Thrombopoietin mimetics for patients with myelodysplastic syndromes

Effect of thrombopoietin receptor agonist on health-related quality of life and platelet transfusion burden for patients with myelodysplastic syndromes: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Thrombocytopenia is a common and unsolved problem in myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) patients; we aimed to summarize the evidence of TPO-RA treatment for heath-related quality of life (HRQoL) and platelet transfusion burden of MDS patients. We searched Pubmed, Web of Science, EMBASE, and CENTRAL for randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing TPO-RA to placebo in MDS published until July 31, 2021. A random-effect model was used. Eight RCTs with 908 patients were identified. Only three RCTs involving eltrombopag reported HRQoL, and all three studies treated HRQoL as a secondary outcome. In these three RCTs, the HRQoL instruments used in each study were different. However, this outcome cannot be meta-analyzed because some studies did not provide complete data. Subsequent clinical trials should pay more attention to this. Compared to placebo, TPO-RA did not affect platelet transfusion incidence 0.83 (95% CI 0.60-1.15). There was no evidence for subgroup differences in the analyses of different types of TPO-RA, different additional agent, and different types of MDS risk groups. However, platelet transfusion units (RR = 0.68, 95% CI 0.53 to 0.84) were significantly decreased. The RR of patients who did not require platelet transfusion for 56 or more consecutive days was not different between groups (RR = 0.98, 95% CI 0.41 to 2.34). TPO-RA may decrease platelet transfusion units in MDS patients with thrombocytopenia. But the significance of this finding should be interpreted with caution, because too few studies were meta-analyzed.

Solute Carrier Nucleoside Transporters in Hematopoiesis and Hematological Drug Toxicities: A Perspective

Simple Summary

Anticancer nucleoside analogs are promising treatments that often result in damaging toxicities and therefore ineffective treatment. Mechanisms of this are not well-researched, but cellular nucleoside transport research in mice might provide additional insight given transport’s role in mammalian hematopoiesis. Cellular nucleoside transport is a notable component of mammalian hematopoiesis due to how mutations within it relate to hematological abnormities. This review encompasses nucleoside transporters, focusing on their inherent properties, hematopoietic role, and their interplay in nucleoside drug treatment side effects. We then propose potential mechanisms to explain nucleoside transport involvement in blood disorders. Finally, we point out and advocate for future research areas that would improve therapeutic outcomes for patients taking nucleoside analog therapies.

Abstract

Anticancer nucleoside analogs produce adverse, and at times, dose-limiting hematological toxicities that can compromise treatment efficacy, yet the mechanisms of such toxicities are poorly understood. Recently, cellular nucleoside transport has been implicated in normal blood cell formation with studies from nucleoside transporter-deficient mice providing additional insights into the regulation of mammalian hematopoiesis. Furthermore, several idiopathic human genetic disorders have revealed nucleoside transport as an important component of mammalian hematopoiesis because mutations in individual nucleoside transporter genes are linked to various hematological abnormalities, including anemia. Here, we review recent developments in nucleoside transporters, including their transport characteristics, their role in the regulation of hematopoiesis, and their potential involvement in the occurrence of adverse hematological side effects due to nucleoside drug treatment. Furthermore, we discuss the putative mechanisms by which aberrant nucleoside transport may contribute to hematological abnormalities and identify the knowledge gaps where future research may positively impact treatment outcomes for patients undergoing various nucleoside analog therapies.

A Review of Romiplostim Mechanism of Action and Clinical Applicability

Thrombocytopenia results from a variety of conditions, including radiation, chemotherapy, autoimmune disease, bone marrow disorders, pathologic conditions associated with surgical procedures, hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT), and hematologic disorders associated with severe aplastic anemia. Immune thrombocytopenia (ITP) is caused by immune reactions that accelerate destruction and reduce production of platelets. Thrombopoietin (TPO) is a critical component of platelet production pathways, and TPO receptor agonists (TPO-RAs) are important for the management of ITP by increasing platelet production and reducing the need for other treatments. Romiplostim is a TPO-RA approved for use in patients with ITP in the United States, European Union, Australia, and several countries in Africa and Asia, as well as for use in patients with refractory aplastic anemia in Japan and Korea. Romiplostim binds to and activates the TPO receptor on megakaryocyte precursors, thus promoting cell proliferation and viability, resulting in increased platelet production. Through this mechanism, romiplostim reduces the need for other treatments and decreases bleeding events in patients with thrombocytopenia. In addition to its efficacy in ITP, studies have shown that romiplostim is effective in improving platelet counts in various settings, thereby highlighting the versatility of romiplostim. The efficacy of romiplostim in such disorders is currently under investigation. Here, we review the structure, mechanism, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics of romiplostim. We also summarize the clinical evidence supporting its use in ITP and other disorders that involve thrombocytopenia, including chemotherapy-induced thrombocytopenia, aplastic anemia, acute radiation syndrome, perisurgical thrombocytopenia, post-HSCT thrombocytopenia, and liver disease.

Clinical spectrum, outcome and management of immune thrombocytopenia associated with myelodysplastic syndromes and chronic myelomonocytic leukemia

Myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) and chronic myelomonocytic leukemia (CMML) are associated with systemic inflammatory or autoimmune diseases in 10-20 % of cases. Among them, immune thrombocytopenia (ITP) has been reported but large studies assessing this association are missing. Whether such patients have a particular phenotype and require particular management is unclear. This study analyzes the clinical spectrum, outcome and therapeutic management of patients with ITP associated with MDS or CMML, in comparison (i) to patients with primary ITP without MDS/CMML and (ii) to patients with MDS/CMML without ITP. Forty-one MDS/CMML-associated ITP patients were included, with chronic ITP in 26 (63%) patients, low-risk myelodysplasia in 30 (73%) patients and CMML in 24 (59%) patients. An associated autoimmune disease was noted in 10 (24%) patients. In comparison to primary ITP patients, MDS/CMML-associated ITP patients had a higher occurrence of severe bleeding despite similar platelet counts at diagnosis. First-line treatment consisted of glucocorticoids (98%) and intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) (56%). Response achievement with IVIg was more frequent in primary ITP than in MDS/CMML-associated ITP patients. Response rates to second-line therapies were not statistically different between primary ITP and MDS/CMMLassociated ITP patients. Ten percent (n=4) of patients with MDS/CMML-associated ITP had multirefractory ITP versus none in primary ITP controls. After a median follow-up of 60 months, there was no difference in overall survival between MDS/CMML-associated ITP and primary ITP patients. Leukemia-free-survival was significantly better in MDS/CMMLassociated ITP patients than in MDS/CMML without ITP MDS/CMML-associated ITP have a particular outcome with more severe bleeding and multirefractory profile than primary ITP, similar response profile to primary ITP therapy except for IVIg, and less progression toward acute myeloid leukemia than MDS/CMML without ITP.

High-dose regimens of hypomethylating agents promote transfusion independence in IPSS lower-risk myelodysplastic syndromes: a meta-analysis of prospective studies

The hypomethylating agents (HMAs) azacytidine (AZA) and decitabine (DAC) are usually administered after the failure of erythropoietin-stimulating agents for lower-risk myelodysplastic syndromes (LR-MDS). However, it is unclear whether one of these HMAs has superior efficacy and safety. This was investigated in the present study by means of a meta-analysis of prospective studies published between January 1990 and July 2020 in PubMed, EMBASE, CENTRAL, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases; 19 studies with 1076 patients were included in the final analysis. The transfusion independence (TI) rate (66.7% [95% confidence interval: 41.7%-87.4%]) was higher with AZA 75 mg/m²/day for 7 days than with other regimens (all p<0.025). The proportion of patients with intermediate-1 risk influenced overall survival (p<0.05). There were no differences in treatment response, survival, and adverse event rates between patients treated with AZA (75 mg/m²/day for 5 days) and DAC (20 mg/m²/day for 3 days), although the latter group had a higher rate of grade 3/4 anemia (15.8% vs 0.0%; p<0.0001) and lower rate of diarrhea/constipation (6.9% vs 25.0%; p=0.002). Thus, both HMAs at high doses achieved reasonable response and TI rates with acceptable side effects, but did not prolong the overall survival in LR-MDS patients.

Safety and Efficacy of Eltrombopag and Romiplostim in Myelodysplastic Syndromes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background and Aim

Many studies indicated that eltrombopag and romiplostim could improve hematopoietic function in patients with myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS), but their toxicity and efficacy were not known. This meta-analysis aimed to investigate the safety and efficacy of eltrombopag and romiplostim in MDS.

Methods

A full-scale search strategy was used to search relevant published studies in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, ClinicalTrials.gov and the Cochrane Library until January 2020 using a random-effects model and the pooled risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence interval as the effect indicator. Statistical analyses were performed using RevMan 5.3.

Results

This meta-analysis included eight studies comprising 1047 patients. A lower RR of overall response rate (ORR) (RR: 0.65; 95% CI, 0.47–0.9) and grade ≥3 bleeding events (RR: 0.36; 95% CI, 0.36–0.92) were observed after romiplostim and eltrombopag treatment compared with placebo. The pooled RR for the ORR and grade ≥3 bleeding events were 0.58 (95% CI: 0.41–0.83, P = 0.003) and 0.6 (95% CI: 0.37–0.96, P = 0.03) in eltrombopag, respectively. A lower ORR in intermediate- or high-risk MDS (RR: 0.63; 95% CI: 0.45–0.88, P = 0.006) was observed. No difference in mortality, serious adverse events, platelet transfusion, hematologic improvement, and AML transformation was observed.

Conclusions

Thrombopoietin receptor agonists (TPO-RAs) romiplostim and eltrombopag were effective in reducing bleeding events, especially grade ≥3 bleeding events. However, it might reduce the ORR of MDS, especially in eltrombopag treatment group or high-risk MDS group. Due to the limited treatment of MDS and the poor response to the drug, this may be a selection method for MDS combined with fatal bleeding, although further research is needed to confirm the effectiveness of this approach.

Evolving therapies for lower-risk myelodysplastic syndromes

The development in the therapeutic landscape of myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) has substantially lagged behind other hematologic malignancies with no new drug approvals for MDS for 13 years since the approval of decitabine in the United States in 2006. While therapeutic concepts for MDS patients continue to be primarily defined by clinical-pathologic risk stratification tools such as the International Prognostic Scoring System (IPSS) and its revised version IPSS-R, our understanding of the genetic landscape and the molecular pathogenesis of MDS has greatly evolved over the last decade. It is expected that the therapeutic approach to MDS patients will become increasingly individualized based on prognostic and predictive genetic features and other biomarkers. Herein, we review the current treatment of lower-risk MDS patients and discuss promising agents in advanced clinical testing for the treatment of symptomatic anemia in lower-risk MDS patients such as luspatercept and imetelstat. Lastly, we review the clinical development of new agents and the implications of the wider availability of mutational analysis for the management of individual MDS patients.

Thrombocytopenia in Patients with Myelodysplastic Syndromes: Still an Unsolved Problem

The myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) are a group of clonal bone marrow (BM) stem cell disorders, characterized by ineffective hematopoiesis, peripheral cytopenias, and hematologic cellular dysfunction, as well as potential transformation to acute leukemia. Thrombocytopenia is common in MDS and is associated with bleeding complications, occasionally life-threatening. Low platelet count (PLT), as well declining PLT also serves as a prognostic marker. Understanding thrombopoiesis led to the cloning of thrombopoietin, resulting in the development of platelet stimulating agents, thrombomimetics, romiplostim and eltrombopag. Both agents have been shown to increase PLT, decrease the need for platelet transfusions and reduce the number of bleeding episodes, with a reasonable tolerance. They are already approved for immune thrombocytopenia and thrombocytopenia related to liver disease. Romiplostim and eltrombopag have proven efficacy in lower- and higher-risk MDS with thrombocytopenia, as monotherapy, as well as a part of a combination, either with lenalidomide, and mainly combined with hypomethylating agents. However, safety concerns have been raised: while several trials have been completed with no evidence of disease progression, others have been early terminated due to an increased number of BM blasts and possible leukemic transformation in treated-patients. The jury is still out regarding this safety concern, although recent publications are more encouraging.

Thrombopoietin receptor agonists for prevention and treatment of chemotherapy-induced thrombocytopenia in patients with solid tumours

BACKGROUND

Chemotherapy-induced thrombocytopenia (CIT) is defined as a peripheral platelet count less than 100×109/L, with or without bleeding in cancer patients receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy. CIT is a significant medical problem during chemotherapy, and it carries the risk of sub-optimal overall survival and bleeding. Alternative interventions to platelet transfusion are limited. Different stages of preclinical and clinical studies have examined the thrombopoietin receptor agonists (TPO-RAs) for CIT in patients with solid tumours.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of TPO-RAs to prevent and treat CIT in patients with solid tumours:(1) to prevent CIT in patients without thrombocytopenia before chemotherapy, (2) to prevent recurrence of CIT, and (3) to treat CIT in patients with thrombocytopenia during chemotherapy.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, to 28 September 2017), MEDLINE (from 1950 to 28 September 2017), as well as online registers of ongoing trials (Clinical Trials, Chinese Clinical Trial Register, Australian New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry, WHO ICTRP Search Portal, International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number registry, GlaxoSmithKline Clinical Study Register, and Amgen Clinical Trials) and conference proceedings (American Society of Hematology, American Society of Clinical Oncology, European Hematology Association, European Society of Medical Oncology, and Conference Proceedings Citation Index-Science, from 2002 up to September 2017) for studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing TPO-RAs alone, or in combination with other drugs, to placebo, no treatment, other drugs, or another TPO-RAs for CIT in patients with solid tumours.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened the results of the search strategies, extracted data, assessed risk of bias, and analysed data according to standard methodological methods expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified six trials eligible for inclusion, of which two are ongoing, and one awaiting classification study. The three included trials were conducted at many different sites in Europe, America, and Asia. All of the three studies recruited adult and elder participants (no children were included) with solid tumours, and compared TPO-RAs with placebo. No studies compared TPO-RAs alone, or in combination with other drugs, to no treatment, or other drugs, or another TPO-RAs.We judged the overall risk of bias as high as we found a high risk for detection bias. We assessed the risk of bias arising from inadequate blinding of outcome assessors as high for number and severity of bleeding episodes (one of the primary outcomes).To prevent CIT: We included two trials (206 participants) comparing TPO-RAs (eltrombopag, multiple-dose oral administration with chemotherapy) with placebo. The use of TPO-RAs may make little or no difference to the all-cause mortality at 33 weeks of follow-up (RR 1.35, 95% CI 0.53 to 3.45; one trial, 26 participants; low quality of evidence). There is not enough evidence to determine whether TPO-RAs reduce the number of patients with at least one bleeding episode of any severity (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.22 to 1.78; two trials, 206 participants; very low quality of evidence). There is not enough evidence to determine whether TPO-RAs reduce the number of patients with at least one severe/life-threatening bleeding episode (RR 0.36, 95% CI 0.06 to 2.06; two trials, 206 participants; very low quality of evidence). No studies were found that looked at overall survival (one of the primary outcomes), the number of treatment cycles with at least one bleeding episode, the number of days on which bleeding occurred, the amount of bleeding, or quality of life.To prevent recurrence of CIT: We included one trial (62 participants) comparing TPO-RAs (romiplostim, single-dose subcutaneous administration with chemotherapy) with placebo. There is not enough evidence to determine whether TPO-RAs reduce the number of patients with at least one bleeding episode of any severity (RR 2.80, 95% CI 0.17 to 47.53; one trial, 62 participants; very low quality of evidence). There is not enough evidence to determine whether TPO-RAs reduce the number of patients with at least one severe/life-threatening bleeding episode (no severe/life-threatening bleeding episodes; one trial, 62 participants; very low quality of evidence). No studies were found that looked at overall survival (one of the primary outcomes), the number of treatment cycles with at least one bleeding episode, the number of days on which bleeding occurred, the amount of bleeding, or quality of life. We found one ongoing study (expected recruitment 74 participants), it is planned to give TPO-RAs (romiplostim, subcutaneous administration with chemotherapy) to participants, but to date this trial has not reported any outcomes.To treat CIT: We found one ongoing study (expected recruitment 83 participants), which is planned to give TPO-RAs (eltrombopag, seven days orally) to participants when their platelet counts are less than 75×109/L during chemotherapy. This trial was originally planned to complete in March 2017, however, the completion date has passed and no results are reported.The one awaiting classification study included patients without thrombocytopenia before chemotherapy (to prevent CIT), patients with thrombocytopenia during chemotherapy (to prevent recurrence of CIT), and other patients during chemotherapy (uncertain whether CIT had happened). There was no evidence for a difference in the number of patients with at least one bleeding episode of any severity (RR 0.27, 95% CI 0.07 to 1.02; one trial, 75 participants). There was no evidence for a difference in the number of patients with at least one severe/life-threatening bleeding episode (RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.03 to 6.77; one trial, 75 participants). This study did not address overall survival or quality of life.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

No certain conclusions can be drawn due to the lack of strong evidence in the review. The available weak evidence did not support the use of TPO-RAs for preventing CIT or preventing recurrence of CIT in patients with solid tumours. There was no evidence to support the use of TPO-RAs for treating CIT in patients with solid tumours.