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.

Targeting hematologic malignancies by inhibiting E-selectin: A sweet spot for AML therapy?

E-selectin, a cytoadhesive glycoprotein, is expressed on venular endothelial cells and mediates leukocyte localization to inflamed endothelium, the first step in inflammatory cell extravasation into tissue. Constitutive marrow endothelial E-selectin expression also supports bone marrow hematopoiesis via NF-κB-mediated signaling. Correspondingly, E-selectin interaction with E-selectin ligand (sialyl Lewisx) on acute myeloid leukemia (AML) cells leads to chemotherapy resistance in vivo. Uproleselan (GMI-1271) is a carbohydrate analog of sialyl Lewisx that blocks E-selectin binding. A Phase 2 trial of MEC chemotherapy combined with uproleselan for relapsed/refractory AML showed a median overall survival of 8.8 months and low (2%) rates of severe oral mucositis. Clinical trials seek to confirm activity in AML and mitigation of neutrophil-mediated adverse events (mucositis and diarrhea) after intensive chemotherapy. In this review we summarize E-selectin biology and the rationale for uproleselan in combination with other therapies for hematologic malignancies. We also describe uproleselan pharmacology and ongoing clinical trials.

Long-term follow-up of VIALE-A: Venetoclax and azacitidine in chemotherapy-ineligible untreated acute myeloid leukemia.

Venetoclax-azacitidine is approved for treatment of patients with newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia (AML) ineligible for intensive chemotherapy based on the interim overall survival (OS) analysis of the VIALE-A study (NCT02993523). Here, long-term follow-up is presented to address survival benefit and long-term outcomes with venetoclax-azacitidine. Patients with newly diagnosed AML who were ineligible for intensive chemotherapy were randomized 2:1 to receive venetoclax-azacitidine or placebo-azacitidine. OS was the primary endpoint; complete remission with/without blood count recovery (CR/CRi) was a key secondary endpoint. This final analysis was conducted when 100% of the predefined 360 OS events occurred. In VIALE-A, 431 patients were enrolled to venetoclax-azacitidine (n = 286) or placebo-azacitidine (n = 145). At 43.2 months median follow-up, median OS was 14.7 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 12.1-18.7) with venetoclax-azacitidine, and 9.6 months (95% CI, 7.4-12.7) with placebo-azacitidine (hazard ratio, 0.58 [95% CI, 0.47-0.72], p < .001); the estimated 24-month OS rate was 37.5% and 16.9%, respectively. Median OS for patients with IDH1/2 mutations and those with measurable residual disease responses was reached in this final analysis. CR/CRi rate was similar to interim analysis. Any-grade hematologic and gastrointestinal adverse events were most common in venetoclax-azacitidine and placebo-azacitidine arms, including thrombocytopenia (47% and 42%) and neutropenia (43% and 29%). No new safety signals were identified. Long-term efficacy and safety confirm venetoclax-azacitidine is an improvement in standard-of-care for patients with AML who are not eligible for intensive chemotherapy because of advanced age or comorbidities.

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.

Measurable residual disease conversion rate with consolidation chemotherapy in acute myeloid leukemia.

The rate of MRD clearance in AML with standard consolidation chemotherapy is not well defined. A multi-institution retrospective analysis was performed on 107 consecutively treated AML patients in morphologic complete remission with detectable MRD post-induction therapy who received standard chemotherapy consolidation. In response to standard intermediate/high-dose cytarabine consolidation therapy, 26 of 60 patients (43.3%) with MRD threshold of detection of at least 0.1% converted to MRD-negative status (undetectable with assay used), and 6 of 47 patients (12.8%) with MRD threshold of detection > 0.1% converted to MRD-negative status. Multivariable logistic regression for patients with MRD threshold of detection of at least 0.1% showed that, when controlling for age, ELN risk category, dose of cytarabine, and use of a combination agent, treatment with 1 cycle of consolidation cytarabine versus ≥2 cycles decreased the odds of conversion of AML to MRD-negative (OR = 0.24, 95% CI 0.07-0.85, p = 0.03).

Standardising acute myeloid leukaemia classification systems: a perspective from a panel of international experts.

The existence of two acute myeloid leukaemia classification systems-one put forth by WHO and one by the International Consensus Classification in 2022-is concerning. Although both systems appropriately move towards genomic disease definitions and reduced emphasis on blast enumeration, there are consequential disagreements between the two systems on what constitutes a diagnosis of acute myeloid leukaemia. This fundamental problem threatens the ability of heath-care providers to diagnose acute myeloid leukaemia, communicate with patients and other health-care providers, and deliver appropriate and consistent management strategies for patients with the condition. Clinical trial eligibility, standardised response assessments, and eventual drug development and regulatory pathways might also be negatively affected by the discrepancies. In this Viewpoint, we review the merits and limitations of both classification systems and illustrate how the coexistence, as well as application of both systems is an undue challenge to patients, clinicians, hematopathologists, sponsors of research, and regulators. Lastly, we emphasise the urgency and propose a roadmap, by which the two divergent classification systems can be harmonised.

Acute Myeloid Leukemia, Version 3.2023, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology.

Acute myeloid leukemia (AML) is a heterogeneous hematologic malignancy characterized by the clonal expansion of myeloid blasts in the peripheral blood, bone marrow, and/or other tissues. It is the most common form of acute leukemia among adults and accounts for the largest number of annual deaths from leukemias in the United States. Like AML, blastic plasmacytoid dendritic cell neoplasm (BPDCN) is a myeloid malignancy. It is a rare malignancy characterized by the aggressive proliferation of precursors of plasmacytoid dendritic cells that frequently involves the bone marrow, skin, central nervous system, and other organs and tissues. This discussion section focuses on the diagnosis and management of BPDCN as outlined in the NCCN Guidelines for AML.

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.

Characterization of a multidisciplinary team's role in hospital discharge for patients receiving hypomethylating agents with venetoclax as induction therapy for acute myeloid leukemia.

PURPOSE: Venetoclax combined with a hypomethylating agent (HMA) has become the standard of care for elderly/unfit patients with newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia (AML). This study is aimed at characterizing the impact of an interdisciplinary team on the length of stay (LOS) of patients with newly diagnosed AML receiving venetoclax with an HMA. METHODS: This retrospective observational study included patients with AML who received HMA with venetoclax as an initial treatment between December 2015 and July 2021. The primary outcome was the median LOS during induction stratified by HMA. Secondary outcomes included barriers to hospital discharge, incidence of tumor lysis syndrome (TLS), response rates, and utilization of the institution's prescription assistance program (PAP). RESULTS: Seventy-eight patients were included in our analysis: 51 received azacitidine/venetoclax, and 27 received decitabine/venetoclax. The median LOS from therapy initiation was eight days (range 7-38) for the azacitidine group and six days (range 5-26) for the decitabine group. The most common barriers to discharge were transfusion dependence (33 patients, 42.3%) and insurance coverage (12 patients, 15.4%). Twelve patients (15.3%) had tumor lysis syndrome during hospital admission, and 20 (25.6%) were readmitted during induction. Twenty-three patients (29.5%) required financial assistance for AML care, and a pharmacy-led PAP generated approximately $342,646 in cost savings. CONCLUSION: The utilization of an interdisciplinary AML team to target early hospital discharge proved to be safe and effective and led to a reduction in costs for the health system. Future research may identify select patients who may be suitable for earlier discharge or outpatient induction.

Olutasidenib (FT-2102) induces durable complete remissions in patients with relapsed or refractory IDH1-mutated AML.

Olutasidenib (FT-2102) is a potent, selective, oral, small-molecule inhibitor of mutant isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 (mIDH1). Overall, 153 IDH1 inhibitor-naive patients with mIDH1R132 relapsed/refractory (R/R) acute myeloid leukemia (AML) received olutasidenib monotherapy 150 mg twice daily in the pivotal cohort of this study. The median age of participants was 71 years (range, 32-87 years) and the median number of prior regimens received by patients was 2 (1-7). The rate of complete remission (CR) plus CR with partial hematologic recovery (CRh) was 35%, and the overall response rate was 48%. Response rates were similar in patients who had, and who had not, received prior venetoclax. With 55% of patients censored at the time of data cut-off, the median duration of CR/CRh was 25.9 months. The median duration of overall response was 11.7 months, and the median overall survival was 11.6 months. Of 86 patients who were transfusion dependent at baseline, a 56-day transfusion independence was achieved in 29 (34%), which included patients in all response groups. Grade 3 or 4 treatment-emergent adverse events (≥10%) were febrile neutropenia and anemia (n = 31; 20% each), thrombocytopenia (n = 25; 16%), and neutropenia (n = 20; 13%). Differentiation syndrome adverse events of special interest occurred in 22 (14%) patients, with 14 (9%) grade ≥3 and 1 fatal case reported. Overall, olutasidenib induced durable remissions and transfusion independence with a well-characterized and manageable side effect profile. The observed efficacy represents a therapeutic advance in this molecularly defined, poor-prognostic population of patients with mIDH1 R/R AML. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT02719574.

Venetoclax and idasanutlin in relapsed/refractory AML: a nonrandomized, open-label phase 1b trial.

This phase 1b trial (NCT02670044) evaluated venetoclax-idasanutlin in patients with relapsed/refractory (R/R) acute myeloid leukemia (AML) ineligible for cytotoxic chemotherapy. Two-dimensional dose escalation (DE, n = 50) was performed for venetoclax daily with idasanutlin on days 1 to 5 in 28-day cycles, followed by dosing schedule optimization (n = 6) to evaluate reduced venetoclax schedules (21-/14-day dosing). Common adverse events (occurring in ≥40% of patients) included diarrhea (87.3% of patients), nausea (74.5%), vomiting (52.7%), hypokalemia (50.9%), and febrile neutropenia (45.5%). During DE, across all doses, composite complete remission (CRc; CR + CR with incomplete blood count recovery + CR with incomplete platelet count recovery) rate was 26.0% and morphologic leukemia-free state (MLFS) rate was 12%. For anticipated recommended phase 2 doses (venetoclax 600 mg + idasanutlin 150 mg; venetoclax 600 mg + idasanutlin 200 mg), the combined CRc rate was 34.3% and the MLFS rate was 14.3%. Pretreatment IDH1/2 and RUNX1 mutations were associated with higher CRc rates (50.0% and 45.0%, respectively). CRc rate in patients with TP53 mutations was 20.0%, with responses noted among those with co-occurring IDH and RUNX1 mutations. In 12 out of 36 evaluable patients, 25 emergent TP53 mutations were observed; 22 were present at baseline with low TP53 variant allele frequency (median 0.0095% [range, 0.0006-0.4]). Venetoclax-idasanutlin showed manageable safety and encouraging efficacy in unfit patients with R/R AML. IDH1/2 and RUNX1 mutations were associated with venetoclax-idasanutlin sensitivity, even in some patients with co-occurring TP53 mutations; most emergent TP53 clones were preexisting. Our findings will aid ongoing/future trials of BCL-2/MDM2 inhibitor combinations. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT02670044.

Olutasidenib alone or with azacitidine in IDH1-mutated acute myeloid leukaemia and myelodysplastic syndrome: phase 1 results of a phase 1/2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Olutasidenib (FT-2102) is a potent, selective, oral, small-molecule inhibitor of mutant isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 (IDH1). The aims for phase 1 of this phase 1/2 study were to assess the safety, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and clinical activity of olutasidenib, as monotherapy or in combination with azacitidine, in patients with acute myeloid leukaemia or myelodysplastic syndrome, harbouring mutant IDH1. METHODS: In this phase 1/2, multicentre, open-label clinical trial, we enrolled patients aged 18 years or older with acute myeloid leukaemia or intermediate, high, or very high risk myelodysplastic syndrome harbouring mutant IDH1 at 18 study sites in the USA, Australia, France, and Spain. Other key eligibility criteria included Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0-2 with adequate liver and renal function. The primary outcomes were dose-limiting toxicities and the maximum tolerated dose, maximum evaluated dose, and the recommended phase 2 dose of olutasidenib. Olutasidenib was administered orally in doses of 150 mg once daily, 150 mg twice per day, and 300 mg once daily. Azacitidine (75 mg/m2) was administered subcutaneously or intravenously daily for 7 days on, 21 days off. The study was ongoing at the data cutoff (Oct 2, 2019) and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02719574. FINDINGS: Patients were enrolled between Aug 8, 2016, and Nov 14, 2018. 78 patients received olutasidenib as monotherapy (n=32) or in combination with azacitidine (n=46). The median follow-up was 8·3 months (IQR 3·1-13·3) for monotherapy and 10·1 months (4·2-15·3) for combination therapy. 16 (50%) of 32 patients in the monotherapy group and 24 (52%) of 46 patients in the combination therapy group were women. Most patients were White (26 [81%] for monotherapy and 31 [67%] for combination therapy). No dose-limiting toxicities were reported in the dose-escalation cohorts and 150 mg twice per day was declared the recommended phase 2 dose on the basis of safety, pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics, and clinical activity. The most common (≥20%) grade 3-4 treatment-emergent adverse events with monotherapy were thrombocytopenia (nine [28%] of 32 patients), febrile neutropenia (seven [22%] of 32), and anaemia (seven [22%] of 32); and with combination therapy were thrombocytopenia (19 [41%] of 46), febrile neutropenia (13 [28%] of 46), neutropenia (13 [28%] of 46), and anaemia (nine [20%] of 46). 11 (34%) of 32 patients in the monotherapy group and nine (20%) of 46 patients in the combination therapy group died (most commonly from disease progression [three (9%) of 32 and four (9%) of 46]). No deaths were considered study-drug related. For patients with relapsed or refractory acute myeloid leukaemia, 41% (95% CI 21-64; nine of 22) receiving monotherapy and 46% (27-67; 12 of 26) receiving combination therapy had an overall response. For treatment-naive patients with acute myeloid leukaemia, 25% (1-81; one of four) receiving monotherapy and 77% (46-95; ten of 13) receiving combination therapy had an overall response. INTERPRETATION: Olutasidenib, with or without azacitidine, was well tolerated and showed meaningful clinical activity in patients with IDH1-mutated acute myeloid leukaemia. The results of this phase 1 study provide rationale for the continued evaluation of olutasidenib in multiple patient populations with myeloid malignancies. FUNDING: Forma Therapeutics.

Outcomes in Patients with Poor-Risk Cytogenetics with or without TP53 Mutations Treated with Venetoclax and Azacitidine.

PURPOSE: To evaluate efficacy and safety of venetoclax + azacitidine in treatment-naïve patients with acute myeloid leukemia harboring poor-risk cytogenetics and TP53mut or TP53wt. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We analyzed data from a phase III study (NCT02993523) comparing venetoclax (400 mg orally days 1-28) + azacitidine (75 mg/m2 days 1-7) or placebo + azacitidine, and from a phase Ib study (NCT02203773) of venetoclax + azacitidine. Patients were ineligible for intensive therapy. TP53 status was analyzed centrally; cytogenetic studies were performed locally. RESULTS: Patients (n = 127) with poor-risk cytogenetics receiving venetoclax + azacitidine (TP53wt = 50; TP53mut = 54) were compared with patients with poor-risk cytogenetics (n = 56) receiving azacitidine alone (TP53wt = 22; TP53mut = 18).For poor-risk cytogenetics + TP53wt patients, venetoclax + azacitidine versus azacitidine alone resulted in composite remission rates (CRc) of 70% versus 23%, median duration of remission (DoR) of 18.4 versus 8.5 months, and median overall survival (OS) of 23.4 versus 11.3 months, respectively. Outcomes with venetoclax + azacitidine were comparable with similarly treated patients with intermediate-risk cytogenetics and TP53wt.For poor-risk cytogenetics + TP53mut patients, venetoclax + azacitidine versus azacitidine alone resulted in CRc of 41% versus 17%, median DoR of 6.5 versus 6.7 months, and median OS of 5.2 versus 4.9 months, respectively.For poor-risk cytogenetics + TP53mut patients, predominant grade ≥3 adverse events (AE) for venetoclax + azacitidine versus azacitidine were febrile neutropenia (55%/39%), thrombocytopenia (28%/28%), neutropenia (26%/17%), anemia (13%/6%), and pneumonia (28%/33%). AEs were comparable between TP53mut and TP53wt patients. CONCLUSIONS: In poor-risk cytogenetics + TP53mut patients, venetoclax + azacitidine improved remission rates but not DoR or OS compared with azacitidine alone. However, in poor-risk cytogenetics + TP53wt patients, venetoclax + azacitidine resulted in higher remission rates and longer DoR and OS than azacitidine alone, with outcomes comparable with similarly treated patients with intermediate-risk cytogenetics. Toxicities were similar in TP53mut and TP53wt patients. See related commentary by Green and Zeidner, p. 5235.

Clinical Impact of Measurable Residual Disease in Acute Myeloid Leukemia.

Measurable residual disease (MRD) has emerged as a primary marker of risk severity and prognosis in acute myeloid leukemia (AML). There is, however, ongoing debate about MRD-based surveillance and treatment. A literature review was performed using the PubMed database with the keywords MRD or residual disease in recently published journals. Identified articles describe the prognostic value of pre-transplant MRD and suggest optimal timing and techniques to quantify MRD. Several studies address the implications of MRD on treatment selection and hematopoietic stem cell transplant, including patient candidacy, conditioning regimen, and transplant type. More prospective, randomized studies are needed to guide the application of MRD in the treatment of AML, particularly in transplant.