Blinatumomab for MRD-Negative Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia in Adults.

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.).

Genetic Risk Stratification and Outcomes Among Treatment-Naive Patients With AML Treated With Venetoclax and Azacitidine.

European LeukemiaNet (ELN) acute myeloid leukemia (AML) genetic risk classification systems were based on response to intensive chemotherapy; their ability to discriminate outcomes in older patients treated with venetoclax-azacitidine may be suboptimal. Here, pooled analysis of patients in the phase 3 VIALE-A trial (NCT02993523) and phase 1b study (NCT02203773) examined prognostic stratification according to 2017 and 2022 ELN risk classifications. A bioinformatic algorithm derived new molecular signatures differentiating venetoclax-azacitidine-treated patients based on median overall survival (OS). 279 patients treated with venetoclax-azacitidine and 113 patients treated with placebo-azacitidine were analyzed. When classified by ELN 2017 or 2022 prognostic criteria, most patients had adverse-risk AML (60.2% and 72.8% for venetoclax-azacitidine and 65.5% and 75.2% for placebo-azacitidine, respectively). While outcomes with venetoclax-azacitidine were improved across all ELN risk groups compared with placebo-azacitidine, ELN classification systems poorly discriminated venetoclax-azacitidine outcomes. By applying a bioinformatic algorithm, new molecular signatures were derived differentiating OS outcomes with venetoclax-azacitidine; the mutational status of TP53, FLT3-ITD, NRAS, and KRAS categorized patients into higher-, intermediate-, and lower-benefit groups (52%, 25%, and 23% of patients, respectively), each associated with a distinct median OS (26.5 months [95% CI, 20.2 to 32.7], 12.1 months [95% CI, 7.3 to 15.2], and 5.5 months [95% CI, 2.8 to 7.6], respectively). ELN prognostic classifiers do not provide clinically meaningful risk stratification of OS outcomes for patients with AML treated with venetoclax-azacitidine. TP53, FLT3-ITD, NRAS, and KRAS mutation status allows classification of these patients into three risk groups with distinct differences in median OS.

Chronic Myeloid Leukemia, Version 2.2024, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology.

Chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) is defined by the presence of Philadelphia chromosome resulting from a reciprocal translocation between chromosomes 9 and 22 [t9;22] that gives rise to a BCR::ABL1 fusion gene. CML occurs in 3 different phases (chronic, accelerated, and blast phase) and is usually diagnosed in the chronic phase in developed countries. Tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) therapy is a highly effective treatment option for patients with chronic phase-CML. The primary goal of TKI therapy in patients with chronic phase-CML is to prevent disease progression to accelerated phase-CML or blast phase-CML. Discontinuation of TKI therapy with careful monitoring is feasible in selected patients. This manuscript discusses the recommendations outlined in the NCCN Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of patients with chronic phase-CML.

Long-term follow-up of VIALE-A: Venetoclax and azacitidine in chemotherapy-ineligible untreated acute myeloid leukemia.

Venetoclax-azacitidine is approved for treatment of patients with newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia (AML) ineligible for intensive chemotherapy based on the interim overall survival (OS) analysis of the VIALE-A study (NCT02993523). Here, long-term follow-up is presented to address survival benefit and long-term outcomes with venetoclax-azacitidine. Patients with newly diagnosed AML who were ineligible for intensive chemotherapy were randomized 2:1 to receive venetoclax-azacitidine or placebo-azacitidine. OS was the primary endpoint; complete remission with/without blood count recovery (CR/CRi) was a key secondary endpoint. This final analysis was conducted when 100% of the predefined 360 OS events occurred. In VIALE-A, 431 patients were enrolled to venetoclax-azacitidine (n = 286) or placebo-azacitidine (n = 145). At 43.2 months median follow-up, median OS was 14.7 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 12.1-18.7) with venetoclax-azacitidine, and 9.6 months (95% CI, 7.4-12.7) with placebo-azacitidine (hazard ratio, 0.58 [95% CI, 0.47-0.72], p < .001); the estimated 24-month OS rate was 37.5% and 16.9%, respectively. Median OS for patients with IDH1/2 mutations and those with measurable residual disease responses was reached in this final analysis. CR/CRi rate was similar to interim analysis. Any-grade hematologic and gastrointestinal adverse events were most common in venetoclax-azacitidine and placebo-azacitidine arms, including thrombocytopenia (47% and 42%) and neutropenia (43% and 29%). No new safety signals were identified. Long-term efficacy and safety confirm venetoclax-azacitidine is an improvement in standard-of-care for patients with AML who are not eligible for intensive chemotherapy because of advanced age or comorbidities.

Azacitidine and Venetoclax in Previously Untreated Acute Myeloid Leukemia.

BACKGROUND: Older patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) have a dismal prognosis, even after treatment with a hypomethylating agent. Azacitidine added to venetoclax had promising efficacy in a previous phase 1b study. METHODS: We randomly assigned previously untreated patients with confirmed AML who were ineligible for standard induction therapy because of coexisting conditions, because they were 75 years of age or older, or both to azacitidine plus either venetoclax or placebo. All patients received a standard dose of azacitidine (75 mg per square meter of body-surface area subcutaneously or intravenously on days 1 through 7 every 28-day cycle); venetoclax (target dose, 400 mg) or matching placebo was administered orally, once daily, in 28-day cycles. The primary end point was overall survival. RESULTS: The intention-to-treat population included 431 patients (286 in the azacitidine-venetoclax group and 145 in the azacitidine-placebo [control] group). The median age was 76 years in both groups (range, 49 to 91). At a median follow-up of 20.5 months, the median overall survival was 14.7 months in the azacitidine-venetoclax group and 9.6 months in the control group (hazard ratio for death, 0.66; 95% confidence interval, 0.52 to 0.85; P<0.001). The incidence of complete remission was higher with azacitidine-venetoclax than with the control regimen (36.7% vs. 17.9%; P<0.001), as was the composite complete remission (complete remission or complete remission with incomplete hematologic recovery) (66.4% vs. 28.3%; P<0.001). Key adverse events included nausea of any grade (in 44% of the patients in the azacitidine-venetoclax group and 35% of those in the control group) and grade 3 or higher thrombocytopenia (in 45% and 38%, respectively), neutropenia (in 42% and 28%), and febrile neutropenia (in 42% and 19%). Infections of any grade occurred in 85% of the patients in the azacitidine-venetoclax group and 67% of those in the control group, and serious adverse events occurred in 83% and 73%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In previously untreated patients who were ineligible for intensive chemotherapy, overall survival was longer and the incidence of remission was higher among patients who received azacitidine plus venetoclax than among those who received azacitidine alone. The incidence of febrile neutropenia was higher in the venetoclax-azacitidine group than in the control group. (Funded by AbbVie and Genentech; VIALE-A ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02993523.).

Ivosidenib or enasidenib combined with intensive chemotherapy in patients with newly diagnosed AML: a phase 1 study.

Ivosidenib (AG-120) and enasidenib (AG-221) are targeted oral inhibitors of the mutant isocitrate dehydrogenase (mIDH) 1 and 2 enzymes, respectively. Given their effectiveness as single agents in mIDH1/2 relapsed or refractory acute myeloid leukemia (AML), this phase 1 study evaluated the safety and efficacy of ivosidenib or enasidenib combined with intensive chemotherapy in patients with newly diagnosed mIDH1/2 AML. Ivosidenib 500 mg once daily and enasidenib 100 mg once daily were well tolerated in this setting, with safety profiles generally consistent with those of induction and consolidation chemotherapy alone. The frequency of IDH differentiation syndrome was low, as expected given the concurrent administration of cytotoxic chemotherapy. In patients receiving ivosidenib, the frequency and grades of QT interval prolongation were similar to those observed with ivosidenib monotherapy. Increases in total bilirubin were more frequently observed in patients treated with enasidenib, consistent with this inhibitor's known potential to inhibit UGT1A1, but did not appear to have significant clinical consequences. In patients receiving ivosidenib (n = 60) or enasidenib (n = 91), end-of-induction complete remission (CR) rates were 55% and 47%, respectively, and CR/CR with incomplete neutrophil or platelet recovery (CR/CRi/CRp) rates were 72% and 63%, respectively. In patients with a best overall response of CR/CRi/CRp, 16/41 (39%) receiving ivosidenib had IDH1 mutation clearance and 15/64 (23%) receiving enasidenib had IDH2 mutation clearance by digital polymerase chain reaction; furthermore, 16/20 (80%) and 10/16 (63%), respectively, became negative for measurable residual disease by multiparameter flow cytometry. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT02632708.

A phase Ib trial of mivavotinib (TAK-659), a dual SYK/FLT3 inhibitor, in patients with relapsed/refractory acute myeloid leukemia.

Mivavotinib (TAK-659) is an investigational type 1 tyrosine kinase inhibitor with dual activity against spleen tyrosine kinase (SYK) and FMS-like tyrosine kinase 3 (FLT3). We conducted a phase Ib study to investigate the safety, tolerability, and efficacy of mivavotinib in patients with refractory and/or relapsed (R/R) acute myeloid leukemia (AML). Both daily (QD) and twice daily (BID) dosing regimens were evaluated. A total of 43 patients were enrolled, and there were 5 complete responses (4 with incomplete count recovery). In the QD dosing regimen, the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) was not reached up to 160 mg QD per protocol; 140 mg QD was identified as the recommended phase II dose. In the BID dosing regimen, the MTD was 60 mg BID. Thirty patients (70%) experienced a bleeding event on study; the majority were grades 1 or 2, were resolved without mivavotinib modification, and were not considered related to study treatment. Eleven patients (26%) experienced grade ≥3 bleeding events, which were observed most frequently with the 80 mg BID dose. We conducted platelet aggregation studies to investigate the potential role of mivavotinib-mediated SYK inhibition on platelet function. The bleeding events observed may have been the result of several confounding factors, including AML disease status, associated thrombocytopenia, and high doses of mivavotinib. Overall, these findings indicate that the activity of mivavotinib in R/R AML is modest. Furthermore, any future clinical investigation of this agent should be undertaken with caution, particularly in thrombocytopenic patients, due to the potential bleeding risk of SYK inhibition. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02323113.

Real-world effectiveness of intensive chemotherapy with 7&3 versus venetoclax and hypomethylating agent in acute myeloid leukemia.

Intensive chemotherapy with cytarabine and anthracycline (7&3) remains the standard therapy for patients medically fit for induction, but the assessment of fitness remains controversial. Venetoclax and hypomethylating agent (ven/HMA) combination therapy has improved outcomes in unfit patients but no prospective study has assessed ven/HMA versus 7&3 as initial therapy in older, fit patients. Given no studies and expectation of ven/HMA use in patients outside of trial criteria, we evaluated retrospective outcomes among newly diagnosed patients. A nationwide electronic health record (EHR)-derived database and the University of Pennsylvania EHR identified 312 patients receiving 7&3 and 488 receiving ven/HMA who were 60-75 years old without history of organ failure. Ven/HMA patients were older and more likely to have secondary AML, adverse cytogenetics, and adverse mutations. Median overall survival (OS) for patients receiving intensive chemotherapy was 22 versus 10 months for ven/HMA (HR 0.53, 95% CI 0.40-0.60). Controlling for measured baseline characteristic imbalances reduced survival advantage by half (HR 0.71, 95% CI 0.53-0.94). A sub-group of patients with equipoise, likelihood at least 30%-70% of receiving either treatment, had similar OS outcomes (HR 1.10, 95% CI 0.75-1.6). Regarding safety outcomes, 60-day mortality was higher for ven/HMA (15% vs. 6% at 60 days) despite higher documented infections and febrile neutropenia for 7&3. In this multicenter real-word dataset, patients selected for intensive chemotherapy had superior OS but a large group had similar outcomes with ven/HMA. Prospective randomized studies, controlling for both measured and unmeasured confounders, must confirm this outcome.

Comparative Efficacy of Venetoclax-Based Combination Therapies and Other Therapies in Treatment-Naive Patients With Acute Myeloid Leukemia Ineligible for Intensive Chemotherapy: A Network Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVES: This network meta-analysis (NMA) assessed the efficacy of venetoclax (VEN) + azacitidine (AZA) and VEN + low-dose cytarabine (LDAC) compared with AZA, LDAC, and decitabine monotherapies and best supportive care (BSC) in adults with untreated acute myeloid leukemia ineligible for intensive chemotherapy. METHODS: A systematic literature review and feasibility assessment was conducted to select phase III randomized controlled trials for inclusion in the NMA. Complete remission + complete remission with incomplete blood count recovery and overall survival (OS) were compared using a Bayesian fixed-effects NMA. Treatments were ranked using surface under the cumulative ranking curves (SUCRAs) with higher values indicating a higher likelihood of being effective. RESULTS: A total of 1140 patients across 5 trials were included. VEN + LDAC (SUCRA 91.4%) and VEN + AZA (87.5%) were the highest ranked treatments for complete remission + complete remission with incomplete blood count recovery. VEN + LDAC was associated significantly higher response rates versus AZA (odds ratio 5.64), LDAC (6.39), and BSC (23.28). VEN + AZA was also associated significantly higher response rates than AZA (5.06), LDAC (5.74), and BSC (20.68). In terms of OS, VEN + AZA (SUCRA: 95.2%) and VEN + LDAC (75.9%) were the highest ranked treatments. VEN + AZA was associated with significant improvements in OS compared with AZA (hazard ratio 0.66), LDAC (0.57), and BSC (0.37), and VEN + LDAC was associated with significant improvements in OS compared with LDAC (0.70) and BSC (0.46). CONCLUSIONS: VEN + AZA and VEN + LDAC demonstrated improved efficacy compared with alternative therapies among treatment-naive patients with acute myeloid leukemia ineligible for intensive chemotherapy.

Venetoclax plus azacitidine in Japanese patients with untreated acute myeloid leukemia ineligible for intensive chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: The phase 3 VIALE-A trial (NCT02993523) reported that venetoclax-azacitidine significantly prolonged overall survival compared with placebo-azacitidine in patients with newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia ineligible for intensive chemotherapy. Herein, efficacy and safety of venetoclax-azacitidine are analyzed in the Japanese subgroup of VIALE-A patients. METHODS: Eligible Japanese patients were randomized 2:1 to venetoclax-azacitidine (N = 24) or placebo-azacitidine (N = 13). Primary endpoints for Japan were overall survival and complete response (CR) + CR with incomplete hematologic recovery (CRi). Venetoclax (target dose 400 mg) was given orally once daily. Azacitidine (75 mg/m2) was administered subcutaneously or intravenously on Days 1-7 of each 28-day cycle. RESULTS: Median follow-up was 16.3 months (range, 1.0-20.3). Median overall survival was not reached with venetoclax-azacitidine (hazard ratio 0.409 and 95% confidence interval: 0.151, 1.109); overall survival estimate was higher with venetoclax-azacitidine than placebo-azacitidine at 12 (67 and 46%) and 18 months (57 and 31%), respectively. CR and CRi rates were 67% with venetoclax-azacitidine and 15% with placebo-azacitidine. Most common any-grade adverse events were febrile neutropenia (79 and 39%), thrombocytopenia (54 and 77%), constipation (54 and 54%) and decreased appetite (54 and 38%) in the venetoclax-azacitidine and placebo-azacitidine arms, respectively. Only 1 patient in the venetoclax-azacitidine arm, and no patients in the placebo-azacitidine arm, had grade 4 febrile neutropenia that led to treatment discontinuation. CONCLUSIONS: This Japanese subgroup analysis of VIALE-A demonstrates comparable safety and efficacy outcomes compared with the global study and supports venetoclax-azacitidine as first-line standard-of-care for Japanese treatment-naive patients with acute myeloid leukemia who are ineligible for intensive chemotherapy.

Day 4 vs. day 12 G-CSF administration following reduced intensity peripheral blood allogeneic stem cell transplant.

INTRODUCTION: Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) hastens neutrophil engraftment and reduces infections after allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant (alloHCT), yet the optimal start date is unknown. Additionally, concurrent G-CSF and methotrexate for graft-vs-host disease (GVHD) prophylaxis may potentiate myelosuppression, and prolonged G-CSF is costly. Our institution changed from day + 4 to day + 12 G-CSF initiation following reduced intensity (RIC) alloHCT with methotrexate GVHD prophylaxis. METHODS: We retrospectively compared day + 4 and day + 12 G-CSF initiation after RIC alloHCT from 2017-2021. The primary endpoint was the time to neutrophil engraftment. Secondary endpoints included length of stay (LOS) and the time to platelet engraftment as well as the incidence of infectious events, acute GVHD (aGVHD), and mucositis. RESULTS: Thirty-two patients were included in each group with similar baseline characteristics. We observed faster neutrophil engraftment (median 12 vs. 15 days, p = 0.01) and platelet engraftment (median 13 vs. 15 days, p = 0.026) with day + 4 vs. day + 12 G-CSF initiation. Median LOS was 23 days (range, 19-32) with day + 4 initiation vs. 24 days (21-30) with day + 12 (p = 0.046). The incidence of culture-negative febrile neutropenia (p = 0.12), any grade aGVHD (p = 0.58), and grade 2-4 mucositis (p = 0.8) were similar between groups. CONCLUSION: Compared to day + 4, day + 12 G-CSF initiation following RIC alloHCT had a longer time to neutrophil and platelet engraftment. Day + 12 initiation also resulted in longer LOS, which while statistically significant, was potentially of limited clinical significance. These findings are hypothesis generating.

Venetoclax combined with decitabine or azacitidine in treatment-naive, elderly patients with acute myeloid leukemia.

Older patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) respond poorly to standard induction therapy. B-cell lymphoma 2 (BCL-2) overexpression is implicated in survival of AML cells and treatment resistance. We report safety and efficacy of venetoclax with decitabine or azacitidine from a large, multicenter, phase 1b dose-escalation and expansion study. Patients (N = 145) were at least 65 years old with treatment-naive AML and were ineligible for intensive chemotherapy. During dose escalation, oral venetoclax was administered at 400, 800, or 1200 mg daily in combination with either decitabine (20 mg/m2, days 1-5, intravenously [IV]) or azacitidine (75 mg/m2, days 1-7, IV or subcutaneously). In the expansion, 400 or 800 mg venetoclax with either hypomethylating agent (HMA) was given. Median age was 74 years, with poor-risk cytogenetics in 49% of patients. Common adverse events (>30%) included nausea, diarrhea, constipation, febrile neutropenia, fatigue, hypokalemia, decreased appetite, and decreased white blood cell count. No tumor lysis syndrome was observed. With a median time on study of 8.9 months, 67% of patients (all doses) achieved complete remission (CR) + CR with incomplete count recovery (CRi), with a CR + CRi rate of 73% in the venetoclax 400 mg + HMA cohort. Patients with poor-risk cytogenetics and those at least 75 years old had CR + CRi rates of 60% and 65%, respectively. The median duration of CR + CRi (all patients) was 11.3 months, and median overall survival (mOS) was 17.5 months; mOS has not been reached for the 400-mg venetoclax cohort. The novel combination of venetoclax with decitabine or azacitidine was effective and well tolerated in elderly patients with AML (This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT02203773).

Venetoclax with azacitidine or decitabine in patients with newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia: Long term follow-up from a phase 1b study.

This analysis represents the longest-term follow-up for patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) treated with 400 mg of venetoclax plus azacitidine or decitabine. Adults with newly diagnosed AML ineligible for intensive chemotherapy were enrolled in an open-label, non-randomized, multicenter phase 1b trial of venetoclax with azacitidine (AZA; 75 mg/m2 ; days 1-7) or decitabine (DEC; 20 mg/m2 ; days 1-5). Endpoints included safety, response rates (complete remission [CR], CR with incomplete blood count recovery [CRi]), response duration and overall survival (OS). The median follow-up time was 29 and 40 months for patients treated with venetoclax plus AZA and DEC combinations, respectively. Key Grade ≥ 3 AEs (AZA and DEC) were febrile neutropenia (39% and 65%), anemia (30% and 26%), thrombocytopenia (25% and 23%), and neutropenia (20% and 10%). The CR/CRi rate was 71% for venetoclax plus AZA and 74% for venetoclax plus DEC. The median duration of CR/CRi was 21.9 months and 15.0 months, and the median OS was 16.4 months and 16.2 months, for venetoclax plus AZA and DEC, respectively. These results support venetoclax plus hypomethylating agents as highly effective frontline AML therapies for patients unfit for intensive chemotherapy.

A Prospective Study of Peritransplant Sorafenib for Patients with FLT3-ITD Acute Myeloid Leukemia Undergoing Allogeneic Transplantation.

FLT3-ITD-mutated acute myeloid leukemia (AML) remains a therapeutic challenge. FLT3 inhibition in the setting of minimal residual disease and a new immune system via allogeneic transplantation offers a promise of improved survival for these patients. We performed a prospective study of patients with FLT3-ITD AML undergoing allogeneic transplant that was conducted to evaluate the safety, tolerability, and outcome of sorafenib administered peritransplant. Sorafenib dosing was individualized, starting at 200 mg twice a day (BID), and titrated based on tolerability or toxicities until a tolerable dose was identified. Forty-four patients, with a median age of 52 years, undergoing allogeneic transplant were started on sorafenib in the peritransplant period (21 pretransplant). The median duration of post-transplant follow-up was 27.6 months (range, 5.2 to 60.4). Overall survival was 76% at both 24 and 36 months. Event-free survival at 24 and 36 months was 74% and 64%, respectively. Ten patients died in the post-transplant period, with 6 deaths due to relapsed leukemia and 4 from transplant-associated toxicity. Tolerable doses ranged from 200 mg every other day to 400 mg BID with similar exposure. Correlative studies evaluating FLT3 inhibition via a plasma inhibitory activity assay showed consistent inhibition of FLT3 at all tolerability-determined dosing levels. Sorafenib is well tolerated in the peritransplant setting irrespective of the conditioning intensity or the donor source. Our findings indicate that sorafenib dosing can be individualized in the post-transplantation setting according to patient tolerability. This approach results in effective in vivo FLT3 inhibition and yields encouraging survival results.

Chronic Myeloid Leukemia, Version 2.2021, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology.

Chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) is defined by the presence of Philadelphia chromosome (Ph) which results from a reciprocal translocation between chromosomes 9 and 22 [t(9;22] that gives rise to a BCR-ABL1 fusion gene. CML occurs in 3 different phases (chronic, accelerated, and blast phase) and is usually diagnosed in the chronic phase. Tyrosine kinase inhibitor therapy is a highly effective first-line treatment option for all patients with newly diagnosed chronic phase CML. This manuscript discusses the recommendations outlined in the NCCN Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of patients with chronic phase CML.

How I treat FLT3-mutated AML.

FLT3-mutated acute myeloid leukemia (AML), despite not being recognized as a distinct entity in the World Health Organization (WHO) classification system, is readily recognized as a particular challenge by clinical specialists who treat acute leukemia. This is especially true with regards to the patients harboring the most common type of FLT3 mutation, the internal tandem duplication (FLT3-ITD) mutation. Here we present 4 patient cases from our institution and discuss how our management reflects what we have learned about this subtype of the disease. We also reflect on how we anticipate the management might change in the near future, with the emergence of clinically useful tyrosine kinase inhibitors.

Acute Myeloid Leukemia, Version 3.2019, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology.

Acute myeloid leukemia (AML) is the most common form of acute leukemia among adults and accounts for the largest number of annual deaths due to leukemias in the United States. Recent advances have resulted in an expansion of treatment options for AML, especially concerning targeted therapies and low-intensity regimens. This portion of the NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) for AML focuses on the management of AML and provides recommendations on the workup, diagnostic evaluation and treatment options for younger (age <60 years) and older (age ≥60 years) adult patients.

A randomized trial of three novel regimens for recurrent acute myeloid leukemia demonstrates the continuing challenge of treating this difficult disease.

To improve the outcome of relapsed/refractory acute myeloid leukemia (AML), a randomized phase II trial of three novel regimens was conducted. Ninety patients were enrolled and were in first relapse or were refractory to induction/re-induction chemotherapy. They were randomized to the following regimens: carboplatin-topotecan (CT), each by continuous infusion for 5 days; alvocidib (formerly flavopiridol), cytarabine, and mitoxantrone (FLAM) in a timed sequential regimen; or sirolimus combined with mitoxantrone, etoposide, and cytarabine (S-MEC). The primary objective was attainment of a complete remission (CR). A Simon two-stage design was used for each of the three arms. The median age of the patients in the FLAM arm was older at 62 years compared with 55 years for the CT arm and the S-MEC arm. The overall response was 14% in the CT arm (5/35, 90% CI 7%-35%), 28% in the FLAM arm (10/36, 90% CI, 16%-43%), and 16% in the S-MEC arm (3/19, 90% CI, 4%-36%). There were nine treatment-related deaths, seven of which occurred in the FLAM arm with four of these in elderly patients. We conclude that the FLAM regimen had an encouraging response rate and should be considered for further clinical development but should be used with caution in elderly patients.

Safety and preliminary efficacy of venetoclax with decitabine or azacitidine in elderly patients with previously untreated acute myeloid leukaemia: a non-randomised, open-label, phase 1b study.

BACKGROUND: Elderly patients (aged ≥65 years) with acute myeloid leukaemia have poor outcomes and no effective standard-of-care therapy exists. Treatment with hypomethylating agents such as azacitidine and decitabine is common, but responses are modest and typically short-lived. The oral anti-apoptotic B-cell lymphoma 2 protein inhibitor, venetoclax, has shown promising single-agent activity in patients with relapsed or refractory acute myeloid leukaemia and preclinical data suggested synergy between hypomethylating agents and venetoclax, which led to this combination phase 1b study. METHODS: Previously untreated patients aged 65 years and over with acute myeloid leukaemia who were ineligible for standard induction therapy were enrolled into this non-randomised, open-label, phase 1b study. Patients were required to have an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2 and either intermediate-risk or poor-risk cytogenetics. Patients were enrolled into one of three groups for the dose-escalation phase of this study: group A (venetoclax and intravenous decitabine 20 mg/m2 [days 1-5 of each 28-day cycle]), group B (venetoclax and subcutaneous or intravenous azacitidine 75 mg/m2 [days 1-7 of each 28-day cycle]), and group C (a venetoclax and decitabine substudy with the oral CYP3A inhibitor posaconazole, 300 mg twice on cycle 1, day 21, and 300 mg once daily from cycle 1, days 22-28, to assess its effect on venetoclax pharmacokinetics). Dose escalation followed a standard 3 + 3 design with at least three evaluable patients enrolled per cohort; daily target doses of venetoclax for groups A and B were 400 mg (cohort 1), 800 mg (cohorts 2 and 3), and 1200 mg (cohort 4), and 400 mg for group C. The primary endpoints were the safety and pharmacokinetics of venetoclax plus decitabine or azacitidine, and to determine the maximum tolerated dose and recommended phase 2 dose. Secondary endpoints included the preliminary anti-leukaemic activity of venetoclax with decitabine or azacitidine through the analysis of overall response, duration of response, and overall survival. We analysed safety, pharmacokinetics, and anti-leukaemic activity in all patients who received one or more venetoclax doses. The expansion phase of the study is ongoing but is closed to accrual. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02203773. FINDINGS: 57 patients were enrolled in the study. 23 patients in group A and 22 patients in group B were enrolled between Nov 19, 2014, and Dec 15, 2015, and 12 patients in group C were enrolled between June 14, 2015, and Jan 16, 2016. As of data cutoff on June 15, 2016, the most common grade 3-4 treatment-emergent adverse events were thrombocytopenia (27 [47%] of 57 patients; nine in group A, 13 in group B, and five in group C), febrile neutropenia (24 [42%] of 57; 11 in group A, ten in group B, and three in group C), and neutropenia (23 [40%] of 57; 12 in group A, eight in group B, and three in group C). The most common serious treatment-emergent adverse event in groups A and B was febrile neutropenia (seven [30%] of 23 patients vs seven [32%] of 22), whereas in group C it was lung infection (four [33%] of 12 patients). 49 (86%) of 57 patients had treatment-related adverse events; the most common in groups A and B included nausea (12 [52%] patients vs seven [32%] patients), fatigue (six [26%] patients vs seven [32%]), and decreased neutrophil count (six [26%] patients vs six [27%]), whereas in group C the most common were nausea (seven [58%] of 12 patients), leucopenia (six [50%]), vomiting (five [42%]), and decreased platelet count (five [42%]). The maximum tolerated dose was not reached. The recommended phase 2 dose was 400 mg once a day or 800 mg with an interrupted dosing schedule (safety expansion). In total, four (7%) of 57 patients had died within 30 days of the first venetoclax dose caused by sepsis (group B), bacteraemia (group A), lung infection (group C), and respiratory failure (group A). Tumour lysis syndrome was not observed. Decitabine and azacitidine did not substantially affect venetoclax exposures. Overall, 35 (61%; 95% CI 47·6-74·0) of 57 patients achieved complete remission or complete remission with incomplete marrow recovery. In groups A and B, 27 (60%; 95% CI 44·3-74·3) of 45 patients had complete remission or complete remission with incomplete marrow recovery. INTERPRETATION: Venetoclax plus hypomethylating agent therapy seems to be a novel, well-tolerated regimen with promising activity in this underserved patient population. Evaluation of expansion cohorts is ongoing at 400 mg and 800 mg doses using both hypomethylating agent combinations. FUNDING: AbbVie and Genentech.