A clinician perspective on the treatment of chronic myeloid leukemia in the chronic phase.

Tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) have vastly improved long-term outcomes for patients with chronic myeloid leukemia (CML). After imatinib (a first-generation TKI), second- and third-generation TKIs were developed. With five TKIs (imatinib, dasatinib, bosutinib, nilotinib, and ponatinib) targeting BCR::ABL approved in most countries, and with the recent approval of asciminib in the USA, treatment decisions are complex and require assessment of patient-specific factors. Optimal treatment strategies for CML continue to evolve, with an increased focus on achieving deep molecular responses. Using clinically relevant case studies developed by the authors of this review, we discuss three major scenarios from the perspective of international experts. Firstly, this review explores patient-specific characteristics that affect decision-making between first- and second-generation TKIs upon initial diagnosis of CML, including patient comorbidities. Secondly, a thorough assessment of therapeutic options in the event of first-line treatment failure (as defined by National Comprehensive Cancer Network and European LeukemiaNet guidelines) is discussed along with real-world considerations for monitoring optimal responses to TKI therapy. Thirdly, this review illustrates the considerations and importance of achieving treatment-free remission as a treatment goal. Due to the timing of the writing, this review addresses global challenges commonly faced by hematologists treating patients with CML during the COVID-19 pandemic. Lastly, as new treatment approaches continue to be explored in CML, this review also discusses the advent of newer therapies such as asciminib. This article may be a useful reference for physicians treating patients with CML with second-generation TKIs and, as it is focused on the physicians' international and personal experiences, may give insight into alternative approaches not previously considered.

Determination of fitness and therapeutic options in older patients with acute myeloid leukemia.

Treatment of older patients with AML remains challenging. Although age, performance status, and comorbidities are commonly employed to determine fitness for intensive treatment, several studies have demonstrated improved outcomes with treatment in older and classically unfit patients, highlighting the importance of other disease-related and patient-related factors that have prognostic value for treatment outcome in AML. However, consistent and objective assessments for fitness are lacking. Multi-parameter geriatric assessment tools offer more comprehensive evaluation, but are limited by the required resources and lack of standardization and consensus regarding prognostic value. These assessments are particularly important considering the emerging new AML therapies that represent a spectrum of intensities. Patients should therefore be evaluated holistically for fitness to receive a specific treatment, with the aim of providing individualized care, and such definitions of fitness should also consistently be applied to clinical trials. This review will examine evolving criteria for the determination of fitness among AML patients and discuss treatment options for older and/or unfit patients with AML.

Phase 1 study of combinatorial sorafenib, G-CSF, and plerixafor treatment in relapsed/refractory, FLT3-ITD-mutated acute myelogenous leukemia patients.

Stroma-leukemia interactions mediated by CXCR4, CD44, VLA4, and their respective ligands contribute to therapy resistance in FLT3-ITD-mutated acute myelogenous leukemia (AML). We conducted a phase 1 study with the combination of sorafenib (a FLT3-ITD inhibitor), plerixafor (a SDF-1/CXCR4 inhibitor), and G-CSF (that cleaves SDF-1, CD44, and VLA4). Twenty-eight patients with relapsed/refractory FLT3-ITD-mutated AML were enrolled from December 2010 to December 2013 at three dose levels of sorafenib (400, 600, and 800 mg twice daily) and G-CSF and plerixafor were administered every other day for seven doses starting on day one. Sorafenib 800 mg twice daily was selected for the expansion phase. While no dose-limiting toxicities (DLT) were encountered in the four-week DLT window, hand-foot syndrome and rash were seen beyond the DLT window, which required dose reductions in most patients. The response rate was 36% (complete response (CR) = 4, complete remission with incomplete platelet recovery (CRp) = 4, complete remission with incomplete hematologic recovery (CRi) = 1, and partial response (PR) = 1) for the intention to treat population. Treatment resulted in 58.4 and 47 mean fold mobilization of blasts and CD34 /38- stem/progenitor cells, respectively, to the circulation. Expression of the adhesion molecules CXCR4, CD44, and VLA4 on circulating leukemia cells correlated negatively with the mobilization of CD34+/38-, CD34+/38-/123+ "progenitor" cells (all P ≤ .002). Mass cytometry analysis of sequential samples from two patients demonstrated resistance emerging early on from sub-clones with persistent Akt and/or ERK signaling. In conclusion, the strategy of combined inhibition of FLT3 kinase and stromal adhesive interactions has promising activity in relapsed/refractory, FLT3-ITD-mutated AML, which warrants further evaluation in the front-line setting.

Illuminating novel biological aspects and potential new therapeutic approaches for chronic myeloproliferative malignancies.

This review reflects the presentations and discussion at the 14th post-American Society of Hematology (ASH) International Workshop on Chronic Myeloproliferative Malignancies, which took place on the December 10 and 11, 2019, immediately after the 61st ASH Annual Meeting in Orlando, Florida. Rather than present a resume of the proceedings, we address some of the topical translational science research and clinically relevant topics in detail. We consider how recent studies using single-cell genomics and other molecular methods reveal novel aspects of hematopoiesis which in turn raise the possibility of new therapeutic approaches for patients with myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs). We discuss how alternative therapies could benefit patients with chronic myeloid leukemia who develop BCR-ABL1 mutant subclones following ABL1-tyrosine kinase inhibitor therapy. In MPNs, we focus on efforts beyond JAK-STAT and the merits of integrating activin receptor ligand traps, interferon-α, and allografting in the current treatment algorithm for patients with myelofibrosis.

Sorafenib plus intensive chemotherapy improves survival in patients with newly diagnosed, FLT3-internal tandem duplication mutation-positive acute myeloid leukemia.

BACKGROUND: The addition of midostaurin to induction chemotherapy improves survival in younger patients with newly diagnosed, FLT3-mutated acute myeloid leukemia (AML). Sorafenib is a potent multikinase inhibitor with efficacy when given as monotherapy. The authors investigated whether the addition of sorafenib to intensive induction chemotherapy improves outcomes in patients with FLT3-internal tandem duplication (ITD)-mutated AML. METHODS: In total, 183 patients who were newly diagnosed with FLT3-ITD-mutated AML between February 2001 and December 2017 were identified. Of these, 79 patients (43%) underwent intensive chemotherapy with the addition of sorafenib, and 104 (57%) received intensive chemotherapy alone. Propensity score matching identified 42 patients in each cohort. RESULTS: The overall response rate was 98% in the sorafenib cohort and 83% in the intensive chemotherapy cohort (P = .057). The median follow-up was 54 months. The median event-free survival was 35 months in the sorafenib cohort and 8 months in the intensive chemotherapy cohort (P = .019), and the median overall survival was 42 and 13 months, respectively (P = .026). With censoring at the time of allogeneic stem cell transplantation, the median event-free survival was 31 and 8 months in the sorafenib and intensive therapy cohorts, respectively (P = .031), and the median overall survival was not reached and 10 months, respectively (P = .001). Multivariate Cox proportional hazards models confirmed that treatment with sorafenib was a favorable prognostic factor (P = .009; hazard ratio, 0.558; 95% CI, 0.360-0.865). CONCLUSIONS: The addition of sorafenib improves survival in patients with FLT3-ITD-mutated AML regardless of whether they undergo allogeneic stem cell transplantation.

Improvement in clinical outcome of FLT3 ITD mutated acute myeloid leukemia patients over the last one and a half decade.

AML with FLT3 ITD mutations are associated with poor outcome. We reviewed outcomes of patients with FLT3 ITD mutated AML to investigate trends over time. We analyzed 224 AML patients (excluding patients with core binding factor and acute promyelocytic leukemia) referred to our institution between 2000 and 2014. Patients were divided into five cohorts by era: 2000-2002 (Era 1, n = 19), 2003-2005 (Era 2, n = 41), 2006-2008 (Era 3, n = 53), 2009-2011 (Era 4, n = 55), and 2012-2014 (Era 5, n = 56) to analyze differences in outcome. The baseline characteristics were not statistically different across Eras. The response rate (CR/CRp) from Era 1-5 was 68%, 49%, 72%, 73%, and 75%, respectively. The overall response rate (all Eras) with chemotherapy alone versus chemotherapy plus FLT3 inhibitor was 67% and 72.5%, respectively (P = 0.4). The median time to relapse was 6, 3.6, 7.9, 8.1 months and not reached from Eras 1 through 5, respectively (P = 0.001). The median OS has improved: 9.6, 7.6, 14.4, 15.7, and 17.8 month from Eras 1-5, respectively (P = <0.001). Stem cell transplant as a time-dependent variable, showed better OS in the univariate analysis (HR: 0.57, 95% CI: 0.39-0.84, P = 0.004) but did not retained its significance in multivariate analysis (HR: 0.75, 95% CI: 0.50-1.13, P = 0.16). Our data suggest improvement in outcome of FLT3 ITD mutated AML patients over the last 15 years. This is probably due to improvement in treatment strategies, including but not limited to integration of FLT3 inhibitors and increased use of SCT.

Treatment with FLT3 inhibitor in patients with FLT3-mutated acute myeloid leukemia is associated with development of secondary FLT3-tyrosine kinase domain mutations.

BACKGROUND: FLT3-internal tandem duplication (ITD) mutations are found in approximately 30% of patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML). FLT3 inhibitors have shown clinical activity in AML with FLT3-ITD, but responses are usually short-lived. METHODS: This study examined 69 FLT3-mutated patients with AML, who were treated with different FLT3 inhibitors to analyze emergence of new mutations. RESULTS: At baseline, 87% of patients had an ITD mutation, 7% had a D835/I836 mutation, and 6% had combined ITD and D835/I836 mutations. Responses occurred in 32% of patients, all with FLT3-ITD; none of the patients with D835/I836 or ITD+D835/I836 responded. Mutational assessment at the time of FLT3 inhibitor discontinuation showed that 68% of patients were unchanged, 10% had become undetectable, and 22% of patients progressed from a single ITD to have combined ITD+D835/I836 mutations. In those patients with unchanged FLT3 mutation at progression, the median survival was 5 months, whereas in those with undetectable and with combined ITD+D835/I836 mutations, the median survival was 7 months, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: These data confirm in vitro observations that a secondary tyrosine kinase domain mutation may arise after the use of FLT3 inhibitors in patients with single FLT3-ITD mutated AML, a phenomenon that is associated with resistance and a poor prognosis.

Long-term response to imatinib is not affected by the initial dose in patients with Philadelphia chromosome-positive chronic myeloid leukemia in chronic phase: final update from the Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitor Optimization and Selectivity (TOPS) study.

The TOPS trial evaluated high- (800 mg/day; n = 319) versus standard-dose (400 mg/day; n = 157) imatinib in patients newly diagnosed with Philadelphia chromosome-positive chronic myeloid leukemia in chronic phase. Patients had a minimum follow-up of 42 months or discontinued early. Major molecular response (MMR) rates were similar between arms at (51.6 vs 50.2 % for 400 and 800 mg/day, respectively; P = 0.77) and by (75.8 vs 79.0 %; P = 0.4807) 42 months. There were no differences in event-free survival (EFS), progression-free survival(PFS), or overall survival (OS) between arms. The estimated rates of PFS on treatment and OS at 42 months were significantly higher in patients with MMR at 6, 12, and 18 months compared with those without MMR.Adverse events were more frequent with high-dose imatinib. Patients with B1 treatment interruption (vs [1) and those able to maintain imatinib C600 mg/day (vs\600 mg/day) in the first year of treatment had faster and higher response rates, but no improvement in EFS or PFS. Adherence to prescribed dose without interruption may be more important than initiation of therapy with higher doses of imatinib. Achievement of MMR correlated with longterm clinical outcomes.

Current practices in the management of chronic myeloid leukemia.

BACKGROUND: A previous survey of physician self-reported practice patterns in the management of CML was conducted in 2005. The National Comprehensive Cancer Network and European LeukemiaNet guidelines now include nilotinib and dasatinib in their treatment algorithms for CML. To assess these new guidelines, a cross-sectional survey of US hematologists and/or oncologists was conducted in December 2010 through an online survey. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The survey had 43 questions consisting of items updated from the 2005 survey to reflect changes in clinical practice, tyrosine kinase inhibitor therapy, and current guidelines. RESULTS: Analysis of the responses from 507 board certified medical oncologists/hematologists suggests that the use of imatinib 400 mg as an initial treatment option had decreased from 62% in 2005 to 52% in the 2010 survey. Currently, nearly 40% of physicians would choose either nilotinib or dasatinib as first-line treatment. From the surveyed physicians, achievement of at least a major molecular response (MMR) is the predominant treatment goal in chronic phase CML. CONCLUSION: This survey emphasizes the need for continued updates and education regarding optimal therapy, monitoring practices, and therapeutic end points in CML.

Phase I study of sorafenib in patients with refractory or relapsed acute leukemias.

UNLABELLED: Background Sorafenib is a multi-kinase inhibitor with activity against fms-like tyrosine kinase 3 with internal tandem duplication mutation and Raf kinase among others. A phase I dose escalation study of sorafenib was conducted in patients with advanced myelodysplastic syndrome and relapsed or refractory acute leukemias. DESIGN AND METHODS: Fifty patients received one of two different schedules; Schedule "A": once or twice daily, five days per week, every week for a 21 day cycle, and Schedule "B": once or twice daily, for 14 days every 21 days. Dose limiting toxicities were grade 3/4 hypertension, hyperbilirubinemia, and amylase elevation. The recommended phase II dose in hematologic malignancies is 400 mg twice daily for both schedules. RESULTS: Complete remissions or complete remissions with incomplete recovery of platelets were achieved in 5 (10%) patients (all with fms-like tyrosine kinase 3-internal tandem duplication). Significant reduction in bone marrow and/or peripheral blood blasts was seen in an additional 17 (34%) patients (all with fms-like tyrosine kinase 3-internal tandem duplication). Eleven of these responses (including 3 complete remissions/complete remissions with incomplete recovery) lasted for 2 cycles or beyond. In conclusion, sorafenib is active and well tolerated in acute myelogenous leukemia with fms-like tyrosine kinase 3 internal tandem duplication mutation. Conclusions Additional studies of sorafenib in patients with acute myelogenous leukemia, particularly those with fms-like tyrosine kinase 3 internal tandem duplication, are warranted, including sorafenib-based combinations. (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00217646).

Phase I/II study of combination therapy with sorafenib, idarubicin, and cytarabine in younger patients with acute myeloid leukemia.

PURPOSE To determine the efficacy and toxicity of the combination of sorafenib, cytarabine, and idarubicin in patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) younger than age 65 years. PATIENTS AND METHODS In the phase I part of the study, 10 patients with relapsed AML were treated with escalating doses of sorafenib with chemotherapy to establish the feasibility of the combination. We then treated 51 patients (median age, 53 years; range, 18 to 65 years) who had previously untreated AML with cytarabine at 1.5 g/m(2) by continuous intravenous (IV) infusion daily for 4 days (3 days if > 60 years of age), idarubicin at 12 mg/m(2) IV daily for 3 days, and sorafenib at 400 mg orally twice daily for 7 days. RESULTS Overall, 38 (75%) patients have achieved a complete remission (CR), including 14 (93%) of 15 patients with mutated FMS-like tyrosine kinase-3 (FLT3; the 15th patient had complete remission with incomplete platelet recovery [CRp]) and 24 (66%) of 36 patients with FLT3 wild-type (WT) disease (three additional FLT3-WT patients had CRp). FLT3-mutated patients were more likely to achieve a CR than FLT3-WT patients (P = .033). With a median follow-up of 54 weeks (range, 8 to 87 weeks), the probability of survival at 1 year is 74%. Among the FLT3-mutated patients, 10 have relapsed and five remain in CR with a median follow-up of 62 weeks (range, 10 to 76 weeks). Plasma inhibitory assay demonstrated an on-target effect on FLT3 kinase activity. CONCLUSION Sorafenib can be safely combined with chemotherapy, produces a high CR rate in FLT3-mutated patients, and inhibits FLT3 signaling.

Phase III, randomized, open-label study of daily imatinib mesylate 400 mg versus 800 mg in patients with newly diagnosed, previously untreated chronic myeloid leukemia in chronic phase using molecular end points: tyrosine kinase inhibitor optimization and selectivity study.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of initial treatment with imatinib mesylate 800 mg/d (400 mg twice daily) versus 400 mg/d in patients with newly diagnosed chronic myeloid leukemia in chronic phase. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 476 patients were randomly assigned 2:1 to imatinib 800 mg (n = 319) or 400 mg (n = 157) daily. The primary end point was the major molecular response (MMR) rate at 12 months. RESULTS: At 12 months, differences in MMR and complete cytogenetic response (CCyR) rates were not statistically significant (MMR, 46% v 40%; P = .2035; CCyR, 70% v 66%; P = .3470). However, MMR occurred faster among patients randomly assigned to imatinib 800 mg/d, who had higher rates of MMR at 3 and 6 months compared with those in the imatinib 400-mg/d arm (P = .0035 by log-rank test). CCyR also occurred faster in the 800-mg/d arm (CCyR at 6 months, 57% v 45%; P = .0146). The most common adverse events were edema, gastrointestinal problems, and rash, and all were more common in patients in the 800-mg/d arm. Grades 3 to 4 hematologic toxicity also occurred more frequently in patients receiving imatinib 800 mg/d. CONCLUSION: MMR rates at 1 year were similar with imatinib 800 mg/d and 400 mg/d, but MMR and CCyR occurred earlier in patients treated with 800 mg/d. Continued follow-up is needed to determine the clinical significance of earlier responses on high-dose imatinib.

Suboptimal response to or failure of imatinib treatment for chronic myeloid leukemia: what is the optimal strategy?

Treatment responses to imatinib vary among patients with chronic myeloid leukemia (CML), and definitions of treatment failure and suboptimal response have been published. This article discusses monitoring and treatment of patients with CML after failure of or suboptimal response to imatinib therapy. We reviewed articles listed on PubMed from January 1, 2002, to July 31, 2008, and abstracts from the 2007 Annual Meeting of the American Society of Hematology. Search terms used were chronic myeloid/myelogenous leukemia, imatinib, and BCR-ABL. To enable early recognition of suboptimal responses, patients should be frequently monitored according to published guidelines, including cytogenetic analysis every 6 months until a complete response is achieved and molecular monitoring every 3 months from the start of therapy or monthly if an increasing BCR-ABL1 transcript level is detected. Mutational analysis of BCR-ABL1 may assist with treatment selection. A recent survey suggests that a notable proportion of physicians do not follow treatment guidelines and that broader communication is required. Recent recommendations state that, in patients whose response to imatinib at 400 mg/d is suboptimal, the dose should be increased, whereas alternative therapies, such as dasatinib, nilotinib, and allogeneic stem cell transplant (in eligible patients), and imatinib dose escalation should be considered after imatinib failure. However, clinical data are lacking to confirm this sequence of treatments, and introducing alternative therapies at an earlier stage of treatment, for example, after a suboptimal response, may produce better long-term outcomes in a higher proportion of patients. Patient and disease characteristics should be carefully considered to optimize treatment strategy for CML.