AVALON: The Italian cohort study on real-life efficacy of hypomethylating agents plus venetoclax in newly diagnosed or relapsed/refractory patients with acute myeloid leukemia.

BACKGROUND: Venetoclax in combination with hypomethylating agents (HMA) is revolutionizing the therapy of acute myeloid leukemia (AML). However, evidence on large sets of patients is lacking, especially in relapsed or refractory leukemia. METHODS: AVALON is a multicentric cohort study that was conducted in Italy on patients with AML who received venetoclax-based therapies from 2015 to 2020. The study was approved by the ethics committee of the participating institution and was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. The effectiveness and toxicity of venetoclax + HMA in 190 (43 newly diagnosed, 68 refractory, and 79 relapsed) patients with AML are reported here. RESULTS: In the newly diagnosed AML, the overall response rate and survival confirmed the brilliant results demonstrated in VIALE-A. In the relapsed or refractory AML, the combination demonstrated a surprisingly complete remission rate (44.1% in refractory and 39.7% in relapsed evaluable patients) and conferred to treated patients a good expectation of survival. Toxicities were overall manageable, and most incidents occurred in the first 60 days of therapy. Infections were confirmed as the most common nonhematologic adverse event. CONCLUSIONS: Real-life data show that the combination of venetoclax and HMA offers an expectation of remission and long-term survival to elderly, newly diagnosed patients, and to relapsed or chemoresistant AML, increasing the chance of cure through a different mechanism of action. The venetoclax + HMA combination is expected to constitute the base for triplet combinations and integration of target therapies. Our data contribute to ameliorate the understanding of venetoclax + HMA effectiveness and toxicities in real life.

BCR::ABL1 levels at first month after TKI discontinuation predict subsequent maintenance of treatment-free remission: A study from the "GRUPPO TRIVENETO LMC".

We analyzed BCR::ABL1 expression at stop and in the first month after discontinuation in 168 chronic myeloid leukemia patients who stopped imatinib or 2nd generation tyrosine kinase inhibitors (2G-TKIs) while in sustained deep molecular response. Patients were divided among those who maintained response (group 1, n = 123) and those who lost major molecular response (group 2, n = 45). Mean BCR::ABL1 RNA levels 1 month after discontinuation were higher in group 2 than in group 1 (p = 0.0005) and the difference was more evident 2 months after stop (p < 0.0001). The same trend was found both for imatinib and 2G-TKIs. A receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis to determine a threshold value of BCR::ABL1 at 1 month after discontinuation identified a cut-off value of 0.0051%, with 92.2% specificity, 31.7% sensitivity and a likelihood ratio of 4.087.

Venetoclax in combination with hypomethylating agents in previously untreated patients with acute myeloid leukemia ineligible for intensive treatment: a real-life multicenter experience.

The addition of venetoclax to hypomethylating agents (HMA-V) improved the outcome of patients with newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia (AML) ineligible for intensive treatment. The aim of our study was to confirm data reported in literature, in a real-life multicenter experience. We retrospectively evaluated 56 naïve AML patients who received HMA-V at 8 different collaborating Hematology Units in the North-East of Italy, from September 2018 to October 2020. Patients received azacitidine or decitabine at standard dose, adding venetoclax starting from cycle 1-3. The median time-to-response was 2 cycles and composite complete remission rate (CCR) was 67.9%. Thirteen out of 38 responders (34.2%) relapsed, with a median response duration of 13.7 months. Transfusion independence (TI) was obtained in 27 (87.0%) and 28 (90.3%) out of 31 patients for red blood cells and platelets, respectively. Median OS was 12.3 months (95% CI, 8.1-16.5), and median PFS was 11.3 months (95% CI, 4.6-17.9). Cytogenetic risk was the only variable impacting on survival, while no differences were observed stratifying patients by age, bone marrow blasts, WHO classification or type of HMA. In conclusion, our real-life multicenter experience indicates that HMA-V treatment allows achieving good response rates in naïve AML patients, ineligible for intensive chemotherapy.

Risk factors for progression to blast phase and outcome in 589 patients with myelofibrosis treated with ruxolitinib: Real-world data.

The impact of ruxolitinib therapy on evolution to blast phase (BP) in patients with myelofibrosis (MF) is still uncertain. In 589 MF patients treated with ruxolitinib, we investigated incidence and risk factors for BP and we described outcome according to disease characteristics and treatment strategy. After a median follow-up from ruxolitinib start of 3 years (range 0.1-7.6), 65 (11%) patients transformed to BP during (93.8%) or after treatment. BP incidence rate was 3.7 per 100 patient-years, comparably in primary and secondary MF (PMF/SMF) but significantly lower in intermediate-1 risk patients (2.3 vs 5.6 per 100 patient-years in intermediate-2/high-risk patients, P < .001). In PMF and SMF cohorts, previous interferon therapy seemed to correlate with a lower probability of BP (HR 0.13, P = .001 and HR 0.22, P = .02, respectively). In SMF, also platelet count <150 × 109 /l (HR 2.4, P = .03) and peripheral blasts ≥3% (HR 3.3, P = .004) were significantly associated with higher risk of BP. High-risk category according to dynamic International Prognostic Score System (DIPSS) and myelofibrosis secondary to PV and ET Collaboration Prognostic Model (MYSEC-PM predicted BP in patients with PMF and SMF, respectively. Median survival after BP was 0.2 (95% CI: 0.1-0.3) years. Therapy for BP included hypomethylating agents (12.3%), induction chemotherapy (9.2%), allogeneic transplant (6.2%) or supportive care (72.3%). Patients treated with supportive therapy had a median survival of 6 weeks, while 73% of the few transplanted patients were alive at a median follow-up of 2 years. Progression to BP occurs in a significant fraction of ruxolitinib-treated patients and is associated with DIPSS and MYSEC-PM risk in PMF and SMF, respectively.

Life after ruxolitinib: Reasons for discontinuation, impact of disease phase, and outcomes in 218 patients with myelofibrosis.

BACKGROUND: After discontinuing ruxolitinib, the outcome of patients with myelofibrosis reportedly has been poor. The authors investigated whether disease characteristics before the receipt of ruxolitinib may predict drug discontinuation in patients with myelofibrosis and whether reasons for drug discontinuation, disease phase at discontinuation, and salvage therapies may influence the outcome. METHODS: A centralized electronic clinical database was created in 20 European hematology centers, including clinical and laboratory data for 524 patients who received ruxolitinib for myelofibrosis. RESULTS: At 3 years, 40.8% of patients had stopped ruxolitinib. Baseline predictors of drug discontinuation were: intermediate-2-risk/high-risk category (Dynamic International Prognostic Score System), a platelet count <100 ×109 per liter, transfusion dependency, and unfavorable karyotype. At last contact, 268 patients (51.1%) had discontinued therapy, and the median drug exposure was 17.5 months. Fifty patients (18.7%) died while taking ruxolitinib. The reasons for discontinuation in the remaining 218 patients were the lack (22.9%) or loss (11.9%) of a spleen response, ruxolitinib-related adverse events (27.5%), progression to blast phase (23.4%), ruxolitinib-unrelated adverse events (9.2%), and allogeneic transplantation during response (5.1%). The median survival after ruxolitinib was 13.2 months and was significantly better in the 167 patients who discontinued ruxolitinib in chronic phase (27.5 vs 3.9 months for those who discontinued in blast phase; P < .001). No survival differences were observed among patients who discontinued ruxolitinib in chronic phase because of lack of response, loss of response, or ruxolitinib-related adverse events. The use of investigational agents and/or ruxolitinib rechallenge were associated with improved outcome. CONCLUSIONS: The survival of patients with myelofibrosis after discontinuation of ruxolitinib is poor, particularly for those who discontinue in blast phase. Salvage therapies can improve outcome, emphasizing the need for novel therapies.

Safety and efficacy of switching from branded to generic imatinib in chronic phase chronic myeloid leukemia patients treated in Italy.

The use of generic drugs after patent expiration of their originators is a relative novelty in the treatment of chronic cancer patients in Western countries. In this observational study we analyzed a cohort of 294 Italian chronic phase chronic myeloid leukemia patients treated frontline with branded imatinib (Glivec®) for at least 6 months and then uniformly switched to generic imatinib upon requirement of health authorities in early 2017. Median age at diagnosis was 57 years (range 19-87). Sokal risk was low/intermediate/high in 55%, 32% and 8% of cases, respectively. Median duration of branded imatinib treatment was 7.4 years (range 0.5-16.7). At a median follow-up of 7.5 months after switch to generic imatinib, 17% of patients reported new or worsening side effects, but grade 3-4 non-hematological adverse events were rare. Six patients switched back to branded imatinib, with improvement in the side effect profile, and 4 pts moved to bosutinib or nilotinib for resistance/intolerance. The majority of patients were in major (26%) or deep molecular response (66%) at the time of switch. Molecular responses remained stable, improved or worsened in 61%, 25% and 14% of patients, respectively. We conclude that switch to generic imatinib for patients who have been receiving branded imatinib appears to be effective and safe. Molecular responses may continue to improve over time. Some patients experienced new or worsened side effects but less than 5% of the whole cohort needed to switch back to branded imatinib or move to other treatments. Savings were around 3 million Euros.