A comparison of therapeutic dosages of decitabine in treating myelodysplastic syndrome: a meta-analysis

Epigenetic therapy: Research progress of decitabine in the treatment of solid tumors

Decitabine's early successful therapeutic outcomes in hematologic malignancies have led to regulatory approvals from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the European Medicines Agency (EMA) for addressing myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) and acute myeloid leukemia (AML). These approvals have sparked keen interest in exploring the potential of decitabine for treating solid tumors. Continuous preclinical and clinical trials have proved that low doses of decitabine also bring benefits in treating solid tumors, and various proposed mechanisms attempt to explain the potential efficacy. It is important to note that the application of decitabine in solid tumors is still considered investigational. This article reviews the application mechanism and current status of decitabine in the treatment of solid tumors.

Decitabine Versus Hydroxyurea for Advanced Proliferative Chronic Myelomonocytic Leukemia: Results of a Randomized Phase III Trial Within the EMSCO Network

PURPOSE

Hydroxyurea (HY) is a reference treatment of advanced myeloproliferative neoplasms. We conducted a randomized phase III trial comparing decitabine (DAC) and HY in advanced myeloproliferative chronic myelomonocytic leukemias (CMML).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Newly diagnosed myeloproliferative CMML patients with advanced disease were randomly assigned 1:1 to intravenous DAC (20 mg/m2/d days 1-5) or HY (1-4 g/d) in 28-day cycles. The primary end point was event-free survival (EFS), events being death and acute myelomonocytic leukemia (AML) transformation or progression.

RESULTS

One-hundred seventy patients received DAC (n = 84) or HY (n = 86). Median age was 72 and 74 years, and median WBC count 32.5 × 109/L and 31.2 × 109/L in the DAC and HY arms, respectively. Thirty-three percent of DAC and 31% of HY patients had CMML-2. Patients received a median of five DAC and six HY cycles. With a median follow-up of 17.5 months, median EFS was 12.1 months in the DAC arm and 10.3 months in the HY arm (hazard ratio [HR], 0.83; 95% CI, 0.59 to 1.16; P = .27). There was no significant interaction between treatment effect and blast or platelet count, anemia, CMML Prognostic Scoring System, Groupe Francophone des Myelodysplasies, or CMML Prognostic Scoring System–mol risk. Fifty-three (63%) DAC patients achieved a response compared with 30 (35%) HY patients ( P = .0004). Median duration of response was similar in both arms (DAC, 16.3 months; HY, 17.4 months; P = .90). Median overall survival was 18.4 months in the DAC arm and 21.9 months in the HY arm ( P = .67). Compared with HY, DAC significantly reduced the risk of CMML progression or transformation to acute myelomonocytic leukemia (cause-specific HR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.41 to 0.94; P = .005) at the expense of death without progression or transformation (cause-specific HR, 1.55; 95% CI, 0.82 to 2.9; P = .04).

CONCLUSION

Compared with HY, frontline treatment with DAC did not improve EFS in patients with advanced myeloproliferative CMML (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02214407 ).

Efficacy and Safety of Hypomethylating Agents in Chronic Myelomonocytic Leukemia: A Single-Arm Meta-analysis

Background  Chronic myelomonocytic leukemia (CMML) is a myeloid neoplasm with features of the myelodysplastic syndromes (MDSs) and myeloproliferative neoplasm presenting with peripheral blood monocytosis and an inherent risk for transformation to acute myeloid leukemia, while the abnormal DNA methylation plays a critical role in the pathogenesis of MDS, which is a disease of disordered differentiation. Recently, with the rapid development of molecular biology, hypomethylating agents (HMAs) for the treatment of MDS has gradually become a research focus. The objective of this study was to evaluate the benefits and risks of HMAs for patients with CMML.

Materials and Methods  PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and three Chinese databases were searched for studies published before November 2020 that used HMAs in CMML.

Results  The pooled objective response rate (ORR), complete response (CR), and partial response (PR) were 50.0, 21.0, and 2.0%, respectively. The proportion of patients with minor response (MR) was significantly higher for decitabine (DAC) than for azacitidine (AZA). There was no significant difference in hematologic improvement, ORR, CR, and PR rates between the DAC and AZA groups. Hematological toxicity included neutropenia grade 3/4 (14.0%), anemia grade 3/4 (17.0%), and thrombocytopenia grade 3/4 (22.0%).

Conclusion  This study showed that HMAs were effective and safe in the treatment of CMML, but large multicenter study would be needed to confirm the efficacy of HMAs for the treatment of CMML with different risk level and genetic abnormality, to support individualization treatment theoretically.

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.

Infection control in patients with myelodysplastic syndromes who are candidates for active treatment: Expert panel consensus-based recommendations

The improvement in supportive care and the introduction of new therapeutic agents, including lenalidomide and hypomethylating agents, in myelodysplastic syndromes have improved patients' outcomes; however, at the same time, the frequency and epidemiology of infections have changed. Therefore, the great strides in the indications and use of new treatment strategies for myelodysplastic syndromes need a parallel progress in the best approach to prophylaxis and supportive therapy for infections. Based on the recognition that the above issues represent an unmet clinical need in myelodysplastic syndromes, an Italian expert panel performed a review of the literature and composed a framework of the best recommendations for optimal infection control in patient candidates to receive active treatment for myelodysplastic syndromes. In this consensus document we report the outcomes of that review and of the consensus meetings held during 2017. The issues tackled in the project dealt with: information to be collected from candidates for active treatment for myelodysplastic syndromes; how to monitor the risk of infection; antimicrobial prophylaxis; the role of iron chelation and antiviral/antibacterial vaccinations. For each of these issues, practice recommendations are provided.

Incidence and risk of hematologic toxicities with hypomethylating agents in the treatment of myelodysplastic syndromes and acute myeloid leukopenia: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Hypomethylating agents (HMAs) are believed to have reliable efficacy in treating myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) and acute myeloid leukemia (AML). Meanwhile, the adverse events of HMAs have become an increasing concern. There is, however, no systematic meta-analysis available to evaluate overall hematologic toxicities for HMAs. In this meta-analysis, we aim to determine the risk of hematologic toxicities in patients treated with HMAs.

METHODS

Relevant studies were identified from PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and the Clinical Trials. gov databases incepted to February 2018. All phase II and III trials meeting the inclusion criteria included adequate safety data. We calculated the relative risk (RR) of high-grade hematologic toxicities (HTEs) with corresponding 95% CI using Review Manager. The incidences of HTEs were also evaluated by R. Heterogeneity was calculated and reported mainly via I analyses.

RESULTS

A total of 2337 MDS or AML patients from 14 studies were identified in this meta-analysis. The overall incidences of high-grade hematologic toxicities in patients who received HMAs were: 27% of the patients with anemia, 45% with neutropenia, 38% with thrombocytopenia, and 25% with febrile neutropenia, respectively. There was a significantly increased RR of neutropenia and thrombocytopenia using HMAs, in comparison with conventional care regimens (CCR) based on the drug type (decitabine vs azacitidine).

CONCLUSIONS

We conclude that the use of HMAs are associated with an increased risk of neutropenia and thrombocytopenia in MDS or AML patients, and our results also demonstrate that HMAs exposure does not significantly increase the risk of high-grade anemia, leukopenia, or febrile neutropenia compared with CCR.