Safety and efficacy of nilotinib in adult patients with chronic myeloid leukemia: a post-marketing surveillance study in Korea.

Background: Nilotinib is a tyrosine kinase inhibitor approved by the Ministry of Food and Drug Safety for frontline and 2nd line treatment of Philadelphia chromosome-positive chronic myeloid leukemia (Ph+ CML). This study aimed to confirm the safety and efficacy of nilotinib in routine clinical practice within South Korea. Methods: An open-label, multicenter, single-arm, 12-week observational post-marketing surveillance (PMS) study was conducted on 669 Korean adult patients with Ph+ CML from December 24, 2010, to December 23, 2016. The patients received nilotinib treatment in routine clinical practice settings. Safety was evaluated by all types of adverse events (AEs) during the study period, and efficacy was evaluated by the complete hematological response (CHR) and cytogenetic response. Results: During the study period, AEs occurred in 61.3% (410 patients, 973 events), adverse drug reactions (ADRs) in 40.5% (271/669 patients, 559 events), serious AEs in 4.5% (30 patients, 37 events), and serious ADRs in 0.7% (5 patients, 8 events). Furthermore, unexpected AEs occurred at a rate of 6.9% (46 patients, 55 events) and unexpected ADRs at 1.2% (8 patients, 8 events). As for the efficacy results, CHR was achieved in 89.5% (442/494 patients), and minor cytogenetic response or major cytogenetic response was achieved in 85.8% (139/162 patients). Conclusion: This PMS study shows consistent results in terms of safety and efficacy compared with previous studies. Nilotinib was well tolerated and efficacious in adult Korean patients with Ph+ CML in routine clinical practice settings.

Prognostic Impact of IPSS-R and Chromosomal Translocations in 751 Korean Patients with Primary Myelodysplastic Syndrome.

Chromosomal translocations are rare in myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) and their impact on overall survival (OS) and response to hypomethylating agents (HMA) is unknown. The prognostic impact of the revised International Prognostic Scoring System (IPSS-R) and for chromosomal translocations was assessed in 751 patients from the Korea MDS Registry. IPSS-R effectively discriminated patients according to leukaemia evolution risk and OS. We identified 40 patients (5.3%) carrying translocations, 30 (75%) of whom also fulfilled complex karyotype criteria. Translocation presence was associated with a shorter OS (median, 12.0 versus 79.7 months, P < 0.01). Multivariate analysis demonstrated that translocations (hazard ratio [HR] 1.64 [1.06-2.63]; P = 0.03) as well as age, sex, IPSS-R, and CK were independent predictors of OS. In the IPSS-R high and very high risk subgroup (n = 260), translocations remained independently associated with OS (HR 1.68 [1.06-2.69], P = 0.03) whereas HMA treatment was not associated with improved survival (median OS, 20.9 versus 21.2 months, P = 0.43). However, translocation carriers exhibited enhanced survival following HMA treatment (median 2.1 versus 12.4 months, P = 0.03). Our data suggest that chromosomal translocation is an independent predictor of adverse outcome and has an additional prognostic value in discriminating patients with MDS having higher risk IPSS-R who could benefit from HMA treatment.

Comparative analysis between azacitidine and decitabine for the treatment of myelodysplastic syndromes.

The present study aimed to directly compare the efficacy and safety of azacitidine and decitabine in patients with myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS). We compared the overall response rate (ORR) (complete responses, partial responses, marrow complete responses, and haematological improvements), overall survival (OS), event-free survival (EFS), time to leukaemic transformation, and adverse outcomes between azacitidine and decitabine. To minimize the effects of treatment selection bias in this observational study, adjustments were made using the propensity-score matching method. Among 300 patients, 203 were treated with azacitidine and 97 with decitabine. Propensity-score matching yielded 97 patient pairs. In the propensity-matched cohort, there were no significant differences between the azacitidine and decitabine groups regarding ORR (44% vs. 52%), OS (26 vs. 22.9 months), EFS (7.7 vs. 7.0 months), and rate of leukaemic transformation (16% vs. 22% at 1 year). In patients ≥ 65 years of age, survival was significantly better in the azacitidine group (P = 0.017). Patients who received decitabine experienced more frequent episodes of grade 3 or 4 cytopenia and infectious episodes. We found that azacitidine and decitabine showed comparable efficacy. Among patients ≥ 65 years of age, survival was significantly better in the azacitidine group (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01409070).