Association of clonal hematopoiesis and mosaic chromosomal alterations with solid malignancy incidence and mortality.

BACKGROUND: Understanding the impact of clonal hematopoiesis of indeterminate potential (CHIP) and mosaic chromosomal alterations (mCAs) on solid tumor risk and mortality can shed light on novel cancer pathways. METHODS: The authors analyzed whole genome sequencing data from the Trans-Omics for Precision Medicine Women's Health Initiative study (n = 10,866). They investigated the presence of CHIP and mCA and their association with the development and mortality of breast, lung, and colorectal cancers. RESULTS: CHIP was associated with higher risk of breast (hazard ratio [HR], 1.30; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.03-1.64; p = .02) but not colorectal (p = .77) or lung cancer (p = .32). CHIP carriers who developed colorectal cancer also had a greater risk for advanced-stage (p = .01), but this was not seen in breast or lung cancer. CHIP was associated with increased colorectal cancer mortality both with (HR, 3.99; 95% CI, 2.41-6.62; p < .001) and without adjustment (HR, 2.50; 95% CI, 1.32-4.72; p = .004) for advanced-stage and a borderline higher breast cancer mortality (HR, 1.53; 95% CI, 0.98-2.41; p = .06). Conversely, mCA (cell fraction [CF] >3%) did not correlate with cancer risk. With higher CFs (mCA >5%), autosomal mCA was associated with increased breast cancer risk (HR, 1.39; 95% CI, 1.06-1.83; p = .01). There was no association of mCA (>3%) with breast, colorectal, or lung mortality except higher colon cancer mortality (HR, 2.19; 95% CI, 1.11-4.3; p = .02) with mCA >5%. CONCLUSIONS: CHIP and mCA (CF >5%) were associated with higher breast cancer risk and colorectal cancer mortality individually. These data could inform on novel pathways that impact cancer risk and lead to better risk stratification.

Toward a more patient-centered drug development process in clinical trials for patients with myelodysplastic syndromes/neoplasms (MDS): Practical considerations from the International Consortium for MDS (icMDS).

Notable treatment advances have been made in recent years for patients with myelodysplastic syndromes/neoplasms (MDS), and several new drugs are under development. For example, the emerging availability of oral MDS therapies holds the promise of improving patients' health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Within this rapidly evolving landscape, the inclusion of HRQoL and other patient-reported outcomes (PROs) is critical to inform the benefit/risk assessment of new therapies or to assess whether patients live longer and better, for what will likely remain a largely incurable disease. We provide practical considerations to support investigators in generating high-quality PRO data in future MDS trials. We first describe several challenges that are to be thoughtfully considered when designing an MDS-focused clinical trial with a PRO endpoint. We then discuss aspects related to the design of the study, including PRO assessment strategies. We also discuss statistical approaches illustrating the potential value of time-to-event analyses and their implications within the estimand framework. Finally, based on a literature review of MDS randomized controlled trials with a PRO endpoint, we note the PRO items that deserve special attention when reporting future MDS trial results. We hope these practical considerations will facilitate the generation of rigorous PRO data that can robustly inform MDS patient care and support treatment decision-making for this patient population.

Final phase 1 substudy results of ivosidenib for patients with mutant IDH1 relapsed/refractory myelodysplastic syndrome.

ABSTRACT: Ivosidenib is a first-in-class mutant isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 (mIDH1) inhibitor with efficacy and tolerability in patients with advanced mIDH1 hematologic malignancies, leading to approval in frontline and relapsed/refractory (R/R) mIDH1 acute myeloid leukemia. We report final data from a phase 1 single-arm substudy of once-daily ivosidenib in patients with R/R mIDH1 myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) after failure of standard-of-care therapies. Primary objectives were to determine safety, tolerability, and clinical activity. The primary efficacy end point was the complete remission (CR) + partial remission (PR) rate. Nineteen patients were enrolled; 18 were included in the efficacy analysis. Treatment-related adverse events occurred in 8 (42.1%) patients, including a grade 1 QT interval prolongation in 1 (5.3%) patient and grade 2 differentiation syndrome in 2 (10.5%) patients. Rates of CR + PR and objective response (CR + PR + marrow CR) were 38.9% (95% confidence interval [CI], 17.3-64.3) and 83.3% (95% CI, 58.6-96.4), respectively. Kaplan-Meier estimates showed a 68.6% probability of patients in CR achieving a remission duration of ≥5 years, and a median overall survival of 35.7 months. Of note, 71.4% and 75.0% baseline red blood cell (RBC)- and platelet-transfusion-dependent patients, respectively, became transfusion independent (TI; no transfusion for ≥56 days); 81.8% and 100% of baseline RBC and platelet TI patients, respectively, remained TI. One (5.3%) patient proceeded to a hematopoietic stem cell transplant. In conclusion, ivosidenib is clinically active, with durable remissions and a manageable safety profile observed in these patients. This trial was registered at www.ClinicalTrials.gov as #NCT02074839.

Efficacy and safety of bosutinib in patients treated with prior imatinib and/or dasatinib and/or nilotinib: Subgroup analyses from the phase 4 BYOND study.

The BYOND study evaluated the efficacy and safety of bosutinib 500 mg once daily in patients with chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) resistant/intolerant to prior tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). These post-hoc analyses assessed the efficacy and safety of bosutinib by resistance or intolerance to prior TKIs (imatinib-resistant vs dasatinib/nilotinib-resistant vs TKI-intolerant), and cross-intolerance between bosutinib and prior TKIs (imatinib, dasatinib, nilotinib), in patients with Philadelphia chromosome-positive chronic phase CML. Data are reported after ≥3 years' follow-up. Of 156 patients with Philadelphia chromosome-positive chronic phase CML, 53 were imatinib-resistant, 29 dasatinib/nilotinib-resistant, and 74 intolerant to all prior TKIs; cumulative complete cytogenetic response rates at any time were 83.7%, 61.5%, and 86.8%, and cumulative major molecular response rates at any time were 72.9%, 40.7%, and 82.4%, respectively. Of 141, 95, and 79 patients who received prior imatinib, dasatinib, and nilotinib, 64 (45.4%), 71 (74.7%), and 60 (75.9%) discontinued the respective TKI due to intolerance; of these, 2 (3.1%), 5 (7.0%), and 0 had cross-intolerance with bosutinib. The response rates observed in TKI-resistant and TKI-intolerant patients, and low cross-intolerance between bosutinib and prior TKIs, further support bosutinib use for patients with Philadelphia chromosome-positive chronic phase CML resistant/intolerant to prior TKIs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02228382.

Olutasidenib in post-venetoclax patients with mutant isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 (mIDH1) acute myeloid leukemia (AML).

Olutasidenib, a potent, selective, oral, mutant isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 (mIDH1) inhibitor, is FDA-approved for relapsed/refractory (R/R) acute myeloid leukemia (AML). Here we report efficacy and safety of olutasidenib in 18 patients with mIDH1 AML who were relapsed (10), refractory (6) or had complete remission with incomplete hematologic recovery (CRi; 2) to a venetoclax combination. Of the 16 patients who were R/R, 4 (25%) achieved complete remission (CR), one (6.3%) achieved CR with partial hematologic recovery (CRh), and 7 (43.8%) achieved a composite complete remission (CRc). Median time to CRc was 1.9 months (range 1-2.8). As of data cutoff (18 June 2021), median duration of CRc was not reached (range, 1.2-NR, ongoing at 30.4+ months). Both patients with CRi at study entry achieved a CR. Safety was consistent with the overall profile of olutasidenib. Olutasidenib offers a valuable treatment option for patients with mIDH1 AML previously treated with venetoclax.

A phase 1 study of the irreversible FLT3 inhibitor FF-10101 in relapsed or refractory acute myeloid leukemia.

ABSTRACT: FLT3 tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) have clinical efficacy for patients with FLT3-mutated AML (acute myeloid leukemia), but their impact is limited by resistance in the setting of monotherapy and by tolerability problems when used in combination therapies. FF-10101 is a novel compound that covalently binds to a cysteine residue near the active site of FLT3, irreversibly inhibiting receptor signaling. It is effective against most FLT3 activating mutations, and, unlike other inhibitors, is minimally vulnerable to resistance induced by FLT3 ligand. We conducted a phase 1 dose escalation study of oral FF-10101 in patients with relapsed and/or refractory AML, the majority of whom harbored FLT3-activating mutations and/or had prior exposure to FLT3 inhibitors. Fifty-four participants enrolled in cohorts receiving doses ranging from 10 to 225 mg per day and 50 to 100 mg twice daily (BID). The dose limiting toxicities were diarrhea and QT prolongation. Among 40 response-evaluable participants, the composite complete response rate was 10%, and the overall response rate (including partial responses) was 12.5%, including patients who had progressed on gilteritinib. Overall, 56% of participants had prior exposure to FLT3 inhibitors. The recommended phase 2 dose was 75 mg BID. FF-10101 potentially represents a next-generation advance in the management of FLT3-mutated AML. This trial was registered at www.ClinicalTrials.gov as #NCT03194685.

Venetoclax and Cobimetinib in Relapsed/Refractory AML: A Phase 1b Trial.

BACKGROUND: Therapies for relapsed/refractory acute myeloid leukemia remain limited and outcomes poor, especially amongst patients who are ineligible for cytotoxic chemotherapy or targeted therapies. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This phase 1b trial evaluated venetoclax, a B-cell lymphoma-2 (BCL-2) inhibitor, plus cobimetinib, a MEK1/2 inhibitor, in patients with relapsed/refractory acute myeloid leukemia, ineligible for cytotoxic chemotherapy. Two-dimensional dose-escalation was performed for venetoclax dosed daily, and for cobimetinib dosed on days 1-21 of each 28-day cycle. RESULTS: Thirty patients (median [range] age: 71.5 years [60-84]) received venetoclax-cobimetinib. The most common adverse events (AEs; in ≥40.0% of patients) were diarrhea (80.0%), nausea (60.0%), vomiting (40.0%), febrile neutropenia (40.0%), and fatigue (40.0%). Overall, 66.7% and 23.3% of patients experienced AEs leading to dose modification/interruption or treatment withdrawal, respectively. The composite complete remission (CRc) rate (complete remission [CR] + CR with incomplete blood count recovery + CR with incomplete platelet recovery) was 15.6%; antileukemic response rate (CRc + morphologic leukemia-free state/partial remission) was 18.8%. For the recommended phase 2 dose (venetoclax: 600 mg; cobimetinib: 40 mg), CRc and antileukemic response rates were both 12.5%. Failure to achieve an antileukemic response was associated with elevated baseline phosphorylated ERK and MCL-1 levels, but not BCL-xL. Baseline mutations in ≥1 signaling gene or TP53 were noted in nonresponders and emerged on treatment. Pharmacodynamic biomarkers revealed inconsistent, transient inhibition of the mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) pathway. CONCLUSION: Venetoclax-cobimetinib showed limited preliminary efficacy similar to single-agent venetoclax, but with added toxicity. Our findings will inform future trials of BCL-2/MAPK pathway inhibitor combinations.

Mutations highly specific for secondary AML are associated with poor outcomes in ELN favorable risk NPM1-mutated AML.

ABSTRACT: Acute myeloid leukemia (AML) is a heterogeneous malignancy with outcomes largely predicted by genetic abnormalities. Mutations of NPM1 are common in AML, occurring in ∼30% of cases, and generally considered a favorable risk factor. Mutations highly specific for secondary AML (sMut) have been shown to confer poor prognosis, but the overall impact of these mutations in the setting of favorable-risk AML defined by mutant NPM1 remains unclear. In this multicenter study of patients with AML (n = 233) with NPM1 mutation at diagnosis, we observed that patients with sMut had worse overall survival (OS) than those without sMut (15.3 vs 43.7 months; P = .002). Importantly, this finding persisted in the European LeukemiaNet (ELN) 2017-defined favorable risk subset (14.7 months vs not reached; P < .0001). Among patients who achieved NPM1 measurable residual disease (MRD) negativity, longer OS was observed in the entire cohort (P = .015) as well as in both the sMut subset (MRD negative: median OS (mOS) 73.9 months vs MRD positive: 12.3 months; P = .0170) and sMut ELN 2017-favorable subset (MRD negative: mOS 27.3 vs MRD positive: 10.5 months; P = .009). Co-occurrence of sMut and mutant NPM1 confers a poor prognosis in AML.

Guadecitabine vs TC in relapsed/refractory AML after intensive chemotherapy: a randomized phase 3 ASTRAL-2 trial.

ABSTRACT: Guadecitabine is a novel hypomethylating agent (HMA) resistant to deamination by cytidine deaminase. Patients with relapsed/refractory acute myeloid leukemia (AML) were randomly assigned to guadecitabine or a preselected treatment choice (TC) of high-intensity chemotherapy, low-intensity treatment with HMAs or low-dose cytarabine, or best supportive care (BSC). The primary end point was overall survival (OS). A total of 302 patients were randomly assigned to guadecitabine (n = 148) or TC (n = 154). Preselected TCs were low-intensity treatment (n = 233 [77%; mainly HMAs]), high-intensity chemotherapy (n = 63 [21%]), and BSC (n = 6 [2%]). The median OS were 6.4 and 5.4 months for guadecitabine and TC, respectively (hazard ratio 0.88 [95% confidence interval, 0.67-1.14]; log-rank P = .33). Survival benefit for guadecitabine was suggested in several prospective subgroups, including age <65 years, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0 to 1, refractory AML, and lower peripheral blood blasts ≤30%. Complete response (CR) + CR with partial hematologic recovery rates were 17% for guadecitabine vs 8% for TC (P < .01); CR+CR with incomplete count recovery rates were 27% for guadecitabine vs 14% for TC (P < .01). Safety was comparable for the 2 arms, but guadecitabine had a higher rate of grade ≥3 neutropenia (32% vs 17%; P < .01). This study did not demonstrate an OS benefit for guadecitabine. Clinical response rates were higher for guadecitabine, with comparable safety to TC. There was an OS benefit for guadecitabine in several prespecified subgroups. This study was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT02920008.

Survival outcomes in patients with acute myeloid leukaemia who received subsequent therapy for relapse in QUAZAR AML-001.

In the phase 3 QUAZAR AML-001 trial (NCT01757535) of patients with acute myeloid leukaemia (AML) in remission following intensive chemotherapy (IC) and ineligible for haematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT), oral azacitidine (Oral-AZA) maintenance significantly prolonged overall survival (OS) versus placebo. The impact of subsequent treatment following maintenance has not been evaluated. In this post hoc analysis, OS was estimated for patients who received subsequent AML therapy, and by regimen received (IC or lower-intensity therapy). First subsequent therapy (FST) was administered after treatment discontinuation in 134/238 Oral-AZA and 173/234 placebo patients. OS from randomization in patients who received FST after Oral-AZA versus placebo was 17.8 versus 12.9 months (HR: 0.82 [95% CI: 0.64-1.04], median follow-up: 56.7 months); OS from FST was similar between arms. Among patients who received injectable hypomethylating agents as FST, median OS was 8.2 versus 4.9 months in the Oral-AZA versus placebo groups (HR: 0.66 [95% CI: 0.41-1.06]). Forty-eight patients (16/238 Oral-AZA, 32/234 placebo) received HSCT following treatment discontinuation, including six Oral-AZA patients still in first remission; Oral-AZA OS benefit persisted when censoring these patients. Oral-AZA maintenance can prolong AML remission duration without negatively impacting survival outcomes after salvage therapies.

Detection of Hybrid Fusion Transcripts, Aberrant Transcript Expression, and Specific Single Nucleotide Variants in Acute Leukemia and Myeloid Disorders with Recurrent Gene Rearrangements.

INTRODUCTION: A variety of gene rearrangements and molecular alterations are key drivers in the pathobiology of acute leukemia and myeloid disorders; current classification systems increasingly incorporate these findings in diagnostic algorithms. Therefore, clinical laboratories require versatile tools, which can detect an increasing number and variety of molecular and cytogenetic alterations of clinical significance. METHODS: We validated an RNA-based next-generation sequencing (NGS) assay that enables the detection of: (i) numerous hybrid fusion transcripts (including rare/novel gene partners), (ii) aberrantly expressed EVI1 (MECOM) and IKZF1 (Del exons 4-7) transcripts, and (iii) hotspot variants in KIT, ABL1, NPM1 (relevant in the context of gene rearrangement status). RESULTS: For hybrid fusion transcripts, the assay showed 98-100% concordance for known positive and negative samples, with an analytical sensitivity (i.e., limit of detection) of approximately 0.8% cells. Samples with underlying EVI1 (MECOM) translocations demonstrated increased EVI1 (MECOM) expression. Aberrant IKZF1 (Del exons 4-7) transcripts detectable with the assay were also present on orthogonal reverse transcription PCR. Specific hotspot mutations in KIT, ABL1, and NPM1 detected with the assay showed 100% concordance with orthogonal testing. Lastly, several illustrative samples are included to highlight the assay's clinically relevant contributions to patient workup. CONCLUSION: Through its ability to simultaneously detect various gene rearrangements, aberrantly expressed transcripts, and hotspot mutations, this RNA-based NGS assay is a valuable tool for clinical laboratories to supplement other molecular and cytogenetic methods used in the diagnostic workup and in clinical research for patients with acute leukemia and myeloid disorders.

Oral decitabine-cedazuridine versus intravenous decitabine for myelodysplastic syndromes and chronic myelomonocytic leukaemia (ASCERTAIN): a registrational, randomised, crossover, pharmacokinetics, phase 3 study.

BACKGROUND: The DNA methyltransferase inhibitors azacitidine and decitabine for individuals with myelodysplastic syndromes or chronic myelomonocytic leukaemia are available in parenteral form. Oral therapy with similar exposure for these diseases would offer potential treatment benefits. We aimed to compare the safety and pharmacokinetics of oral decitabine plus the cytidine deaminase inhibitor cedazuridine versus intravenous decitabine. METHODS: We did a registrational, multicentre, open-label, crossover, phase 3 trial of individuals with myelodysplastic syndromes or chronic myelomonocytic leukaemia and individuals with acute myeloid leukaemia, enrolled as separate cohorts; results for only participants with myelodysplastic syndromes or chronic myelomonocytic leukaemia are reported here. In 37 academic and community-based clinics in Canada and the USA, we enrolled individuals aged 18 years or older who were candidates to receive intravenous decitabine, with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0 or 1 and a life expectancy of at least 3 months. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive 5 days of oral decitabine-cedazuridine (one tablet once daily containing 35 mg decitabine and 100 mg cedazuridine as a fixed-dose combination) or intravenous decitabine (20 mg/m2 per day by continuous 1-h intravenous infusion) in a 28-day treatment cycle, followed by 5 days of the other formulation in the next treatment cycle. Thereafter, all participants received oral decitabine-cedazuridine from the third cycle on until treatment discontinuation. The primary endpoint was total decitabine exposure over 5 days with oral decitabine-cedazuridine versus intravenous decitabine for cycles 1 and 2, measured as area under the curve in participants who received the full treatment dose in cycles 1 and 2 and had decitabine daily AUC0-24 for both oral decitabine-cedazuridine and intravenous decitabine (ie, paired cycles). On completion of the study, all patients were rolled over to a maintenance study. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03306264. FINDINGS: Between Feb 8, 2018, and June 7, 2021, 173 individuals were screened, 138 (80%) participants were randomly assigned to a treatment sequence, and 133 (96%) participants (87 [65%] men and 46 [35%] women; 121 [91%] White, four [3%] Black or African-American, three [2%] Asian, and five [4%] not reported) received treatment. Median follow-up was 966 days (IQR 917-1050). Primary endpoint of total exposure of oral decitabine-cedazuridine versus intravenous decitabine was 98·93% (90% CI 92·66-105·60), indicating equivalent pharmacokinetic exposure on the basis of area under the curve. The safety profiles of oral decitabine-cedazuridine and intravenous decitabine were similar. The most frequent adverse events of grade 3 or worse were thrombocytopenia (81 [61%] of 133 participants), neutropenia (76 [57%] participants), and anaemia (67 [50%] participants). The incidence of serious adverse events in cycles 1-2 was 31% (40 of 130 participants) with oral decitabine-cedazuridine and 18% (24 of 132 participants) with intravenous decitabine. There were five treatment-related deaths; two deemed related to oral therapy (sepsis and pneumonia) and three to intravenous treatment (septic shock [n=2] and pneumonia [n=1]). INTERPRETATION: Oral decitabine-cedazuridine was pharmacologically and pharmacodynamically equivalent to intravenous decitabine. The results support use of oral decitabine-cedazuridine as a safe and effective alternative to intravenous decitabine for treatment of individuals with myelodysplastic syndromes or chronic myelomonocytic leukaemia. FUNDING: Astex Pharmaceuticals.

Aspacytarabine for the treatment of patients with AML unfit for intensive chemotherapy: a phase 2 study.

High-dose cytarabine is associated with gastrointestinal and cerebellar toxicity, precluding its use for older or unfit patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML). Aspacytarabine, an inactive prodrug of cytarabine, was evaluated as monotherapy in a phase 2b study of patients unfit for intensive chemotherapy (NCT03435848). Sixty-five patients with AML were treated with aspacytarabine 4.5 g/m2 per day (equimolar to 3 g/m2 per day cytarabine) for 6 doses per treatment. The median age was 75 years; 60.6% of patients had de novo AML, 28.8% had AML secondary to myelodysplastic syndrome, and 10.6% had therapy-related AML. Overall, 36.9% achieved complete remission (CR) with full count recovery. CR rates in patients with secondary AML, patients with prior treatment with hypomethylating agents, and patients with TP53 mutation were 26.7%, 25%, and 36%, respectively. Median overall survival was 9 months (range, 6-15.9) and was not reached among responders. Hematologic recovery was observed in all responding patients by day 26 without prolonged cytopenias. Adverse events typically precluding the use of high-dose cytarabine in older or unfit patients were not observed. These data suggest that aspacytarabine may be an effective regimen with a reduction in the attendant toxicities associated with high-dose cytarabine, an important consideration when treating AML and other hematologic disorders that use high-dose cytarabine. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT03435848.

Measurable residual disease monitoring in patients with acute myeloid leukemia treated with lower-intensity therapy: Roadmap from an ELN-DAVID expert panel.

With the availability of effective targeted agents, significant changes have occurred in the management of patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) over the past several years, particularly for those considered unfit for intensive chemotherapy. While testing for measurable residual disease (MRD) is now routinely performed in patients treated with intensive chemotherapy to refine prognosis and, possibly, inform treatment decision-making, its value in the context of lower-intensity regimens is unclear. As such regimens have gained in popularity and can be associated with higher response rates, the need to better define the role of MRD assessment and the appropriate time points and assays used for this purpose has increased. This report outlines a roadmap for MRD testing in patients with AML treated with lower-intensity regimens. Experts from the European LeukemiaNet (ELN)-DAVID AML MRD working group reviewed all available data to propose a framework for MRD testing in future trials and clinical practice. A Delphi poll served to optimize consensus. Establishment of uniform standards for MRD assessments in lower-intensity regimens used in treating patients with AML is clinically relevant and important for optimizing testing and, ultimately, improving treatment outcomes of these patients.

Classification, risk stratification and response assessment in myelodysplastic syndromes/neoplasms (MDS): A state-of-the-art report on behalf of the International Consortium for MDS (icMDS).

The guidelines for classification, prognostication, and response assessment of myelodysplastic syndromes/neoplasms (MDS) have all recently been updated. In this report on behalf of the International Consortium for MDS (icMDS) we summarize these developments. We first critically examine the updated World Health Organization (WHO) classification and the International Consensus Classification (ICC) of MDS. We then compare traditional and molecularly based risk MDS risk assessment tools. Lastly, we discuss limitations of criteria in measuring therapeutic benefit and highlight how the International Working Group (IWG) 2018 and 2023 response criteria addressed these deficiencies and are endorsed by the icMDS. We also address the importance of patient centered care by discussing the value of quality-of-life assessment. We hope that the reader of this review will have a better understanding of how to classify MDS, predict clinical outcomes and evaluate therapeutic outcomes.

Clinical impact of the genomic landscape and leukemogenic trajectories in non-intensively treated elderly acute myeloid leukemia patients.

To characterize the genomic landscape and leukemogenic pathways of older, newly diagnosed, non-intensively treated patients with AML and to study the clinical implications, comprehensive genetics analyses were performed including targeted DNA sequencing of 263 genes in 604 patients treated in a prospective Phase III clinical trial. Leukemic trajectories were delineated using oncogenetic tree modeling and hierarchical clustering, and prognostic groups were derived from multivariable Cox regression models. Clonal hematopoiesis-related genes (ASXL1, TET2, SRSF2, DNMT3A) were most frequently mutated. The oncogenetic modeling algorithm produced a tree with five branches with ASXL1, DDX41, DNMT3A, TET2, and TP53 emanating from the root suggesting leukemia-initiating events which gave rise to further subbranches with distinct subclones. Unsupervised clustering mirrored the genetic groups identified by the tree model. Multivariable analysis identified FLT3 internal tandem duplications (ITD), SRSF2, and TP53 mutations as poor prognostic factors, while DDX41 mutations exerted an exceptionally favorable effect. Subsequent backwards elimination based on the Akaike information criterion delineated three genetic risk groups: DDX41 mutations (favorable-risk), DDX41wildtype/FLT3-ITDneg/TP53wildtype (intermediate-risk), and FLT3-ITD or TP53 mutations (high-risk). Our data identified distinct trajectories of leukemia development in older AML patients and provide a basis for a clinically meaningful genetic outcome stratification for patients receiving less intensive therapies.

Use of tamibarotene, a potent and selective RARα agonist, in combination with azacitidine in patients with relapsed and refractory AML with RARA gene overexpression.

Tamibarotene-based therapy is a novel targeted approach for the treatment of relapsed/refractory (R/R) acute myeloid leukemia (AML) with retinoic acid receptor alpha (RARA) gene overexpression. Approximately, 50% of higher-risk myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) patients and approximately 30% of AML patients are positive for RARA overexpression using a blood-based biomarker test that measures RARA expression in peripheral blasts. A phase 2 study investigating the activity of tamibarotene in patients with RARA overexpression was conducted in patients with AML and MDS (NCT02807558). In 28 patients with R/R AML and RARA overexpression treated with tamibarotene in combination with azacitidine, the median overall survival was 5.9 months. In 21 response-evaluable patients, the complete remission/complete remission with incomplete hematologic recovery (CR/CRi) rate was 19%, and median time to initial CR/CRi was 1.2 months. The favorable safety profile and preliminary clinical activity support the development of combination therapies with tamibarotene in myeloid malignancies with RARA overexpression.

Guadecitabine vs treatment choice in newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia: a global phase 3 randomized study.

This phase 3 study evaluated the efficacy and safety of the new hypomethylating agent guadecitabine (n = 408) vs a preselected treatment choice (TC; n = 407) of azacitidine, decitabine, or low-dose cytarabine in patients with acute myeloid leukemia unfit to receive intensive induction chemotherapy. Half of the patients (50%) had poor Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (2-3). The coprimary end points were complete remission (19% and 17% of patients for guadecitabine and TC, respectively [stratified P = .48]) and overall survival (median survival 7.1 and 8.5 months for guadecitabine and TC, respectively [hazard ratio, 0.97; 95% confidence interval, 0.83-1.14; stratified log-rank P = .73]). One- and 2-year survival estimates were 37% and 18% for guadecitabine and 36% and 14% for TC, respectively. A large proportion of patients (42%) received <4 cycles of treatment in both the arms. In a post hoc analysis of patients who received ≥4 treatment cycles, guadecitabine was associated with longer median survival vs TC (15.6 vs 13.0 months [hazard ratio, 0.78; 95% confidence interval, 0.64-0.96; log-rank P = .02]). There was no significant difference in the proportion of patients with grade ≥3 adverse events (AEs) between guadecitabine (92%) and TC (88%); however, grade ≥3 AEs of febrile neutropenia, neutropenia, and pneumonia were higher with guadecitabine. In conclusion, no significant difference was observed in the efficacy of guadecitabine and TC in the overall population. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT02348489.