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 I substudy results of ivosidenib in patients with mutant IDH1 relapsed/refractory myelodysplastic syndrome.

Ivosidenib is a first-in-class mutant isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 (mIDH1) inhibitor and has shown efficacy and tolerability in patients with advanced mIDH1 hematologic malignancies, leading to approval in front-line and relapsed/refractory (R/R) mIDH1 AML populations. We report final data from a phase I single-arm substudy (NCT02074839) of patients with R/R mIDH1 MDS following failure of standard-of-care therapies. Oral ivosidenib was taken once daily on days 1-28 in 28-day cycles. Primary objectives were to determine safety, tolerability, and clinical activity. The primary efficacy endpoint was the complete remission + partial remission (CR+PR) rate. Nineteen patients were enrolled; 18 were included in the efficacy analysis. Treatment-related adverse events occurred in eight (42.1%) patients, including a grade 1 QT interval prolongation in one (5.3%) patient and grade 2 differentiation syndrome in two (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 OS 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 >=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 by data cut-off. In conclusion, ivosidenib is clinically active, with durable remissions and a manageable safety profile observed in patients with mIDH1 R/R MDS.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Transplantation Referral Patterns for Patients with Newly Diagnosed Higher-Risk Myelodysplastic Syndromes and Acute Myeloid Leukemia at Academic and Community Sites in the Connect® Myeloid Disease Registry: Potential Barriers to Care.

Hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HCT) is indicated for patients with higher-risk (HR) myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) and acute myeloid leukemia (AML). Age, performance status, patient frailty, comorbidities, and nonclinical factors (eg, cost, distance to site) are all recognized as important clinical factors that can influence HCT referral patterns and patient outcomes; however, the proportion of eligible patients referred for HCT in routine clinical practice is largely unknown. This study aimed to assess patterns of consideration for HCT among patients with HR-MDS and AML enrolled in the Connect® Myeloid Disease Registry at community/government (CO/GOV)- or academic (AC)-based sites, as well as to identify factors associated with rates of transplantation referral. We assessed patterns of consideration for and completion of HCT in patients with HR-MDS and AML enrolled between December 12, 2013, and March 6, 2020, in the Connect Myeloid Disease Registry at 164 CO/GOV and AC sites. Registry sites recorded whether patients were considered for transplantation at baseline and at each follow-up visit. The following answers were possible: "considered potentially eligible," "not considered potentially eligible," or "not assessed." Sites also recorded whether patients subsequently underwent HCT at each follow-up visit. Rates of consideration for HCT between CO/GOV and AC sites were compared using multivariable logistic regression analysis with covariates for age and comorbidity. Among the 778 patients with HR-MDS or AML enrolled in the Connect Myeloid Disease Registry, patients at CO/GOV sites were less likely to be considered potentially eligible for HCT than patients at AC sites (27.9% versus 43.9%; P < .0001). Multivariable logistic regression analysis with factors for age (<65 versus ≥65 years) and ACE-27 comorbidity grade (<2 versus ≥2) showed that patients at CO/GOV sites were significantly less likely than those at AC sites to be considered potentially eligible for HCT (odds ratio, 1.6, 95% confidence interval, 1.1 to 2.4; P = .0155). Among patients considered eligible for HCT, 45.1% (65 of 144) of those at CO/GOV sites and 35.7% (41 of 115) of those at AC sites underwent transplantation (P = .12). Approximately one-half of all patients at CO/GOV (50.1%) and AC (45.4%) sites were not considered potentially eligible for HCT; the most common reasons were age at CO/GOV sites (71.5%) and comorbidities at AC sites (52.1%). Across all sites, 17.4% of patients were reported as not assessed (and thus not considered) for HCT by their treating physician (20.7% at CO/GOV sites and 10.7% at AC sites; P = .0005). These findings suggest that many patients with HR-MDS and AML who may be candidates for HCT are not receiving assessment or consideration for transplantation in clinical practice. In addition, treatment at CO/GOV sites and age remain significant barriers to ensuring that all potentially eligible patients are assessed for HCT.

A phase 1b study of venetoclax and alvocidib in patients with relapsed/refractory acute myeloid leukemia.

Relapsed/refractory (R/R) Acute Myeloid Leukemia (AML) is a genetically complex and heterogeneous disease with a poor prognosis and limited treatment options. Thus, there is an urgent need to develop therapeutic combinations to overcome drug resistance in AML. This open-label, multicenter, international, phase 1b study evaluated the safety, efficacy, and pharmacokinetics of venetoclax in combination with alvocidib in patients with R/R AML. Patients were treated with escalating doses of venetoclax (400, 600, and 800 mg QD, orally, days 1-28) and alvocidib (45 and 60 mg/m2 , intravenously, days 1-3) in 28-day cycles. The combination was found to be safe and tolerable, with no maximum tolerated dose reached. Drug-related Grade ≥3 adverse events were reported in 23 (65.7%) for venetoclax and 24 (68.6%) for alvocidib. No drug-related AEs were fatal. Gastrointestinal toxicities, including diarrhea, nausea, and vomiting were notable and frequent; otherwise, the toxicities reported were consistent with the safety profile of both agents. The response rate was modest (complete remission [CR] + incomplete CR [CRi], 11.4%; CR + CRi + partial response rate + morphologic leukemia-free state, 20%). There was no change in alvocidib pharmacokinetics with increasing doses of venetoclax. However, when venetoclax was administered with alvocidib, AUC24 and Cmax decreased by 18% and 19%, respectively. A recommended phase 2 dose was not established due to lack of meaningful increase in efficacy across all cohorts compared to what was previously observed with each agent alone. Future studies could consider the role of the sequence, dosing, and the use of a more selective MCL1 inhibitor for the R/R AML population.

Eprenetapopt combined with venetoclax and azacitidine in TP53-mutated acute myeloid leukaemia: a phase 1, dose-finding and expansion study.

BACKGROUND: TP53-mutated acute myeloid leukaemia is associated with poor outcomes. Eprenetapopt (APR-246) is a first-in-class, small-molecule p53 reactivator. We aimed to evaluate the combination of eprenetapopt and venetoclax with or without azacitidine in patients with TP53-mutated acute myeloid leukaemia. METHODS: This phase 1, multicentre, open-label, dose-finding and cohort expansion study was done at eight academic research hospitals in the USA. Inclusion criteria were age of at least 18 years; at least one pathogenic TP53 mutation; treatment-naive acute myeloid leukaemia according to the 2016 WHO classification; an ECOG performance status of 0-2; and a life expectancy of at least 12 weeks. In dose-finding cohort 1 patients received previous therapy with hypomethylating agents for myelodysplastic syndromes. In dose-finding cohort 2, previous use of hypomethylating agents was not permitted. Treatment cycles were 28 days. Patients in cohort 1 received intravenous eprenetapopt 4·5 g/day on days 1-4 and oral venetoclax 400 mg/day on days 1-28; those in cohort 2 also received subcutaneous or intravenous azacitidine 75 mg/m2 on days 1-7. The expansion part of the study proceeded with patients enrolled as in cohort 2. Primary endpoints were safety in all cohorts (assessed in patients receiving at least one dose of assigned treatment) and complete response in the expansion cohort (assessed in patients who completed at least one treatment cycle and had at least one post-treatment clinical response assessment). The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04214860, and is complete. FINDINGS: Between Jan 3, 2020, and July 22, 2021, 49 patients were enrolled across all cohorts. Six patients were initially enrolled into each of dose-finding cohorts 1 and 2; after no dose-limiting toxicities were observed, cohort 2 was expanded to enrol an additional 37 patients. The median age was 67 years (IQR 59-73). 24 (49%) of 49 patients were female and 25 (51%) male, and 40 (82%) were White. At data cutoff (Oct 1, 2021), the median length of follow-up was 9·5 months (IQR 6·1-11·5). No dose-limiting toxicities were recorded and the recommended phase 2 dose for eprenetapopt combinations was 4·5 g/day on days 1-4. Across all patients, adverse events of grade 3 or worse occurring in at least 20% of patients were febrile neutropenia (23 [47%] of 49 patients), thrombocytopenia (18 [37%] patients), leukopenia (12 [25%] patients), and anaemia (11 [22%] patients). Treatment-related serious adverse events occurred in 13 (27%) of 49 patients and there was one (2%) treatment-related death (sepsis). 25 (64%, 95% CI 47-79) of 39 patients had an overall response with eprenetapopt and venetoclax with azacytidine; 15 (38%, 23-55) had a complete response. INTERPRETATION: Eprenetapopt and venetoclax with azacitidine had an acceptable safety profile and encouraging activity, supporting further frontline evaluation of this combination in the treatment of TP53-mutated acute myeloid leukaemia. FUNDING: Aprea Therapeutics.

Current landscape of translational and clinical research in myelodysplastic syndromes/neoplasms (MDS): Proceedings from the 1st International Workshop on MDS (iwMDS) Of the International Consortium for MDS (icMDS).

Biological events that contribute to the pathogenesis of myelodysplastic syndromes/neoplasms (MDS) are becoming increasingly characterized and are being translated into rationally designed therapeutic strategies. Herein, we provide updates from the first International Workshop on MDS (iwMDS) of the International Consortium for MDS (icMDS) detailing recent advances in understanding the genetic landscape of MDS, including germline predisposition, epigenetic and immune dysregulation, the complexities of clonal hematopoiesis progression to MDS, as well as novel animal models of the disease. Connected to this progress is the development of novel therapies targeting specific molecular alterations, the innate immune system, and immune checkpoint inhibitors. While some of these agents have entered clinical trials (e.g., splicing modulators, IRAK1/4 inhibitors, anti-CD47 and anti-TIM3 antibodies, and cellular therapies), none have been approved for MDS. Additional preclinical and clinical work is needed to develop a truly individualized approach to the care of MDS patients.