A clinical trial for patients with acute myeloid leukemia or myelodysplastic syndromes not eligible for standard clinical trials

Beyond the horizon: emerging therapeutic approaches in myelodysplastic neoplasms

Management of myelodysplastic neoplasms (MDS) requires a personalized approach, with a focus on improving quality of life and extending lifespan. The International Prognostic Scoring System-Revised and the molecular International Prognostic Scoring System are key tools for risk stratification and management of MDS. They provide a framework for predicting survival and the risk of transformation to acute myeloid leukemia. However, a major challenge in MDS management remains the limited therapeutic options available, especially after the failure of first-line therapies. In lower-risk MDS, the failure of erythropoietin-stimulating agents often leaves few alternatives, although in higher-risk MDS, the prognosis after hypomethylating agent failure is dismal. This highlights the urgent need for novel, more personalized therapeutic approaches. In this review, we discuss emerging novel therapeutic approaches in the treatment of MDS. Several new therapeutic targets are currently being evaluated, offering hope for improved management of MDS in the future.

Assessment of 2022 European LeukemiaNet risk classification system in real-world cohort from China

BACKGROUND

The European LeukemiaNet (ELN) risk classification system for acute myeloid leukemia (AML) patients has been used worldwide. In 2022, the ELN risk classification system modified risk genes including CEBPA mutation status, myelodysplasia-related (MR) gene mutations and internal tandem duplications of FLT3 (FLT3-ITD).

METHODS

We include newly diagnosed de novo AML patients at our center from January 2017 to December 2021, regardless of the further treatment received. Clinical data and date of survival were included. Survival analysis were performed using the Kaplan-Meier method, and the log-rank test was used to compare survival between different risk groups.

RESULTS

We include 363 newly diagnosed de novo AML patients from 2017 to 2021 to assess the accuracy of the ELN risk classification system. Their survival results show that the ELN-2022 risk classification system is not superior to the ELN-2017 version; for patients with FLT3-ITD mutations but without FLT3 inhibitor treatment, their survival is similar to the ELN-2022 adverse risk group. The ELN-2022 risk classification system cannot accurately clarify ECOG performance status (PS) 2-4 patients, especially in the ELN-2022 favorable risk group.

CONCLUSION

The ELN-2022 risk stratification system may not be appropriate for patients unable to receive intensive therapy or FLT3 inhibitor; more real-world data is needed to straify patients with worse ECOG PS and inferior intensive therapy.

HDAC inhibitors: Promising agents for leukemia treatment

The essential role of epigenetic modification in the pathogenesis of a series of cancers have gradually been recognized. Histone deacetylase (HDACs), as well-known epigenetic modulators, are responsible for DNA repair, cell proliferation, differentiation, apoptosis and angiogenesis. Studies have shown that aberrant expression of HDACs is found in many cancer types. Thus, inhibition of HDACs has provided a promising therapeutic approach alternative for these patients. Since HDAC inhibitor (HDACi) vorinostat was first approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for treating cutaneous T-cell lymphoma (CTCL) in 2006, the combination of HDAC inhibitors with other molecules such as chemotherapeutic drugs has drawn much attention in current cancer treatment, especially in hematological malignancies therapy. Up to now, there have been more than twenty HDAC inhibitors investigated in clinic trials with five approvals being achieved. Indeed, Histone deacetylase inhibitors promote or enhance several different anticancer mechanisms and therefore are in evidence as potential antileukemia agents. In this review, we will focus on possible mechanisms by how HDAC inhibitors exert therapeutic benefit and their clinical utility in leukemia.

Age and sex associate with outcome in older AML and high risk MDS patients treated with 10-day decitabine

Treatment choice according to the individual conditions remains challenging, particularly in older patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) and high risk myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS). The impact of performance status, comorbidities, and physical functioning on survival is not well defined for patients treated with hypomethylating agents. Here we describe the impact of performance status (14% ECOG performance status 2), comorbidity (40% HCT-comorbidity index ≥ 2), and physical functioning (41% short physical performance battery < 9 and 17% ADL index < 6) on overall survival (OS) in 115 older patients (age ≥ 66 years) treated on a clinical trial with a 10-day decitabine schedule. None of the patient-related variables showed a significant association with OS. Multivariable analysis revealed that age > 76 years was significantly associated with reduced OS (HR 1.58; p = 0.043) and female sex was associated with superior OS (HR 0.62; p = 0.06). We further compared the genetic profiles of these subgroups. This revealed comparable mutational profiles in patients younger and older than 76 years, but, interestingly, revealed significantly more prevalent mutated ASXL1, STAG2, and U2AF1 in male compared to female patients. In this cohort of older patients treated with decitabine age and sex, but not comorbidities, physical functioning or cytogenetic risk were associated with overall survival.

Understanding common key indicators of successful and unsuccessful cancer drug trials using a contrast mining framework on ClinicalTrials.gov

Clinical trials are essential to the process of new drug development. As clinical trials involve significant investments of time and money, it is crucial for trial designers to carefully investigate trial settings prior to designing a trial. Utilizing trial documents from ClinicalTrials.gov, we aim to understand the common characteristics of successful and unsuccessful cancer drug trials to provide insights about what to learn and what to avoid. In this research, we first computationally classified cancer drug trials into successful and unsuccessful cases and then utilized natural language processing to extract eligibility criteria information from the trial documents. To provide explainable and potentially modifiable recommendations for new trial design, contrast mining was applied to discoverhighly contrasted patterns with a significant difference in prevalence between successful (completion with advancement to the next phase) and unsuccessful (suspended, withdrawn, or terminated) groups. Our method identified contrast patterns consisting of combinations of drug categories, eligibility criteria, study organization, and study design for nine major cancers. In addition to a literature review for the qualitative validation of mined contrast patterns, we found that contrast-pattern-based classifiers using the top 200 contrast patterns as feature representations can achieve approximately 80% F₁ score for eight out of ten cancer types in our experiments. In summary, aligning with the modernization efforts of ClinicalTrials.gov, our study demonstrates that understanding the contrast characteristics of successful and unsuccessful cancer trials may provide insights into the decision-making process for trial investigators and therefore facilitate improved cancer drug trial design.

Azacitidine Monotherapy in Patients With Treatment-Naïve Higher-risk Myelodysplastic Syndrome: A Systematic Literature Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The global incidence of myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) has been estimated as 0.06 to 0.26/100,000. Since their introduction, hypomethylating agents have played a central role in the treatment of MDS, with heterogeneous real-world outcomes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We assessed and synthesized clinical outcomes of azacitidine (AZA) monotherapy in treatment-naïve patients with higher-risk MDS. A systematic literature review was conducted by searching MEDLINE, Embase, and CENTRAL to identify randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and observational studies, both prospective and retrospective, reporting complete remission (CR), partial remission (PR), overall survival (OS), duration of response (DOR), time-to-response (TTR), and myelosuppressive adverse events (AEs) for patients treated with AZA monotherapy. Noncomparative meta-analyses were used to summarize effects.

RESULTS

The search identified 3250 abstracts, of which 34 publications describing 16 studies (5 RCTs, 3 prospective, and 8 retrospective observational) were included. Across all studies, pooled CR was 16%; PR was 6%; Median OS was 16.4 months; median DOR was 10.1 months; median TTR was 4.6 months. Proportions of grade 3/4 anemia and thrombocytopenia AEs were 10% and 30%.

CONCLUSIONS

The effectiveness and efficacy of AZA monotherapy-as measured by CR and median OS-was limited. These findings highlight a significant unmet medical need for effective treatments for patients with higher-risk MDS.

A phase 1b multicenter study of TAS-102 in combination with irinotecan in patients with advanced recurrent or unresectable gastric and gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma after at least one line of treatment with a fluoropyrimidine and platinum-containing regimen

TAS-102 is approved for treatment of refractory metastatic gastroesophageal carcinoma (mGEC). This study sought to determine whether the combination of TAS-102 with irinotecan (TASIRI) was safe and effective in previously treated mGEC. This was a single-arm phase 1b study for patients (pts) with mGEC previously treated with at least one line of fluoropyrimidine and platinum-containing regimen. TAS-102 was given at 25 mg/m² twice daily on days 1 to 5 with irinotecan 180 mg/m² on day 1 of a 14-day cycle. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival at 6 months ≥ 35% (PFS-6). 20 Pts were enrolled. The study met its primary endpoint. PFS-6 is 40% (95% CI 19.3-60.0). Median PFS and overall survival are 5.3 months and not reached, respectively. 17 of 20 pts had measurable disease by RECIST criteria. Of the 17, 13 had stable disease and 4 had progressive disease as best response (8 pts had tumor shrinkage < 30%). The disease control rate was 75%. In exploratory analyses, mutations in homologous recombination deficiency genes were associated with inferior PFS (P < 0.03). The most common any grade (G) treatment-related adverse events (TRAE) were nausea (n = 14, 70%), diarrhea (n = 9, 45%), and fatigue (n = 8, 40%). G3-4 TRAE in > 5% of pts were anemia (20%) and neutropenia (10%). 2 serious TRAE were reported: G4 febrile neutropenia (n = 1) and G3 hypotension (n = 1). There was no G5 TRAE. The combination of TASIRI showed encouraging clinical activity with a meaningful improvement in PFS-6 compared to historic controls.

Survival of patients with newly diagnosed high-grade myeloid neoplasms who do not meet standard trial eligibility

Few patients with cancer, including those with acute myeloid leukemia and high-grade myeloid neoplasms, participate in clinical trials. Broadening standard eligibility criteria may increase clinical trial participation. In this retrospective single-center analysis, we identified 442 consecutive newly diagnosed patients from 2014 to 2016. Patients were considered “eligible” if they had a performance status 0-2, normal renal and hepatic function, no recent solid tumor, left ventricular ejection fraction (EF) ≥50%, and no history of congestive heart failure (CHF) or myocardial infarction (MI); “ineligible” patients failed to meet one or more of these criteria. We included 372 patients who received chemotherapy. Ineligible patients represented 40% of the population and had a 1.79-fold greater risk of death (95% Confidence Interval [CI]: 1.37-2.33) than eligible patients. Very few patients had cardiac comorbidities, including 2% with low EF, 4% with prior CHF, and 5% with prior MI. In multivariable analysis, ineligibility was associated with decreased survival (Hazard ratio [HR] 1.44; 95% CI: 1.07-1.93). Allogeneic transplantation, performed in 150 patients (40%), was associated with improved survival (HR 0.66, 95% CI: 0.48-0.91). Therefore, standard eligibility characteristics identify a patient population with improved survival. Further treatment options are needed for patients considered ineligible for clinical trials.

Acute myeloid leukaemia in patients we judge as being older and/or unfit

The definition of older age in AML is arbitrary. In the context of the clinical studies, it starts with age ≥60 or ≥65 years and in recent years ≥70 or 75, depending on the selection of the studied population. In clinical practice, with older age, we often mean that the patient is unfit for intensive chemotherapy. Higher age overlaps with categories such as worse performance status, unfitness, comorbidities, poor-risk cytogenetics, adverse mutation patterns, age-related clonal haematopoiesis and specific disease ontogeny. Intensive induction therapy can result in prolonged overall survival, at least in a subset of elderly patients aged up to 75 years despite the reluctance of some physicians and patients to use treatment regimens perceived as toxic. Venetoclax and azacitidine combination is the new standard of comparison for persons unfit for intensive therapy. New oral hypomethylating agent CC-486 as maintenance therapy led to a prolonged overall survival in a randomized trial of patients ≥55 years of age who were in first complete remission, but not eligible for allogeneic stem cell transplantation. Any therapy is better than no therapy, but a substantial proportion of older patients still receive only palliative care. Making a decision for AML diagnosed in older age should be individualized and shared through the dialog with the patient and relatives or cohabitants, considering medical issues and social factors including personal goals. Although we are witnesses of the advances in basic research and therapy, we are still a very long way from curing older patients with AML.

The evolution of epigenetic therapy in myelodysplastic syndromes and acute myeloid leukemia

Mutations in the group of epigenetic modifiers are the largest group of mutated genes in Myelodysplastic Syndromes (MDS) and are very frequently found in Acute Myeloid Leukemia (AML). Our advancements in the understanding of epigenetics in these diseases have helped develop groundbreaking therapeutics that have changed the treatment landscape of MDS and AML, significantly improving outcomes. In this review we describe the most common epigenetic aberrations in MDS and AML, and current treatments that target mutations in epigenetic modifiers, as well as novel treatment combinations, from standard therapies to investigational treatments.

Current and emerging molecular and epigenetic disease entities in acute myeloid leukemia and a critical assessment of their therapeutic modalities

Acute myeloid leukemia (AML) is the most frequently diagnosed acute leukemia, and its incidence increases with age. Although the etiology of AML remains unknown, exposure to genotoxic agents or some prior hematologic disorders could lead to the development of this condition. The pathogenesis of AML involves the development of malignant transformation of hematopoietic stem cells that undergo successive genomic alterations, ultimately giving rise to a full-blown disease. From the disease biology perspective, AML is considered to be extremely complex with significant genetic, epigenetic, and phenotypic variations. Molecular and cytogenetic alterations in AML include mutations in those subsets of genes that are involved in normal cell proliferation, maturation and survival, thus posing significant challenge to targeting these pathways without attendant toxicity. In addition, multiple malignant cells co-exist in the majority of AML patients. Individual subclones are characterized by unique genetic and epigenetic abnormalities, which contribute to the differences in their response to treatment. As a result, despite a dramatic progress in our understanding of the pathobiology of AML, not much has changed in therapeutic approaches to treat AML in the past four decades. Dose and regimen modifications with improved supportive care have contributed to improved outcomes by reducing toxicity-related side effects. Several drug candidates are currently being developed, including targeted small-molecule inhibitors, cytotoxic chemotherapies, monoclonal antibodies and epigenetic drugs. This review summarizes the current state of affairs in the pathobiological and therapeutic aspects of AML.

Acute myeloid leukemia: 2021 update on risk-stratification and management

Management of AML involves choosing between purely palliative care, standard therapy and investigational therapy ("clinical trial"). Even most older patients likely benefit from treatment. Based on randomized trials CPX 351, midostaurin, gemtuzumab ozogamicin, and venetoclax, the latter three when combined with other drugs, should now be considered standard therapy. Knowledge of the likely results with these therapies is essential in deciding whether to recommend them or participate in a clinical trial, possibly including these drugs. Hence here, in the context of established prognostic algorithms, we review results with the recently- approved drugs compared with their predecessors and describe other potential options. We discuss benefit/risk ratios underlying the decision to offer allogeneic transplant and emphasize the importance of measurable residual disease. When first seeing a newly-diagnosed patient physicians must decide whether to offer conventional treatment or investigational therapy, the latter preferably in the context of a clinical trial. As noted below, such trials have led to changes in what today is considered "conventional" therapy compared to even 1-2 years ago. In older patients decision making has often included inquiring whether specific anti-AML therapy should be offered at all, rather than focusing on a purely palliative approach emphasizing transfusion and antibiotic support, with involvement of a palliative care specialist.

American Society of Hematology 2020 guidelines for treating newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia in older adults

BACKGROUND

Older adults with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) represent a vulnerable population in whom disease-based and clinical risk factors, patient goals, prognosis, and practitioner- and patient-perceived treatment risks and benefits influence treatment recommendations.

OBJECTIVE

These evidence-based guidelines of the American Society of Hematology (ASH) are intended to support patients, clinicians, and other health care professionals in their decisions about management of AML in older adults.

METHODS

ASH formed a multidisciplinary guideline panel that included specialists in myeloid leukemia, geriatric oncology, patient-reported outcomes and decision-making, frailty, epidemiology, and methodology, as well as patients. The McMaster Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) Centre supported the guideline-development process, including performing systematic evidence reviews (up to 24 May 2019). The panel prioritized clinical questions and outcomes according to their importance to patients, as judged by the panel. The panel used the GRADE approach, including GRADE's Evidence-to-Decision frameworks, to assess evidence and make recommendations, which were subject to public comment.

RESULTS

The panel agreed on 6 critical questions in managing older adults with AML, mirroring real-time practitioner-patient conversations: the decision to pursue antileukemic treatment vs best supportive management, the intensity of therapy, the role and duration of postremission therapy, combination vs monotherapy for induction and beyond, duration of less-intensive therapy, and the role of transfusion support for patients no longer receiving antileukemic therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment is recommended over best supportive management. More-intensive therapy is recommended over less-intensive therapy when deemed tolerable. However, these recommendations are guided by the principle that throughout a patient's disease course, optimal care involves ongoing discussions between clinicians and patients, continuously addressing goals of care and the relative risk-benefit balance of treatment.

Characteristics and outcomes of therapy-related myeloid neoplasms after peptide receptor radionuclide/chemoradionuclide therapy (PRRT/PRCRT) for metastatic neuroendocrine neoplasia: a single-institution series

PURPOSE

Peptide receptor radionuclide/chemoradionuclide therapy (PRRT/PRCRT) is an effective therapy for metastatic neuroendocrine neoplasia (NEN), but therapy-related myeloid neoplasms (t-MN) remain of concern. The study reviewed the clinicopathological features and outcomes of patients who developed t-MN.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of all patients diagnosed with t-MN by 2016 WHO classification, from a cohort of 521 patients who received PRRT/PRCRT over a 12-year period. Molecular next-generation sequencing using an in-house 26-gene panel was performed.

RESULTS

Twenty-five of 521 (4.8%) patients were diagnosed with t-MN, including six acute myeloid leukaemia (AML) and 19 myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS). The median time from first cycle PRRT/PRCRT to diagnosis of t-MN was 26 months (range 4-91). Twenty-two of 25 (88%) patients had grade 1-2 pancreatic or small bowel NEN with moderate metastatic liver burden. Six patients (24%) had prior chemotherapy. Median number of PRRT cycles = 5 (22/25 (88%) with concomitant radiosensitising chemotherapy). All 25 patients achieved disease stabilisation (68%) or partial response (32%) on RECIST 1.1 at 3 months post-PRRT. At t-MN diagnosis, all patients presented with thrombocytopenia (median nadir 33 × 10⁹/L, range 3-75) and 17 (68%) remained NEN progression-free. Marrow genetic analysis revealed unfavourable karyotype in 16/25 (66%) patients with tumour protein 53 (TP53) mutation in nine (36%). Azacitidine therapy was utilised in ten eligible patients, while four received induction chemotherapy for AML. The median overall survival from first PRRT was 62 months (19-94), but from t-MN diagnosis was only 13 months (1-56), with death due primarily to haematological disease progression.

CONCLUSIONS

The diagnosis of t-MN after PRRT/PRCRT is an infrequent but serious complication with poor overall survival. Most patients present with thrombocytopenia; unfavourable genetic mutations have a poor response to t-MN treatment. Prospective data are needed to explore potential pre-existing genetic factors and predictive biomarkers to minimise the risk of t-MN.

Management of myelodysplastic syndromes after failure of response to hypomethylating agents

Hypomethylating agents (HMAs) are the standard of care for patients with myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS). However, only around 50% of patients respond to these agents, and responses tend to be transient, with loss of response frequently happening within 2 years and being associated with very poor prognosis and limited therapeutic options. Identification of patients who will respond to HMAs is challenging. Mechanisms underlying resistance to HMAs are not clear yet. Recently, absence of response has been associated with increased cell-cycle quiescence among the hematopoietic progenitor cells. There are no standard-of-care options for patients after HMA failure. However, the increasing knowledge of MDS pathogenesis has led to the development of new potential therapies, including HMAs with longer half-life and exposure, inhibition of the antiapoptotic BCL2 protein with venetoclax or inhibition of immune-checkpoint regulatory proteins such as PD-1 or CTLA-4, innate immunity and targeting of CD33/CD3 with multiple monoclonal antibodies. In addition, multiple targeted agents are opening opportunities to treat subgroups of patients whose disease harbors mutations in TP53, IDH, FLT3, and genes involved in splicing machinery. Newer formulations of intensive chemotherapy and its different combinations may be considered a valid option in selected patients after HMA failure. Finally, decision making at the time of failure of response to HMAs should be personalized, taking into account that allogenic stem-cell transplantation remains the only therapeutic approach with curative potential in these patients. In the current review, we will focus on all the above aspects.

Histone Deacetylases (HDACs) Guided Novel Therapies for T-cell lymphomas

T-cell lymphomas are a heterogeneous group of cancers with different pathogenesis and poor prognosis. Histone deacetylases (HDACs) are epigenetic modifiers that modulate many key biological processes. In recent years, HDACs have been fully investigated for their roles and potential as drug targets in T-cell lymphomas. In this review, we have deciphered the modes of action of HDACs, HDAC inhibitors as single agents, and HDACs guided combination therapies in T-cell lymphomas. The overview of HDACs on the stage of T-cell lymphomas, and HDACs guided therapies both as single agents and combination regimens endow great opportunities for the cure of T-cell lymphomas.

A comparison of patients with acute myeloid leukemia and high-risk myelodysplastic syndrome treated on versus off study

Patients with newly diagnosed (ND) and relapsed/refractory (RR) acute myeloid leukemia (AML) and high-risk myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS, ≥10% blasts) often receive intensive chemotherapy at diagnosis and relapse. We retrospectively identified 365 patients and categorized the reasons for receiving treatment off study (medical, logistical, or unclear). The pretreatment characteristics of the on and off study groups were similar. Rates of the complete remission (CR) without measurable residual disease were significantly higher for ND patients treated on versus off study (61% versus 35%), but CR rates and survival were low for all RR patients regardless of study assignment. The subset of ND patients treated off study for medical reasons had significantly decreased overall survival and relapse-free survival. Standard, stringent study eligibility criteria may delineate a population of ND, but not RR, patients with improved outcomes with intensive induction chemotherapy.

Acute myeloid leukemia: 2019 update on risk-stratification and management

Outcome in patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) ranges from death within a few days of beginning treatment (treatment related mortality, TRM) to likely cure. The major reason patients are not cured is resistance to treatment, often manifested as relapse from remission, rather than, even in older patients, TRM, whose incidence is decreasing. Knowledge of the pre-treatment mutation status of various genes has improved our ability to assign initial treatment and, of particular importance, knowledge of whether patients ostensibly in remission have measurable residual disease should influence subsequent management. Several new drugs have been approved by the FDA and we discuss their role in treatment.

Therapy of older persons with acute myeloid leukaemia

Most persons age≥60 y with acute myeloid leukaemia (AML) die from their disease. When interpreting clinical trials data from these persons one must be aware of substantial selection biases. Randomized trials of post-remission treatments can be performed upfront or after achieving defined landmarks. Both strategies have important limitations. Selection of the appropriate treatment is critical. Age, performance score, co-morbidities and frailty provide useful data to treatment selection. If an intensive remission induction therapy is appropriate, therapy with cytarabine and an anthracycline is the most common regimen. Non-intensive therapies consist of the hypo-methylating drugs azacitidine and decitabine, low-dose cytarabine and supportive care. Feasibility of doing an allotransplant in older persons with AML is increasing. However, only very few qualify. Results of cytogenetic testing are risk factor in young and old persons with AML. Adverse abnormalities are more frequent in older persons. Although data about the frequency of mutations in older persons with AML is increasing their prognostic impact is less clear than in younger subjects. Neither differences in the distribution of cytogenetic risk, mutations, nor differences in clinical risk factors between younger and older persons with AML completely explain the age-dependent outcome. Many drugs are in clinical development in older persons with AML. Their potential role in the treatment of older persons with AML remains to be defined.