Time from diagnosis to treatment has no impact on survival in newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia treated with venetoclax-based regimens.

In newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia, immediate initiation of treatment is standard of care. However, deferral of antileukemic therapy may be indicated to assess comorbidities or pre-therapeutic risk factors. We explored the impact of time from diagnosis to treatment on outcomes in newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia undergoing venetoclax-based therapy in two distinct cohorts. By querying the Study Alliance Leukemia database and the global health network TriNetX, we identified 138 and 717 patients respectively with an average age of 76 and 72 years who received venetoclax-based firstline therapy. When comparing patients who started treatment earlier or later than 10 days after initial diagnosis, no significant difference in median overall survival was observed - neither in the SAL cohort (7.7 vs. 9.6 months, p=.42) nor in the TriNetX cohort (7.5 vs. 7.2 months, p=.41). Similarly, severe infections, bleeding, and thromboembolic events were equally observed between early and later treatments, both in the overall patient groups and specific subgroups (age ≥75 years or leukocytes ≥20x109/L). This retrospective analysis indicates that delaying the start of venetoclax-based therapy in newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia might be a safe option for selected patients, provided that close clinical monitoring is performed.

Intensified cytarabine dose during consolidation in adult AML patients under 65 years is not associated with survival benefit: real-world data from the German SAL-AML registry.

PURPOSE: Higher doses of cytarabine appear to improve long-term outcome in acute myeloid leukemia (AML), in particular for younger patients. To this end, the optimal dosage of single-agent cytarabine in consolidation therapy remains elusive. Here, we assessed the impact of different dosages of cytarabine consolidation after 7 + 3 induction on outcome in a large real-world data set from the German Study Alliance Leukemia-Acute Myeloid Leukemia (SAL-AML) registry. METHODS: Patients between 18 and 64 years of age, registered between April 2005 and September 2020, who attained complete remission after intensive induction and received at least one consolidation cycle with intermediate (IDAC) or high-dose cytarabine (HiDAC) were selected. To account for differences in patient and disease characteristics between both groups, the average treatment effect was estimated by propensity score weighting. RESULTS: Six-hundred-forty-two patients received HiDAC consolidation with median dosage of 17.6 (IQR (interquartile range), 16.5-18.0) g/m2 for a median number of 3 cycles (IQR, 2-3), whereas 178 patients received IDAC consolidation with 5.9 (IQR, 5.7-8.6) g/m2 for a median of 2 cycles (IQR, 1-3). Both groups differed significantly in some important characteristics (age, sex, cytogenetic risk group, ECOG performance status, disease status, HCT-CI, number of induction cycles). After propensity score weighting for differences in patient and disease characteristics, relapse-free survival after 2 years was comparable between HiDAC-treated (55.3%) and IDAC-treated (55.6%) patients (HR = 0.935, p = 0.69). Moreover, no significant differences in overall survival were observed after 2 years (84.7 vs. 80.6%, HR = 1.101, p = 0.65). Notably, more patients treated with IDAC received allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation in first remission (37.6 vs. 19.8%, p < 0.001). Censoring for allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation in first remission revealed no significant survival difference with regard to cytarabine dosage. Considering only of European LeukemiaNet (ELN) favorable-risk AML patients, there was no significant difference in outcome. Of note, significantly more patients treated with HiDAC suffered from ≥ 3 CTCAE infectious complications (56.7 [95%-CI 52.8-60.6%] vs. 44.1% [95%-CI 36.6-51.7%]; p = 0,004). The rate of other ≥ 3 CTCAE non-hematological toxicities and secondary malignancies was comparable in both treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: This retrospective analysis suggests no significant benefit of high-dose cytarabine compared to intermediate dosages in consolidation for AML patients under 65 years of age, independent of ELN risk group. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03188874.

Sorafenib or placebo in patients with newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukaemia: long-term follow-up of the randomized controlled SORAML trial.

Early results of the randomized placebo-controlled SORAML trial showed that, in patients with newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukaemia (AML), sorafenib led to a significant improvement in event-free (EFS) and relapse-free survival (RFS). In order to describe second-line treatments and their implications on overall survival (OS), we performed a study after a median follow-up time of 78 months. Newly diagnosed fit AML patients aged ≤60 years received sorafenib (n = 134) or placebo (n = 133) in addition to standard chemotherapy and as maintenance treatment. The 5-year EFS was 41 versus 27% (HR 0.68; p = 0.011) and 5-year RFS was 53 versus 36% (HR 0.64; p = 0.035). Allogeneic stem cell transplantation (allo SCT) was performed in 88% of the relapsed patients. Four years after salvage allo SCT, the cumulative incidence of relapse was 54 versus 35%, and OS was 32 versus 50%. The 5-year OS from randomization in all study patients was 61 versus 53% (HR 0.82; p = 0.282). In conclusion, the addition of sorafenib to chemotherapy led to a significant prolongation of EFS and RFS. Although the OS benefit did not reach statistical significance, these results confirm the antileukaemic activity of sorafenib.

Does time from diagnosis to treatment affect the prognosis of patients with newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia?

In fit patients with newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia (AML), immediate treatment start is recommended due to the poor prognosis of untreated acute leukemia. We explored the relationship between time from diagnosis to treatment start (TDT) and prognosis in a large real-world data set from the German Study Alliance Leukemia-Acute Myeloid Leukemia (SAL-AML) registry. All registered non-acute promyelocytic leukemia patients with intensive induction treatment and a minimum 12 months of follow-up were selected (n = 2263). We analyzed influence of TDT on remission, early death, and overall survival (OS) in univariable analyses for each day of treatment delay, in groups of 0 to 5, 6 to 10, 11 to 15, and >15 days of TDT, adjusted for influence of established prognostic variables on outcomes. Median TDT was 3 days (interquartile range, 2-7). Unadjusted 2-year OS rates, stratified by TDT of 0 to 5, 6 to 10, 11 to 15, and >15 days, were 51%, 48%, 44%, and 50% (P = .211). In multivariable Cox regression analysis accounting for established prognostic variables, the TDT hazard ratio as a continuous variable was 1.00 (P = .617). In OS analyses, separately stratified for age ≤60 and >60 years and for high vs lower initial white blood cell count, no significant differences between TDT groups were observed. Our study suggests that TDT is not related to survival. As stratification in intensive first-line AML treatment evolves, TDT data suggest that it may be a feasible approach to wait for genetic and other laboratory test results so that clinically stable patients are assigned the best available treatment option. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT03188874.

Addition of sorafenib versus placebo to standard therapy in patients aged 60 years or younger with newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukaemia (SORAML): a multicentre, phase 2, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Preclinical data and results from non-randomised trials suggest that the multikinase inhibitor sorafenib might be an effective drug for the treatment of acute myeloid leukaemia. We investigated the efficacy and tolerability of sorafenib versus placebo in addition to standard chemotherapy in patients with acute myeloid leukaemia aged 60 years or younger. METHODS: This randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 trial was done at 25 sites in Germany. We enrolled patients aged 18-60 years with newly diagnosed, previously untreated acute myeloid leukaemia who had a WHO clinical performance score 0-2, adequate renal and liver function, no cardiac comorbidities, and no recent trauma or operation. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive two cycles of induction therapy with daunorubicin (60 mg/m(2) on days 3-5) plus cytarabine (100 mg/m(2) on days 1-7), followed by three cycles of high-dose cytarabine consolidation therapy (3 g/m(2) twice daily on days 1, 3, and 5) plus either sorafenib (400 mg twice daily) or placebo on days 10-19 of induction cycles 1 and 2, from day 8 of each consolidation, and as maintenance for 12 months. Allogeneic stem-cell transplantation was scheduled for all intermediate-risk patients with a sibling donor and for all high-risk patients with a matched donor in first remission. Computer-generated randomisation was done in blocks. The primary endpoint was event-free survival, with an event defined as either primary treatment failure or relapse or death, assessed in all randomised patients who received at least one dose of study treatment. We report the final analysis. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00893373, and the EU Clinical Trials Register (2008-004968-40). FINDINGS: Between March 27, 2009, and Nov 28, 2011, 276 patients were enrolled and randomised, of whom nine did not receive study medication. 267 patients were included in the primary analysis (placebo, n=133; sorafenib, n=134). With a median follow-up of 36 months (IQR 35·5-38·1), median event-free survival was 9 months (95% CI 4-15) in the placebo group versus 21 months (9-32) in the sorafenib group, corresponding to a 3-year event-free survival of 22% (95% CI 13-32) in the placebo group versus 40% (29-51) in the sorafenib group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·64, 95% CI; 0·45-0·91; p=0·013). The most common grade 3-4 adverse events in both groups were fever (71 [53%] in the placebo group vs 73 [54%] in the sorafenib group), infections (55 [41%] vs 46 [34%]), pneumonia (21 [16%] vs 20 [14%]), and pain (13 [10%] vs 15 [11%]). Grade 3 or worse adverse events that were significantly more common in the sorafenib group than the placebo group were fever (relative risk [RR] 1·54, 95% CI 1·04-2·28), diarrhoea (RR 7·89, 2·94-25·2), bleeding (RR 3·75, 1·5-10·0), cardiac events (RR 3·46, 1·15-11·8), hand-foot-skin reaction (only in sorafenib group), and rash (RR 4·06, 1·25-15·7). INTERPRETATION: In patients with acute myeloid leukaemia aged 60 years or younger, the addition of sorafenib to standard chemotherapy has antileukaemic efficacy but also increased toxicity. Our findings suggest that kinase inhibitors could be a useful addition to curative treatment for acute myeloid leukaemia. Overall survival after long-term follow-up and strategies to reduce toxicity are needed to determine the future role of sorafenib in treatment of this disease. FUNDING: Bayer HealthCare.