A single oncogenic enhancer rearrangement causes concomitant EVI1 and GATA2 deregulation in leukemia.

Chromosomal rearrangements without gene fusions have been implicated in leukemogenesis by causing deregulation of proto-oncogenes via relocation of cryptic regulatory DNA elements. AML with inv(3)/t(3;3) is associated with aberrant expression of the stem-cell regulator EVI1. Applying functional genomics and genome-engineering, we demonstrate that both 3q rearrangements reposition a distal GATA2 enhancer to ectopically activate EVI1 and simultaneously confer GATA2 functional haploinsufficiency, previously identified as the cause of sporadic familial AML/MDS and MonoMac/Emberger syndromes. Genomic excision of the ectopic enhancer restored EVI1 silencing and led to growth inhibition and differentiation of AML cells, which could be replicated by pharmacologic BET inhibition. Our data show that structural rearrangements involving the chromosomal repositioning of a single enhancer can cause deregulation of two unrelated distal genes, with cancer as the outcome.

Genome sequencing of pediatric medulloblastoma links catastrophic DNA rearrangements with TP53 mutations.

Genomic rearrangements are thought to occur progressively during tumor development. Recent findings, however, suggest an alternative mechanism, involving massive chromosome rearrangements in a one-step catastrophic event termed chromothripsis. We report the whole-genome sequencing-based analysis of a Sonic-Hedgehog medulloblastoma (SHH-MB) brain tumor from a patient with a germline TP53 mutation (Li-Fraumeni syndrome), uncovering massive, complex chromosome rearrangements. Integrating TP53 status with microarray and deep sequencing-based DNA rearrangement data in additional patients reveals a striking association between TP53 mutation and chromothripsis in SHH-MBs. Analysis of additional tumor entities substantiates a link between TP53 mutation and chromothripsis, and indicates a context-specific role for p53 in catastrophic DNA rearrangements. Among these, we observed a strong association between somatic TP53 mutations and chromothripsis in acute myeloid leukemia. These findings connect p53 status and chromothripsis in specific tumor types, providing a genetic basis for understanding particularly aggressive subtypes of cancer.

How I treat refractory and relapsed acute myeloid leukemia.

ABSTRACT: Most patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) develop refractory/relapsed (R/R) disease even in the presence of novel and targeted therapies. Given the biological complexity of the disease and differences in frontline treatments, there are therapies approved for only subgroups of R/R AML, and enrollment in clinical trials should be first priority. Allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) is the only potentially curative strategy for most patients. Therapeutic approaches, including allogeneic HCT, triggered by the presence of measurable residual disease (MRD), have recently evolved to prevent overt hematologic relapse. Salvage therapy with chemotherapy or targeted therapy is frequently administered before HCT to reduce the leukemic burden. Gilteritinib is approved by the Food and Drug Administration and European Medicines Agency for patients with relapsed FLT3 mutated AML, whereas targeted therapy for relapsed IDH1/2 mutated AML has only FDA approval. Patients who are R/R after azacitidine and venetoclax (AZA/VEN) have a dismal outcome. In this setting, even available targeted therapies show unsatisfactory results. Examples of ongoing developments include menin inhibitors, a targeted therapy for patients with mutated NPM1 or KMT2A rearrangements, antibodies targeting the macrophage immune checkpoint CD47, and triple combinations involving AZA/VEN. The latter cause significant myelosuppressive effects, which make it challenging to find the right schedule and dose.

Genetic Risk Stratification and Outcomes Among Treatment-Naive Patients With AML Treated With Venetoclax and Azacitidine.

European LeukemiaNet (ELN) acute myeloid leukemia (AML) genetic risk classification systems were based on response to intensive chemotherapy; their ability to discriminate outcomes in older patients treated with venetoclax-azacitidine may be suboptimal. Here, pooled analysis of patients in the phase 3 VIALE-A trial (NCT02993523) and phase 1b study (NCT02203773) examined prognostic stratification according to 2017 and 2022 ELN risk classifications. A bioinformatic algorithm derived new molecular signatures differentiating venetoclax-azacitidine-treated patients based on median overall survival (OS). 279 patients treated with venetoclax-azacitidine and 113 patients treated with placebo-azacitidine were analyzed. When classified by ELN 2017 or 2022 prognostic criteria, most patients had adverse-risk AML (60.2% and 72.8% for venetoclax-azacitidine and 65.5% and 75.2% for placebo-azacitidine, respectively). While outcomes with venetoclax-azacitidine were improved across all ELN risk groups compared with placebo-azacitidine, ELN classification systems poorly discriminated venetoclax-azacitidine outcomes. By applying a bioinformatic algorithm, new molecular signatures were derived differentiating OS outcomes with venetoclax-azacitidine; the mutational status of TP53, FLT3-ITD, NRAS, and KRAS categorized patients into higher-, intermediate-, and lower-benefit groups (52%, 25%, and 23% of patients, respectively), each associated with a distinct median OS (26.5 months [95% CI, 20.2 to 32.7], 12.1 months [95% CI, 7.3 to 15.2], and 5.5 months [95% CI, 2.8 to 7.6], respectively). ELN prognostic classifiers do not provide clinically meaningful risk stratification of OS outcomes for patients with AML treated with venetoclax-azacitidine. TP53, FLT3-ITD, NRAS, and KRAS mutation status allows classification of these patients into three risk groups with distinct differences in median OS.

Genetic risk classification for adults with AML receiving less-intensive therapies: the 2024 ELN recommendations.

The European LeukemiaNet (ELN) genetic risk classifications were developed based on data from younger adults receiving intensive chemotherapy. Emerging analyses from patients receiving less-intensive therapies prompted a proposal for an ELN genetic risk classification specifically for this patient population.

Ivosidenib and Azacitidine in IDH1-Mutated Acute Myeloid Leukemia.

BACKGROUND: The combination of ivosidenib - an inhibitor of mutant isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 (IDH1) - and azacitidine showed encouraging clinical activity in a phase 1b trial involving patients with newly diagnosed IDH1-mutated acute myeloid leukemia. METHODS: In this phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned patients with newly diagnosed IDH1-mutated acute myeloid leukemia who were ineligible for intensive induction chemotherapy to receive oral ivosidenib (500 mg once daily) and subcutaneous or intravenous azacitidine (75 mg per square meter of body-surface area for 7 days in 28-day cycles) or to receive matched placebo and azacitidine. The primary end point was event-free survival, defined as the time from randomization until treatment failure (i.e., the patient did not have complete remission by week 24), relapse from remission, or death from any cause, whichever occurred first. RESULTS: The intention-to-treat population included 146 patients: 72 in the ivosidenib-and-azacitidine group and 74 in the placebo-and-azacitidine group. At a median follow-up of 12.4 months, event-free survival was significantly longer in the ivosidenib-and-azacitidine group than in the placebo-and-azacitidine group (hazard ratio for treatment failure, relapse from remission, or death, 0.33; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.16 to 0.69; P = 0.002). The estimated probability that a patient would remain event-free at 12 months was 37% in the ivosidenib-and-azacitidine group and 12% in the placebo-and-azacitidine group. The median overall survival was 24.0 months with ivosidenib and azacitidine and 7.9 months with placebo and azacitidine (hazard ratio for death, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.27 to 0.73; P = 0.001). Common adverse events of grade 3 or higher included febrile neutropenia (28% with ivosidenib and azacitidine and 34% with placebo and azacitidine) and neutropenia (27% and 16%, respectively); the incidence of bleeding events of any grade was 41% and 29%, respectively. The incidence of infection of any grade was 28% with ivosidenib and azacitidine and 49% with placebo and azacitidine. Differentiation syndrome of any grade occurred in 14% of the patients receiving ivosidenib and azacitidine and 8% of those receiving placebo and azacitidine. CONCLUSIONS: Ivosidenib and azacitidine showed significant clinical benefit as compared with placebo and azacitidine in this difficult-to-treat population. Febrile neutropenia and infections were less frequent in the ivosidenib-and-azacitidine group than in the placebo-and-azacitidine group, whereas neutropenia and bleeding were more frequent in the ivosidenib-and-azacitidine group. (Funded by Agios Pharmaceuticals and Servier Pharmaceuticals; AGILE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03173248.).

Final analysis of the CLL2-GIVe trial: obinutuzumab, ibrutinib, and venetoclax for untreated CLL with del(17p)/TP53mut.

The final analysis of the open-label, multicenter phase 2 CLL2-GIVe trial shows response and tolerability of the triple combination of obinutuzumab, ibrutinib, and venetoclax (GIVe regimen) in 41 previously untreated patients with high-risk chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) with del(17p) and/or TP53 mutation. Induction consisted of 6 cycles of GIVe; venetoclax and ibrutinib were continued up to cycle 12 as consolidation. Ibrutinib was given until cycle 15 or up to cycle 36 in patients not achieving a complete response and with detectable minimal residual disease. The primary end point was the complete remission rate at cycle 15, which was achieved at 58.5% (95% CI, 42.1-73.7; P < .001). The last patient reached the end of the study in January 2022. After a median observation time of 38.4 months (range, 3.7-44.9), the 36-month progression-free survival was 79.9%, and the 36-month overall survival was 92.6%. Only 6 patients continued ibrutinib maintenance. Adverse events of concern were neutropenia (48.8%, grade ≥3) and infections (19.5%, grade ≥3). Cardiovascular toxicity grade 3 occurred as atrial fibrillation at a rate of 2.4% between cycles 1 and 12, as well as hypertension (4.9%) between cycles 1 and 6. The incidence of adverse events of any grade and grade ≥3 was highest during induction and decreased over time. Progressive disease was observed in 7 patients between cycles 27 and 42. In conclusion, the CLL2-GIVe regimen is a promising fixed-duration, first-line treatment for patients with high-risk CLL with a manageable safety profile.

Enasidenib vs conventional care in older patients with late-stage mutant-IDH2 relapsed/refractory AML: a randomized phase 3 trial.

This open-label, randomized, phase 3 trial (NCT02577406) compared enasidenib, an oral IDH2 (isocitrate dehydrogenase 2) inhibitor, with conventional care regimens (CCRs) in patients aged ≥60 years with late-stage, mutant-IDH2 acute myeloid leukemia (AML) relapsed/refractory (R/R) to 2 or 3 prior AML-directed therapies. Patients were first preselected to a CCR (azacitidine, intermediate-dose cytarabine, low-dose cytarabine, or supportive care) and then randomized (1:1) to enasidenib 100 mg per day or CCR. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Secondary endpoints included event-free survival (EFS), time to treatment failure (TTF), overall response rate (ORR), hematologic improvement (HI), and transfusion independence (TI). Overall, 319 patients were randomized to enasidenib (n = 158) or CCR (n = 161). The median age was 71 years, median (range) enasidenib exposure was 142 days (3 to 1270), and CCR was 36 days (1 to 1166). One enasidenib (0.6%) and 20 CCR (12%) patients received no randomized treatment, and 30% and 43%, respectively, received subsequent AML-directed therapies during follow-up. The median OS with enasidenib vs CCR was 6.5 vs 6.2 months (HR [hazard ratio], 0.86; P = .23); 1-year survival was 37.5% vs 26.1%. Enasidenib meaningfully improved EFS (median, 4.9 vs 2.6 months with CCR; HR, 0.68; P = .008), TTF (median, 4.9 vs 1.9 months; HR, 0.53; P < .001), ORR (40.5% vs 9.9%; P <.001), HI (42.4% vs 11.2%), and red blood cell (RBC)-TI (31.7% vs 9.3%). Enasidenib safety was consistent with prior reports. The primary study endpoint was not met, but OS was confounded by early dropout and subsequent AML-directed therapies. Enasidenib provided meaningful benefits in EFS, TTF, ORR, HI, and RBC-TI in this heavily pretreated older mutant-IDH2 R/R AML population.

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.

Distinguishing AML from MDS: a fixed blast percentage may no longer be optimal.

Patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) have conventionally received more intense therapy than patients with myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS). Although less intense therapies are being used more often in AML, the dichotomy between AML and MDS remains, with the presence of ≥20% myeloblasts in marrow or peripheral blood generally regarded as defining AML. Consequently, patients with 19% blasts are typically ineligible for AML studies, and patients with 21% blasts are ineligible for MDS studies. Here we cite biologic and clinical data to question this practice. Biologically, abnormalities in chromosome 3q26 and mutations in NPM1 and FLT3, regarded as AML associated, also occur in MDS. The genetic signatures of MDS, particularly cases with 10% to 19% blasts (MDS-EB2), resemble those of AML following a preceding MDS (secondary AML). Mutationally, secondary AML appears at least as similar to MDS-EB2 as to de novo AML. Patients presenting with de novo AML but with secondary-type AML mutations seem to have the same poor prognosis associated with clinically defined secondary AML. Seattle data indicate that after accounting for European LeukemiaNet 2017 risk, age, performance status, clinically secondary AML, and treatment including allogeneic transplantation, patients with World Health Organization-defined AML (n = 769) have similar rates of overall survival, event-free survival, and complete remission (CR)/CR with incomplete hematologic recovery as patients with MDS-EB2 (n = 202). We suggest defining patients with 10% to 30% blasts (AML/MDS) as eligible for both AML and MDS studies. This would permit empiric testing of the independent effect of blast percentage on outcome, allow patients access to more therapies, and potentially simplify the regulatory approval process.

Oral azacitidine prolongs survival of patients with AML in remission independently of measurable residual disease status.

Measurable residual disease (MRD) in patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) in remission after intensive chemotherapy is predictive of early relapse and poor survival. Postremission maintenance therapy that prolongs MRD negativity or converts MRD+ patients to MRD- status may delay or prevent relapse and improve overall survival (OS). In the phase 3 QUAZAR AML-001 trial, oral azacitidine (oral-AZA; formerly CC-486), a hypomethylating agent, significantly prolonged OS and relapse-free survival (RFS) compared with placebo in patients aged ≥55 years with AML in first remission after intensive chemotherapy who were not candidates for hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. In this trial, MRD (≥0.1% leukemic cells in bone marrow) was assessed by multiparameter flow cytometry in serial samples collected at baseline and on day 1 of every 3 cycles. As expected, baseline MRD status was significantly associated with both OS and RFS. Multivariate analyses showed oral-AZA significantly improved OS and RFS vs placebo independent of baseline MRD status. Oral-AZA treatment also extended the duration of MRD negativity by 6 months vs placebo and resulted in a higher rate of conversion from MRD+ at baseline to MRD- during treatment: 37% vs 19%, respectively. In the oral-AZA arm, 24% of MRD responders achieved MRD negativity >6 months after treatment initiation. Although presence or absence of MRD was a strong prognostic indicator of OS and RFS, there were added survival benefits with oral-AZA maintenance therapy compared with placebo, independent of patients' MRD status at baseline. Registered at clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT01757535.

Diagnosis and management of AML in adults: 2022 recommendations from an international expert panel on behalf of the ELN.

The 2010 and 2017 editions of the European LeukemiaNet (ELN) recommendations for diagnosis and management of acute myeloid leukemia (AML) in adults are widely recognized among physicians and investigators. There have been major advances in our understanding of AML, including new knowledge about the molecular pathogenesis of AML, leading to an update of the disease classification, technological progress in genomic diagnostics and assessment of measurable residual disease, and the successful development of new therapeutic agents, such as FLT3, IDH1, IDH2, and BCL2 inhibitors. These advances have prompted this update that includes a revised ELN genetic risk classification, revised response criteria, and treatment recommendations.

Obinutuzumab (GA-101), ibrutinib, and venetoclax (GIVe) frontline treatment for high-risk chronic lymphocytic leukemia.

Despite considerable treatment advances with targeted therapies for patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) deemed high-risk [del(17p) and/or TP53 mutation], the outcome is still inferior compared with other CLL patients. Combining multiple agents with distinct mechanisms of action may further improve outcomes. CLL2-GIVe is an open-label, multicenter trial which enrolled patients with previously untreated CLL with del(17p) and/or TP53 mutation. Patients received induction therapy with obinutuzumab (GA-101), ibrutinib, and venetoclax (GIVe) for cycles 1 through 6 and consolidation therapy with venetoclax and ibrutinib for cycles 7 through 12. Ibrutinib monotherapy was continued for cycles 13 through 36 in patients not reaching a complete response (CR) with serial undetectable minimal residual disease (uMRD) after consolidation. The primary endpoint was CR rate at cycle 15 (final restaging). Secondary endpoints included MRD, survival, and safety. All 41 patients enrolled between September 2016 and August 2018 received study treatment and were included in efficacy and safety populations. With a CR rate of 58.5% at cycle 15, the primary endpoint was met (95% CI: 42.1-73.7; P < .001). At final restaging, 78.0% of patients had uMRD in peripheral blood (PB); 65.9% of patients had uMRD in bone marrow (BM). Estimated progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) rates at 24 months were both 95.1%. Adverse events were reported in all patients; most were low grade (grade ≥3: 23.9%). Two deaths were reported (cardiac failure and ovarian carcinoma), neither related to study treatment. The CLL2-GIVe treatment regimen has a manageable safety profile and is a first-line treatment of good efficacy for patients with high-risk CLL.

Prognostic impact of NPM1 and FLT3 mutations in patients with AML in first remission treated with oral azacitidine.

The randomized, placebo-controlled, phase 3 QUAZAR AML-001 trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01757535) evaluated oral azacitidine (Oral-AZA) in patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) in first remission after intensive chemotherapy (IC) who were not candidates for hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Eligible patients were randomized 1:1 to Oral-AZA 300 mg or placebo for 14 days per 28-day cycle. We evaluated relapse-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) in patient subgroups defined by NPM1 and FLT3 mutational status at AML diagnosis and whether survival outcomes in these subgroups were influenced by presence of post-IC measurable residual disease (MRD). Gene mutations at diagnosis were collected from patient case report forms; MRD was determined centrally by multiparameter flow cytometry. Overall, 469 of 472 randomized patients (99.4%) had available mutational data; 137 patients (29.2%) had NPM1 mutations (NPM1mut), 66 patients (14.1%) had FLT3 mutations (FLT3mut; with internal tandem duplications [ITD], tyrosine kinase domain mutations [TKDmut], or both), and 30 patients (6.4%) had NPM1mut and FLT3-ITD at diagnosis. Among patients with NPM1mut, OS and RFS were improved with Oral-AZA by 37% (hazard ratio [HR], 0.63; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.41-0.98) and 45% (HR, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.35-0.84), respectively, vs placebo. Median OS was improved numerically with Oral-AZA among patients with NPM1mut whether without MRD (48.6 months vs 31.4 months with placebo) or with MRD (46.1 months vs 10.0 months with placebo) post-IC. Among patients with FLT3mut, Oral-AZA improved OS and RFS by 37% (HR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.35-1.12) and 49% (HR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.27-0.95), respectively, vs placebo. Median OS with Oral-AZA vs placebo was 28.2 months vs 16.2 months, respectively, for patients with FLT3mut and without MRD and 24.0 months vs 8.0 months for patients with FLT3mut and MRD. In multivariate analyses, Oral-AZA significantly improved survival independent of NPM1 or FLT3 mutational status, cytogenetic risk, or post-IC MRD status.

Genomic profiling for clinical decision making in myeloid neoplasms and acute leukemia.

Myeloid neoplasms and acute leukemias derive from the clonal expansion of hematopoietic cells driven by somatic gene mutations. Although assessment of morphology plays a crucial role in the diagnostic evaluation of patients with these malignancies, genomic characterization has become increasingly important for accurate diagnosis, risk assessment, and therapeutic decision making. Conventional cytogenetics, a comprehensive and unbiased method for assessing chromosomal abnormalities, has been the mainstay of genomic testing over the past several decades and remains relevant today. However, more recent advances in sequencing technology have increased our ability to detect somatic mutations through the use of targeted gene panels, whole-exome sequencing, whole-genome sequencing, and whole-transcriptome sequencing or RNA sequencing. In patients with myeloid neoplasms, whole-genome sequencing represents a potential replacement for both conventional cytogenetic and sequencing approaches, providing rapid and accurate comprehensive genomic profiling. DNA sequencing methods are used not only for detecting somatically acquired gene mutations but also for identifying germline gene mutations associated with inherited predisposition to hematologic neoplasms. The 2022 International Consensus Classification of myeloid neoplasms and acute leukemias makes extensive use of genomic data. The aim of this report is to help physicians and laboratorians implement genomic testing for diagnosis, risk stratification, and clinical decision making and illustrates the potential of genomic profiling for enabling personalized medicine in patients with hematologic neoplasms.

Impact of TP53 Mutation Status in Elderly AML Patients When Adding All-Trans Retinoic Acid or Valproic Acid to Decitabine.

In a randomized phase II trial (AMLSG 14-09, NCT00867672) of elderly, newly diagnosed AML patients, ATRA combined with decitabine (DEC) significantly improved the overall response rate (ORR) and survival also in patients with adverse-risk genetics, without adding toxicity. We performed a post hoc analysis to determine the predictive impact of TP53 status. Despite a nominally higher ORR, the clinically meaningful survival benefit when adding ATRA to DEC was diminished, but not completely negated, in TP53-mutated patients. Indeed, 2 out of 14 TP53-mutated patients (14%) randomized to a DEC + ATRA-containing regimen lived for > 36 months. Further studies of ATRA combined with hypomethylating agents appear warranted in non-M3 AML patients ineligible for HMA/venetoclax therapy. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00867672.

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.

Azacitidine and Venetoclax in Previously Untreated Acute Myeloid Leukemia.

BACKGROUND: Older patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) have a dismal prognosis, even after treatment with a hypomethylating agent. Azacitidine added to venetoclax had promising efficacy in a previous phase 1b study. METHODS: We randomly assigned previously untreated patients with confirmed AML who were ineligible for standard induction therapy because of coexisting conditions, because they were 75 years of age or older, or both to azacitidine plus either venetoclax or placebo. All patients received a standard dose of azacitidine (75 mg per square meter of body-surface area subcutaneously or intravenously on days 1 through 7 every 28-day cycle); venetoclax (target dose, 400 mg) or matching placebo was administered orally, once daily, in 28-day cycles. The primary end point was overall survival. RESULTS: The intention-to-treat population included 431 patients (286 in the azacitidine-venetoclax group and 145 in the azacitidine-placebo [control] group). The median age was 76 years in both groups (range, 49 to 91). At a median follow-up of 20.5 months, the median overall survival was 14.7 months in the azacitidine-venetoclax group and 9.6 months in the control group (hazard ratio for death, 0.66; 95% confidence interval, 0.52 to 0.85; P<0.001). The incidence of complete remission was higher with azacitidine-venetoclax than with the control regimen (36.7% vs. 17.9%; P<0.001), as was the composite complete remission (complete remission or complete remission with incomplete hematologic recovery) (66.4% vs. 28.3%; P<0.001). Key adverse events included nausea of any grade (in 44% of the patients in the azacitidine-venetoclax group and 35% of those in the control group) and grade 3 or higher thrombocytopenia (in 45% and 38%, respectively), neutropenia (in 42% and 28%), and febrile neutropenia (in 42% and 19%). Infections of any grade occurred in 85% of the patients in the azacitidine-venetoclax group and 67% of those in the control group, and serious adverse events occurred in 83% and 73%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In previously untreated patients who were ineligible for intensive chemotherapy, overall survival was longer and the incidence of remission was higher among patients who received azacitidine plus venetoclax than among those who received azacitidine alone. The incidence of febrile neutropenia was higher in the venetoclax-azacitidine group than in the control group. (Funded by AbbVie and Genentech; VIALE-A ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02993523.).

Oral Azacitidine Maintenance Therapy for Acute Myeloid Leukemia in First Remission.

BACKGROUND: Although induction chemotherapy results in remission in many older patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML), relapse is common and overall survival is poor. METHODS: We conducted a phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of the oral formulation of azacitidine (CC-486, a hypomethylating agent that is not bioequivalent to injectable azacitidine), as maintenance therapy in patients with AML who were in first remission after intensive chemotherapy. Patients who were 55 years of age or older, were in complete remission with or without complete blood count recovery, and were not candidates for hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation were randomly assigned to receive CC-486 (300 mg) or placebo once daily for 14 days per 28-day cycle. The primary end point was overall survival. Secondary end points included relapse-free survival and health-related quality of life. RESULTS: A total of 472 patients underwent randomization; 238 were assigned to the CC-486 group and 234 were assigned to the placebo group. The median age was 68 years (range, 55 to 86). Median overall survival from the time of randomization was significantly longer with CC-486 than with placebo (24.7 months and 14.8 months, respectively; P<0.001). Median relapse-free survival was also significantly longer with CC-486 than with placebo (10.2 months and 4.8 months, respectively; P<0.001). Benefits of CC-486 with respect to overall and relapse-free survival were shown in most subgroups defined according to baseline characteristics. The most common adverse events in both groups were grade 1 or 2 gastrointestinal events. Common grade 3 or 4 adverse events were neutropenia (in 41% of patients in the CC-486 group and 24% of patients in the placebo group) and thrombocytopenia (in 22% and 21%, respectively). Overall health-related quality of life was preserved during CC-486 treatment. CONCLUSIONS: CC-486 maintenance therapy was associated with significantly longer overall and relapse-free survival than placebo among older patients with AML who were in remission after chemotherapy. Side effects were mainly gastrointestinal symptoms and neutropenia. Quality-of-life measures were maintained throughout treatment. (Supported by Celgene; QUAZAR AML-001 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01757535.).

Analysis, identification and visualization of subgroups in genomics.

MOTIVATION: Cancer is a complex and heterogeneous disease involving multiple somatic mutations that accumulate during its progression. In the past years, the wide availability of genomic data from patients' samples opened new perspectives in the analysis of gene mutations and alterations. Hence, visualizing and further identifying genes mutated in massive sets of patients are nowadays a critical task that sheds light on more personalized intervention approaches. RESULTS: Here, we extensively review existing tools for visualization and analysis of alteration data. We compare different approaches to study mutual exclusivity and sample coverage in large-scale omics data. We complement our review with the standalone software AVAtar ('analysis and visualization of alteration data') that integrates diverse aspects known from different tools into a comprehensive platform. AVAtar supplements customizable alteration plots by a multi-objective evolutionary algorithm for subset identification and provides an innovative and user-friendly interface for the evaluation of concurrent solutions. A use case from personalized medicine demonstrates its unique features showing an application on vaccination target selection. AVAILABILITY: AVAtar is available at: https://github.com/sysbio-bioinf/avatar. CONTACT: hans.kestler@uni-ulm.de, phone: +49 (0) 731 500 24 500, fax: +49 (0) 731 500 24 502.