The long-term efficacy and safety of nilotinib in pediatric patients with CML: a 5-year update of the DIALOG study.

The efficacy and safety of nilotinib in pediatric patients with imatinib/dasatinib resistant/intolerant (R/I) or newly diagnosed (ND) Philadelphia chromosome-positive (Ph+) chronic myeloid leukemia in chronic phase (CML-CP) was demonstrated in the phase 2, open-label DIALOG study. In this final analysis, long-term efficacy and safety are presented for patients who completed 66 cycles (of 28 days) of treatment with nilotinib (230 mg/m2 twice daily) or discontinued early. Overall, 59 patients were enrolled and 58 were treated (R/I, n = 33; ND, n = 25; median time on treatment: 60.5 and 51.9 months, respectively). In the R/I cohort, the cumulative major molecular response (MMR; BCR::ABL1 international scale [IS] ≤ 0.1%) rate was 60.6%, and no patients had a confirmed loss of MMR. Among ND patients, the best overall MMR rate was 76.0%; 3 patients had a confirmed loss of MMR. The cumulative molecular response MR4 (BCR::ABL1IS ≤ 0.01%) and MR4.5 (BCR::ABL1IS ≤ 0.0032%) rates by 66 cycles were 27.3% and 12.1% in the R/I cohort, and 56.0% and 44.0% in the ND cohort, respectively. The safety profile of nilotinib was consistent with those of earlier reports. No on-treatment deaths occurred. These long-term (up to ∼5 years) data support the efficacy and safety of nilotinib in pediatric patients with Ph+ CML-CP. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov.uk as #NCT01844765.

A phase 2 study of nilotinib in pediatric patients with CML: long-term update on growth retardation and safety.

The phase 2, open-label study (DIALOG) of nilotinib in pediatric patients with Philadelphia chromosome-positive chronic myelogenous leukemia (CML) met its coprimary end points, showing sustained nilotinib efficacy in patients with newly diagnosed (ND) or imatinib/dasatinib resistant/intolerant (R/I) CML. This update assessed growth and safety profiles in patients who had completed ≥48, 28-day treatment cycles of nilotinib 230 mg/m2 twice daily, or previously discontinued the study. Height was assessed regularly and reported using standard deviation scores (SDSs) based on World Health Organization growth charts. All data were summarized descriptively (cutoff, 6 March 2019). Overall, 33 patients in the R/I cohort and 25 patients in the ND cohort received nilotinib. Each cohort showed a negative slope in height SDS over the course of the study, indicating attenuated growth rates during nilotinib treatment: overall median change from baseline in height SDS after 48 cycles was -0.54 SDS (range, - 1.6 to 0.4) and -0.91 SDS (-1.4 to -0.1) in R/I and ND cohorts, respectively. Patients in the R/I cohort were shorter at baseline than those in the ND cohort, and remained so throughout the study. The most common all-cause adverse events were increased blood bilirubin (53.4%), headache (46.6%), pyrexia (37.9%), and increased alanine transferase (36.2%). Apart from the impact on growth, the safety profile of nilotinib was generally consistent with previous reports. This study was registered on www.clinicaltrials.gov at #NCT01844765.

Treatment-free remission following frontline nilotinib in patients with chronic phase chronic myeloid leukemia: 5-year update of the ENESTfreedom trial.

The ENESTfreedom trial assessed the feasibility of treatment-free remission (TFR) in patients with chronic myeloid leukemia in chronic phase (CML-CP) following frontline nilotinib treatment. Results for long-term outcomes after a 5-year follow-up are presented herein. Patients who had received ≥2 years of frontline nilotinib therapy and achieved MR4.5 underwent a 1-year nilotinib treatment consolidation phase before attempting TFR. At the 5-year data cut-off, 81/190 patients entering the TFR phase (42.6%) were still in TFR, with 76 (40.0%) in MR4.5. Patients who lost major molecular response (MMR) entered a treatment re-initiation phase; 90/91 patients entering this phase (98.9%) regained MMR and 84/91 patients (92.3%) regained MR4.5. The Kaplan-Meier estimated treatment-free survival rate at 5 years was 48.2%. No disease progression or CML-related deaths were reported. Whereas the incidence of adverse events (AEs) declined from 96 weeks following the start of TFR, an increase in AE frequency was observed for patients in the treatment re-initiation phase. Low Sokal risk score, BCR-ABL1IS levels at 48 weeks of TFR and stable MR4.5 response for the first year of TFR were associated with higher TFR rates. Overall, these results support the efficacy and safety of attempting TFR following upfront nilotinib therapy of >3 years in patients with CML-CP.

Long-term outcomes with frontline nilotinib versus imatinib in newly diagnosed chronic myeloid leukemia in chronic phase: ENESTnd 10-year analysis.

In the ENESTnd study, with ≥10 years follow-up in patients with newly diagnosed chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) in chronic phase, nilotinib demonstrated higher cumulative molecular response rates, lower rates of disease progression and CML-related death, and increased eligibility for treatment-free remission (TFR). Cumulative 10-year rates of MMR and MR4.5 were higher with nilotinib (300 mg twice daily [BID], 77.7% and 61.0%, respectively; 400 mg BID, 79.7% and 61.2%, respectively) than with imatinib (400 mg once daily [QD], 62.5% and 39.2%, respectively). Cumulative rates of TFR eligibility at 10 years were higher with nilotinib (300 mg BID, 48.6%; 400 mg BID, 47.3%) vs imatinib (29.7%). Estimated 10-year overall survival rates in nilotinib and imatinib arms were 87.6%, 90.3%, and 88.3%, respectively. Overall frequency of adverse events was similar with nilotinib and imatinib. By 10 years, higher cumulative rates of cardiovascular events were reported with nilotinib (300 mg BID, 16.5%; 400 mg BID, 23.5%) vs imatinib (3.6%), including in Framingham low-risk patients. Overall efficacy and safety results support the use of nilotinib 300 mg BID as frontline therapy for optimal long-term outcomes, especially in patients aiming for TFR. The benefit-risk profile in context of individual treatment goals should be carefully assessed.