC recipients. The median ages for the DEC10-VEN and IC groups were 64 and 58 years, respectively, and baseline characteristics were balanced between the 2 cohorts. DEC10-VEN conferred significantly higher responses compared with IC including higher overall response rate (60% vs 36%; odds ratio [OR], 3.28; P < .001), complete remission with incomplete hematologic recovery (CRi, 19% vs 6%; OR, 3.56; P = .012), minimal residual disease negativity by flow cytometry (28% vs 13%; OR, 2.48; P = .017), and lower rates of refractory disease. DEC10-VEN led to significantly longer median event-free survival compared with IC (5.7 vs 1.5 months; hazard ratio [HR], 0.46; 95% CI, 0.30-0.70; P < .001), as well as median overall survival (OS; 6.8 vs 4.7 months; HR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.37-0.86; P = .008). DEC10-VEN was independently associated with improved OS compared with IC in multivariate analysis. Exploratory analysis for OS in 27 subgroups showed that DEC10-VEN was comparable with IC as salvage therapy for R/R AML. CONCLUSION: DEC10-VEN represents an appropriate salvage therapy and may offer better responses and survival compared with IC in adults with R/R AML.

Prognostic value of measurable residual disease after venetoclax and decitabine in acute myeloid leukemia.

Assessment of measurable residual disease (MRD) provides prognostic information in acute myeloid leukemia (AML). However, the utility of MRD with venetoclax-based lower intensity regimens is unknown. We analyzed the prognostic value of achieving a negative MRD in older/"unfit" patients with AML receiving first-line therapy with 10-day decitabine and venetoclax. MRD was evaluated in bone marrow specimens using multicolor flow cytometry (sensitivity 0.1%). Ninety-seven patients achieving either a complete remission (CR) or CR with incomplete hematologic recovery (CRi) or morphologic leukemia-free state were included. Median age was 72 years (interquartile range, 68-78 years), and 64% had adverse-risk AML. Eighty-three patients achieved CR/CRi, and 52 (54%) became MRD negative. Median time to becoming MRD negative was 2.0 months (interquartile range, 0.9-3.1 months). Patients becoming MRD negative by 2 months had longer relapse-free survival (RFS) compared with those remaining MRD positive (median RFS, not reached vs 5.2 months; hazard ratio [HR], 0.31; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.12-0.78; P = .004), longer event-free survival (EFS) (median EFS, not reached vs 5.8 months; HR, 0.25; 95% CI, 0.12-0.55; P < .001), as well as longer overall survival (OS) (median OS, 25.1 vs 7.1 months; HR, 0.23; 95% CI, 0.11-0.51; P < .001). Patients achieving an MRD-negative CR had longer OS compared with those with an inferior response (median OS, 25.1 vs 11.6 months; HR, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.19-0.58; P < .0005). Patients becoming MRD negative within 1 month had an improved OS compared with MRD-positive patients (median OS, 25.1 vs 3.4 months; HR, 0.15; 95% CI, 0.03-0.64; P < .0001). Differential impact of MRD status on survival outcomes persisted at a later 4-month time point of evaluation. In conclusion, MRD-negative status at 1, 2, and 4 months after starting therapy confers significantly better survival in older/unfit patients with AML receiving first-line therapy with 10-day decitabine and venetoclax. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT03404193.

Venetoclax with decitabine vs intensive chemotherapy in acute myeloid leukemia: A propensity score matched analysis stratified by risk of treatment-related mortality.

Hypomethylating agents (HMA) with venetoclax is a new standard for older/unfit patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML). However, it is unknown how HMA with venetoclax compare to intensive chemotherapy (IC) in patients who are "fit" or "unfit" for IC. We compared outcomes of older patients with newly diagnosed AML receiving 10-day decitabine with venetoclax (DEC10-VEN) vs IC. DEC10-VEN consisted of daily venetoclax with decitabine 20 mg/m2 for 10 days for induction and decitabine for 5 days as consolidation. The IC cohort received regimens containing cytarabine ≥1 g/m2 /d. A validated treatment-related mortality score (TRMS) was used to classify patients at high-risk or low-risk for TRM with IC. Propensity scores were used to match patients to minimize bias. Median age of the DEC10-VEN cohort (n = 85) was 72 years (range 63-89) and 28% patients were at high-risk of TRM with IC. The comparator IC group (n = 85) matched closely in terms of baseline characteristics. DEC10-VEN was associated with significantly higher CR/CRi compared to IC (81% vs 52%, P < .001), and lower rate of relapse (34% vs 56%, P = .01), 30-day mortality (1% vs 24%, P < .01), and longer overall survival (OS; 12.4 vs 4.5 months, HR = 0.48, 95%CI 0.29-0.79, P < .01). In patients at both at high-risk and low-risk of TRM, DEC10-VEN showed significantly higher CR/CRi, lower 30-day mortality, and longer OS compared to IC. Patients at both high-risk and low-risk of TRM had comparable outcomes with DEC10-VEN. In conclusion, DEC10-VEN offers better outcomes compared to intensive chemotherapy in older patients with newly diagnosed AML, particularly in those at high-risk of TRM.

Chemoimmunotherapy with inotuzumab ozogamicin combined with mini-hyper-CVD, with or without blinatumomab, is highly effective in patients with Philadelphia chromosome-negative acute lymphoblastic leukemia in first salvage.

BACKGROUND: The outcomes of patients with relapsed or refractory (R-R) acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) are poor. Inotuzumab ozogamicin and blinatumomab have single-agent activity in R-R ALL. Their addition to low-intensity chemotherapy may further improve the outcomes of patients with ALL in their first relapse. METHODS: The chemotherapy was lower in intensity than conventional hyperfractionated cyclophosphamide, vincristine, adriamycin, and dexamethasone and was called mini-hyperfractionated cyclophosphamide, vincristine, and dexamethasone (or mini-HCVD). Inotuzumab was given on day 3 of each of the first 4 cycles at 1.8 to 1.3 mg/m2 for cycle 1, and this was followed by 1.3 to 1.0 mg/m2 for subsequent cycles. From patient 39 onward, the inotuzumab dose was reduced and fractionated into weekly doses (0.6 and 0.3 mg/m2 during cycle 1 and 0.3 and 0.3 mg/m2 during subsequent cycles), and blinatumomab was administered for up to 4 cycles after inotuzumab therapy. RESULTS: Forty-eight patients with Philadelphia chromosome-negative ALL with a median age of 39 years were treated during their first relapse. Overall, 44 patients (92%) responded, with 35 of them (73%) achieving a complete response. The overall minimal residual disease negativity rate among the responders was 93%. Twenty-four patients (50%) underwent allogeneic stem cell transplantation (ASCT). Veno-occlusive disease of any grade occurred in 5 patients (10%). With a median follow-up of 31 months, the median progression-free survival (PFS) and the median overall survival (OS) were 11 and 25 months, respectively. The 2-year PFS and OS rates were 42% and 54%, respectively. Of the 24 patients (50%) who underwent ASCT, 14 patients were alive at the last follow-up (13 [54%] in remission). Of the remaining 20 responding patients who did not undergo subsequent ASCT, 6 (30%) remained in remission at the last follow-up. According to propensity score matching, the combination of mini-HCVD and inotuzumab with or without blinatumomab conferred better outcomes than intensive salvage chemotherapy or inotuzumab alone. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of inotuzumab and low-intensity mini-HCVD chemotherapy with or without blinatumomab shows encouraging results in patients with ALL in first salvage.