Reduced dose azacitidine plus venetoclax as maintenance therapy in acute myeloid leukaemia following intensive or low-intensity induction: a single-centre, single-arm, phase 2 trial

The prognostic significance of genetics in acute myeloid leukemia under venetoclax-based treatment

Acute myeloid leukemia (AML) is the most prevalent hematologic malignancy in adults. In 2022, the European LeukemiaNet (ELN) has updated its prognostic system that incorporates cytogenetics and molecular genetics based on data from patients undergoing intensive chemotherapy (IC). Recently, a risk stratification framework has been established for hypomethylating agents (HMA)-based low-intensity treatment (LIT) to fill the gaps in stratification for this treatment modality, but this needs further refinement. Venetoclax (VEN), a BH3 mimetic, targets BCL-2 to modulate apoptosis and metabolism in AML cells. Its combination with HMA or low-dose cytarabine (LDAC) has been shown to enhance the response rates and prolong the survival outcomes of older or unfit patients with AML. In this review, we delved into the prognostic significance of FLT3-ITD and IDH mutations when used in combination with VEN and HMA, as well as in conjunction with their specific inhibitors. We also explored the role of VEN in NPM1-mutated AML and its efficacy in splicing factor mutations AML. Additionally, we examined the response rates and survival outcomes of CBF-AML when treated with a VEN-based regimen. Moving forward, it is imperative that risk stratification for LIT becomes more nuanced to better align with the requirements of personalized diagnosis and treatment strategies.

Azacitidine in combination with shortened venetoclax treatment cycles in patients with acute myeloid leukemia

The combination of venetoclax with hypomethylating agents is currently the standard of care for elderly patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) ineligible for intensive chemotherapy. Despite its favorable efficacy, clinical use is often associated with post-remission cytopenia, frequently necessitating treatment delays and dose modifications. This study aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of shortened venetoclax treatment durations. A multicenter analysis was conducted involving 20 adult AML patients receiving venetoclax (7 or 14 days with 9 and 11 patients, respectively) combined with 5-azacitidine (5-7 days) between 2021 and 2024. The cohort included patients from four German academic centers all treated in first line. Outcome measures included bone marrow response, transfusion dependence, overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Median age was 73.5 years, with 70% of patients having secondary AML. Adverse molecular risk was observed in 75% of patients. The overall response rate (ORR) was 100%, with a composite complete remission rate of 78%. No significant differences in response rates were observed between the 7-day and 14-day venetoclax regimens. Median OS for the cohort was 15 months. Infection-related complications were observed in 55% of patients, with severe sepsis in 20% of cases. In this cohort, shortened venetoclax regimens demonstrated efficacy comparable to standard treatment protocols, with a potential reduction in hematologic toxicity. These findings support the individualization of treatment regimens to optimize clinical outcomes while potentially minimizing adverse effects.

Current status and research directions in acute myeloid leukemia

The understanding of the molecular pathobiology of acute myeloid leukemia (AML) has spurred the identification of therapeutic targets and the development of corresponding novel targeted therapies. Since 2017, twelve agents have been approved for the treatment of AML subsets: the BCL2 inhibitor venetoclax; the CD33 antibody drug conjugate gemtuzumab ozogamicin; three FLT3 inhibitors (midostaurin, gilteritinib, quizartinib); three IDH inhibitors (ivosidenib and olutasidenib targeting IDH1 mutations; enasidenib targeting IDH2 mutations); two oral hypomethylating agents (oral poorly absorbable azacitidine; fully absorbable decitabine-cedazuridine [latter approved as an alternative to parenteral hypomethylating agents in myelodysplastic syndrome and chronic myelomonocytic leukemia but commonly used in AML]); and CPX-351 (encapsulated liposomal 5:1 molar ratio of cytarabine and daunorubicin), and glasdegib (hedgehog inhibitor). Other targeted therapies (menin inhibitors, CD123 antibody-drug conjugates) are showing promising results. To achieve optimal results in such a rare and heterogeneous entity as AML requires expertise, familiarity with this rare cancer, and the access to, and delivery of disparate therapies under rigorous supportive care conditions. In this review, we update the standard-of-care and investigational therapies and outline promising current and future research directions.

Optimizing maintenance therapy in acute myeloid leukemia: where do we stand in the year 2024?

INTRODUCTION

Despite the prognosis of patients affected by acute myeloid leukemia (AML) improved in the last decade, most patients relapse. Maintenance therapy after a chemotherapy approach with or without allogeneic stem cell transplantation could be a way to control the undetectable residual burden of leukemic cells. Several studies are being carried out as maintenance therapy in AML. Some critical points need to be defined, how the physician can choose among the various drugs available.

AREAS COVERED

This review discusses the advances and controversies surrounding maintenance therapy for AML patients.

EXPERT OPINION

Patients withFLT3-positive AML should receive midostaurin or quizartinib in the first-linesetting. For a patient initially receiving midostaurin, consider switching to sorafenib in the post-transplant setting. Because of the improved safety profile and potency, many experts will lean toward using a second-generation FLT3 inhibitor such as quizartinib or gilteritinib. Finally, no data indicate whether maintenance therapy should be prolonged until progression or for a defined period.