Cost-effectiveness of azacitidine and venetoclax in unfit patients with previously untreated acute myeloid leukemia

Homoharringtonine synergizes with venetoclax in early T cell progenitor acute lymphoblastic leukemia: Bench and bed

BACKGROUND

Early T cell precursor acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ETP-ALL) is a distinct subtype of T-ALL with a poor prognosis. To find a cure, we examined the synergistic effect of homoharringtonine (HHT) in combination with the BCL-2 inhibitor venetoclax (VEN) in ETP-ALL.

METHODS

Using in vitro cellular assays and ETP-ALL xenograft models, we first investigated the synergistic activity of HHT and VEN in ETP-ALL. Next, to explore the underlying mechanism, we employed single-cell RNA sequencing of primary ETP-ALL cells treated with HHT or VEN alone or in combination and validated the results with western blot assays. Based on the promising preclinical results and given that both drugs have been approved for clinical use, we then assessed this combination in clinical practice.

FINDINGS

Our results showed that HHT synergizes strongly with VEN both in vitro and in vivo in ETP-ALL. Mechanistic studies demonstrated that the HHT/VEN combination concurrently downregulated key anti-apoptotic proteins, i.e., MCL1, leading to enhanced apoptosis. Importantly, the clinical results were very promising. Six patients with ETP-ALL with either refractory/relapsed (R/R) or newly diagnosed disease were treated with an HHT/VEN-based regimen. All patients achieved complete remission (CR) after only one cycle of treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings demonstrate that a combination of HHT/VEN is effective on ETP-ALL and represents the "backbone" of a promising and safe regimen for newly diagnosed and R/R patients with ETP-ALL.

FUNDING

This work was funded by the National Cancer Institute, Gehr Family Foundation, George Hoag Family Foundation, National Natural Science Foundation of China, and Key Research and Development Program of Zhejiang Province of China.

Venetoclax with low-dose cytarabine, a forgotten combination in patients with acute myeloid leukemia ineligible for intensive chemotherapy: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Based on the VIALE-A and VIALE-C studies, the Food and Drug Administration approved venetoclax in 2020 in combination with azacitidine or low-dose cytarabine for the treatment of patients with acute myeloid leukemia ineligible for intensive chemotherapy. After the publication of these studies, venetoclax/azacitidine was assumed to be superior to venetoclax/low-dose cytarabine; however, these studies were not designed to demonstrate superiority between these combinations. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review to describe overall survival, complete remission rate, and composite complete remission rate to assess response of these two regimens in patients with newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia who are ineligible for intensive chemotherapy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The PubMed and Web of Science databases were searched for retrospective studies and complete remission, composite complete remission, and overall survival rates were recorded.

RESULTS

Only 11 of the 815 publications identified were eligible to be included n this review, ten studies evaluated the venetoclax/azacitidine combination and one study evaluated the venetoclax/low-dose cytarabine combination. The median overall survival for venetoclax/azacitidine was 10.75 months, whereas for venetoclax/low-dose cytarabine the median overall survival had not been reached at the time of publication. Composite complete remission was 63.3 % for venetoclax/azacitidine and 90 % for venetoclax/low-dose cytarabine. Adverse events were similar for both combinations.

CONCLUSIONS

A limited number of studies investigating the venetoclax/low-dose cytarabine combination exist. Based on the available data, the superiority of venetoclax/azacitidine over venetoclax/low-dose cytarabine cannot be assumed for all acute myeloid leukemia patients who are ineligible for intensive chemotherapy. Venetoclax/low-dose cytarabine can still be considered as an option for the drug combinations currently under investigation.

Cost-effectiveness of Enasidenib versus conventional care for older patients with IDH2-mutant refractory/relapsed AML

In the randomized phase III IDHENTIFY trial, the IDH2 inhibitor enasidenib (ENA) showed improvement in event-free but not overall survival compared with conventional care regimens (CCR) among patients with relapsed/refractory (R/R), IDH2-mutant AML. We constructed a partitioned survival model to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of enasidenib for the treatment of older patients with R/R, and IDH2-mutant AML. In the base-case scenario, ENA exhibited an incremental effectiveness of 0.234quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) compared to CCR, and an incremental cost of $126,800, leading to an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $540,300/QALY(95% CI: $197,800-$4,777,000/QALY). In probabilistic sensitivity analysis, CCR was favored in 99.8% of simulations. The cost of ENA would need to be decreased by 72% to be cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $150,000/QALY. Our findings suggest that ENA is unlikely to be a cost-effective treatment for older patients with IDH2-mutant R/R AML under current pricing.

Outcomes of acute myeloid leukemia patients who responded to venetoclax and azacitidine and stopped treatment

Venetoclax-azacitidine is the standard of treatment for unfit acute myeloid leukemia patients. In the VIALE-A study, treatment was given until progression but there are no data on its optimal duration for responding patients who do not tolerate indefinite therapy. We retrospectively analyzed the outcome of patients who discontinued venetoclax or venetoclax-azacitidine due to poor tolerance. Sixty-two newly diagnosed (ND) AML patients and 22 patients with morphological relapse or refractory AML were included. In the ND cohort (n = 62), 28 patients stopped venetoclax and azacitidine and 34 patients continued azacitidine monotherapy. With a median follow-up of 23 months (IQR, 20-32), median overall survival and treatment-free survival were 44 (IQR, 16-NR) and 16 (IQR, 8-27) months, respectively. Patients who stopped both treatments and those who continued azacitidine monotherapy had the same outcomes. Negative minimal residual disease was associated with a 2-year treatment-free survival of 80%. In the RR cohort (n = 22), median overall survival and treatment-free survival were 19 (IQR, 17-31) and 10 (IQR, 5-NR) months, respectively. Prior number of venetoclax-azacitidine cycles and IDH mutations were associated with increased overall survival. The only factor significantly impacting treatment-free survival was the number of prior cycles. This study suggests that patients who discontinued treatment in remission have favorable outcomes supporting the rationale for prospective controlled trials.

Cost-effectiveness of adding quizartinib to induction chemotherapy for patients with FLT3-mutant acute myeloid leukemia

The FLT3 inhibitor quizartinib has been shown to improve overall survival when added to intensive induction chemotherapy ("7 + 3") in patients 18-75 years old with newly diagnosed AML harboring a FLT3-ITD mutation. However, the health economic implications of this approval are unknown. We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of quizartinib using a partitioned survival analysis model. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted. In the base case scenario, the addition of quizartinib to 7 + 3 resulted in incremental costs of $289,932 compared with 7 + 3 alone. With an incremental gain of 0.84 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) with quizartinib + 7 + 3 induction vs. 7 + 3 alone, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for the addition of quizartinib to standard 7 + 3 was $344,039/QALY. Only an 87% reduction in the average wholesale price of quizartinib or omitting quizartinib continuation therapy after completion of consolidation therapy and allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant would make quizartinib a cost-effective option.

Metformin synergizes with gilteritinib in treating FLT3-mutated leukemia via targeting PLK1 signaling

Fms-like tyrosine kinase 3 (FLT3) mutations, present in over 30% of acute myeloid leukemia (AML) cases and dominated by FLT3-internal tandem duplication (FLT3-ITD), are associated with poor outcomes in patients with AML. While tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs; e.g., gilteritinib) are effective, they face challenges such as drug resistance, relapse, and high costs. Here, we report that metformin, a cheap, safe, and widely used anti-diabetic agent, exhibits a striking synergistic effect with gilteritinib in treating FLT3-ITD AML. Metformin significantly sensitizes FLT3-ITD AML cells (including TKI-resistant ones) to gilteritinib. Metformin plus gilteritinib (low dose) dramatically suppresses leukemia progression and prolongs survival in FLT3-ITD AML mouse models. Mechanistically, the combinational treatment cooperatively suppresses polo-like kinase 1 (PLK1) expression and phosphorylation of FLT3/STAT5/ERK/mTOR. Clinical analysis also shows improved survival rates in patients with FLT3-ITD AML taking metformin. Thus, the metformin/gilteritinib combination represents a promising and cost-effective treatment for patients with FLT3-mutated AML, particularly for those with low income/affordability.

A Markov analysis of azacitidine and venetoclax vs induction chemotherapy for medically fit patients with AML

ABSTRACT

Although induction chemotherapy (IC) is the standard of care in medically fit patients with newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia (AML), limited retrospective data indicate that patients at adverse-risk may benefit from azacytidine and venetoclax (aza-ven). Our goal was to perform a Markov decision analysis to determine whether IC or aza-ven is the optimal induction regimen in this population. Using the TreeAge software, Markov models were created for adverse-risk and intermediate-risk cohorts. A systematic review of the literature informed the transition probabilities and utilities included in the analyses. Our primary outcome was quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained over 5 years after diagnosis. Overall, patients at adverse risk treated with IC gained 1.4 QALYs, compared with 2.0 QALYs in patients treated with aza-ven. Patients at adverse risk treated with IC and allogeneic stem cell transplantation (allo-SCT), IC, aza-ven and allo-SCT, or aza-ven gained 2.1, 1.5, 3.0, and 1.9 QALYs, respectively. Meanwhile, patients at intermediate risk treated with IC gained 2.0 QALY, compared with 1.7 QALY in patients treated with aza-ven. Patients at intermediate risk treated with IC and allo-SCT, IC, aza-ven and allo-SCT, and aza-ven gained 2.7, 2.3, 2.6, and 1.8 QALYs, respectively. We have demonstrated that medically fit patients with newly diagnosed adverse-risk AML may benefit from treatment with aza-ven over those treated with IC, whereas IC remains the preferred approach for patients at intermediate risk. Our work challenges the use of the European LeukemiaNet risk classification for patients treated with aza-ven and highlights the need for prospective investigation into aza-ven as induction therapy for medically fit patients.

Budget impact analysis of venetoclax for the management of acute myeloid leukemia from the perspective of the social security and the private sector in Argentina

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to estimate the budget impact of the incorporation of venetoclax for the treatment of patients with Acute Myeloid Leukemia (AML) over 75 years of age or those with comorbidities and contraindications for the use of intensive chemotherapy, from the perspective of the social security and the private third-party payers in Argentina.

METHODS

A budget impact model was adapted to estimate the cost difference between the current scenario (azacitidine, decitabine and low doses of cytarabine) and the new scenario (incorporation of venetoclax) for a third-party payer over a time horizon of three years. Input parameters were obtained from a literature review, validated or complemented by expert opinion using a modified Panel Delphi approach. All direct medical costs were estimated by the micro-costing approach and were expressed in US dollars (USD) as of September 2020 (1 USD = 76.18 Argentine pesos).

RESULTS

For a third-party payer with a cohort of 1,000,000 individuals covered, incorporating venetoclax was associated with an average budget impact per-member per-month (PMPM) of $0.11 USD for the social security sector and $0.07 USD for the private sector. The duration of treatment with venetoclax was the most influential parameter in the budget impact results.

CONCLUSION

The introduction of venetoclax was associated with a positive and slight budget impact. These findings are informative to support policy decisions aimed to expand the current treatment landscape of AML.

Selinexor Synergistically Promotes the Antileukemia Activity of Venetoclax in Acute Myeloid Leukemia by Inhibiting Glycolytic Function and Downregulating the Expression of DNA Replication Genes

Introduction

The BCL-2 inhibitor venetoclax has been widely used in the treatment of acute myeloid leukemia (AML); however, AML patients treated with venetoclax gradually develop resistance. The exportin-1 (XPO1) inhibitor selinexor can synergistically promote the antileukemia activity of venetoclax, but the mechanism remains unclear.

Methods and Results

Annexin V/7-aminoactinomycin D assays were used to examine the effects of a combination of venetoclax and selinexor (VEN+SEL) on AML cell lines and primary AML cells. RNA sequencing and oxygen consumption rate (OCR) and extracellular acidification rate (ECAR) determinations by a Seahorse XF analyzer were employed to investigate the molecular mechanism of the toxicity of the VEN+SEL combination to AML cells. The cytotoxicity of NK cell combined with VEN+SEL combination was assessed in vitro using flow cytometry. VEN+SEL enhanced the apoptosis of AML cells (KG-1A and THP-1) and primary AML samples in vitro. The ECAR and OCR results demonstrated that the VEN+SEL combination significantly inhibited glycolytic function. RNA sequencing of THP-1 cells demonstrated that DNA replication-related genes were downregulated after treatment with the VEN+SEL combination.

Conclusion

This study indicated that selinexor can synergistically enhance the antileukemia activity of venetoclax in AML cells in vitro by inhibiting glycolytic function and downregulating DNA replication-related genes. Based on our experimental data, combining selinexor with venetoclax is an appropriate advanced treatment option for AML patients.

Cost-effectiveness of human T-cell leukemia virus type 1 (HTLV-1) antenatal screening for prevention of mother-to-child transmission

BACKGROUND

Human T-cell leukemia virus type 1 (HTLV-1) causes adult T-cell leukemia-lymphoma (ATL) and HTLV-1-associated myelopathy-tropical spastic paraparesis (HAM/TSP) with a poor prognosis. This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness and health impact of HTLV-1 antenatal screening.

METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

A state-transition model was developed for HTLV-1 antenatal screening and no screening over a lifetime horizon from a healthcare payer perspective. A hypothetical cohort of 30-year-old individuals was targeted. The main outcomes were costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), life expectancy life-years (LYs), incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs), HTLV-1 carriers, ATL cases, HAM/TSP cases, ATL-associated deaths, and HAM/TSP-associated deaths. The willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold was set at US$50,000 per QALY gained. In the base-case analysis, HTLV-1 antenatal screening (US$76.85, 24.94766 QALYs, 24.94813 LYs, ICER; US$40,100 per QALY gained) was cost-effective compared with no screening (US$2.18, 24.94580 QALYs, 24.94807 LYs). Cost-effectiveness was sensitive to the maternal HTLV-1 seropositivity rate, HTLV-1 transmission rate with long-term breastfeeding from HTLV-1 seropositive mothers to children, and the cost of the HTLV-1 antibody test. HTLV-1 antenatal screening was cost-effective when the maternal HTLV-1 seropositivity rate was greater than 0.0022 and the cost of the HTLV-1 antibody test was lower than US$94.8. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis using a second-order Monte-Carlo simulation showed that HTLV-1 antenatal screening was 81.1% cost-effective at a WTP threshold of US$50,000 per QALY gained. For 10,517,942 individuals born between 2011 and 2021, HTLV-1 antenatal screening costs US$785 million, increases19,586 QALYs and 631 LYs, and prevents 125,421 HTLV-1 carriers, 4,405 ATL cases, 3,035 ATL-associated deaths, 67 HAM/TSP cases, and 60 HAM/TSP-associated deaths, compared with no screening over a lifetime.

CONCLUSION/SIGNIFICANCE

HTLV-1 antenatal screening is cost-effective and has the potential to reduce ATL and HAM/TSP morbidity and mortality in Japan. The findings strongly support the recommendation for HTLV-1 antenatal screening as a national infection control policy in HTLV-1 high-prevalence countries.

Cost-effectiveness of azacitidine and ivosidenib in newly diagnosed older, intensive chemotherapy-ineligible patients with IDH1-mutant acute myeloid leukemia

Ivosidenib + azacitidine (IVO/AZA) is approved in the United States for newly diagnosed, older or intensive chemotherapy-ineligible patients with IDH1-mutated acute myeloid leukemia. We created a partitioned survival analysis model to evaluate the health economic implications of this approval. Model outputs were used to calculate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of IVO/AZA versus AZA. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted. In the base case scenario, IVO/AZA and AZA resulted in life-time costs of $403,062 and $161,887, respectively. With an incremental gain of 0.95 QALYs, the ICER of IVO/AZA was $252,782/QALY. In sensitivity analyses, only a reduction in the price of IVO by 59.3% lowered the ICER to below $150,000/QALY and 99.95% of model calculations yielded ICERs of >$150,000/QALY. In a model in which all patients received IVO monotherapy after progression on AZA monotherapy, the ICER was $155,453/QALY and various model inputs that would make IVO/AZA cost-effective were identified.

Mechanisms of venetoclax resistance and solutions

The BCL-2 inhibitor venetoclax is currently approved for treatment of hematologic diseases and is widely used either as monotherapy or in combination strategies. It has produced promising results in the treatment of refractory or relapsed (R/R) and aged malignant hematologic diseases. However, with clinical use, resistance to venetoclax has emerged. We review the mechanism of reduced dependence on BCL-2 mediated by the upregulation of antiapoptotic proteins other than BCL-2, such as MCL-1 and BCL-XL, which is the primary mechanism of venetoclax resistance, and find that this mechanism is achieved through different pathways in different hematologic diseases. Additionally, this paper also summarizes the current investigations of the mechanisms of venetoclax resistance in terms of altered cellular metabolism, changes in the mitochondrial structure, altered or modified BCL-2 binding domains, and some other aspects; this article also reviews relevant strategies to address these resistance mechanisms.

Venetoclax in Combination with Azacitidine for the Treatment of Newly Diagnosed Acute Myeloid Leukemia: A Canadian Cost-Utility Analysis

Treatment for acute myeloid leukemia (AML) typically involves intensive chemotherapy (IC); however, there is an unmet need for approximately 50% of AML patients who are deemed unfit or ineligible for IC. The purpose of this study was to evaluate, from a Canadian perspective, the economic impact of venetoclax in combination with azacitidine (Ven+Aza) for the treatment of patients with newly diagnosed AML who are 75 years or older or who have comorbidities that preclude using IC. A lifetime partitioned survival model was developed to assess the cost-effectiveness of Ven+Aza compared with Aza. Health states included event-free survival, progressive/relapsed disease, and death. Efficacy parameters were based on the VIALE-A trial. Analyses were conducted from Ministry of Health (MoH) and societal perspectives. Over a lifetime horizon, Ven+Aza was associated with a gain of 1.65 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) compared with Aza. From an MoH perspective, Ven+Aza and Aza were associated with total costs of $204,305 and $82,333, respectively, resulting in an incremental cost-utility ratio of $73,841/QALY. Results were similar from a societal perspective. This economic evaluation demonstrates that, in comparison with Aza, Ven+Aza is a cost-effective strategy for the treatment of patients with newly diagnosed AML who are deemed unfit for IC.

The successful combination of grapefruit juice and venetoclax in an unfit acute myeloid leukemia patient with adverse risk: A case report

Venetoclax combined with hypomethylating agents such as azacitidine and decitabine is the standard regime for the elderly patient with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) unfit for intensive induction therapy. However, many patients struggle with finances and forgo treatments due to the high costs of venetoclax. In this study, we performed the regime with azacitidine, low-dose venetoclax, and grapefruit juice on an unfit AML patient with TP53 mutation. The peak venetoclax concentration (Cmax) and side effects on the patient were also monitored. The patient achieved complete remission with the venetoclax Cmax within the effective concentration range (1,000–3,000 ng/ml) and maintained durable remission until recently. Febrile neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, and pneumonia appeared during the first cycle and were recovered by stimulating agents and antibiotic treatment. This improvement combination approach by drug-food interaction may enlighten other similarly patients with AML, especially those in low-middle income countries.

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Venetoclax in Combination with Azacitidine Versus Azacitidine Monotherapy in Patients with Acute Myeloid Leukemia Who are Ineligible for Intensive Chemotherapy: From a US Third Party Payer Perspective

OBJECTIVES

Using individual patient-level data from the phase 3 VIALE-A trial, this study assessed the cost-effectiveness of venetoclax in combination with azacitidine compared with azacitidine monotherapy for patients newly diagnosed with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) who are ineligible for intensive chemotherapy, from a United States (US) third-party payer perspective.

METHODS

A partitioned survival model with a 28-day cycle and three health states (event-free survival (EFS), progressive/relapsed disease, and death) was developed to estimate costs and effectiveness of venetoclax + azacitidine versus azacitidine over a lifetime (25-year) horizon. Efficacy inputs (overall survival (OS), EFS, and complete remission (CR)/CR with incomplete marrow recovery (CRi) rate) were estimated using VIALE-A data. Best-fit parametric models per Akaike Information Criterion were used to extrapolate OS until reaching EFS and extrapolate EFS until Year 5. Within EFS, the time spent in CR/CRi was estimated by applying the CR/CRi rate to the EFS curve. Past Year 5, patients still in EFS were considered cured and to have the same mortality as the US general population. Mean time on treatment (ToT) for both regimens was based on the time observed in VIALE-A. Costs of drug acquisition, drug administration (initial and subsequent treatments), subsequent stem cell transplant procedures, adverse events (AEs), and healthcare resource utilization (HRU) associated with health states were obtained from the literature/public data and inflated to 2021 US dollars. Health state utilities were estimated using EuroQol-5 dimension-5 level data from VIALE-A; AE disutilities were obtained from the literature. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) per life-year (LY) and quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained were estimated. Deterministic sensitivity analyses (DSA), scenario analyses, and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSA) were also performed.

RESULTS

Over a lifetime horizon, venetoclax + azacitidine versus azacitidine led to gains of 1.89 LYs (2.99 vs. 1.10, respectively) and 1.45 QALYs (2.30 vs. 0.84, respectively). Patients receiving venetoclax + azacitidine incurred higher total lifetime costs ($250,486 vs. $110,034 (azacitidine)). The ICERs for venetoclax + azacitidine versus azacitidine were estimated at $74,141 per LY and $96,579 per QALY gained. Results from the DSA and scenario analyses supported the base-case findings, with ICERs ranging from $60,718 to $138,554 per QALY gained. The results were most sensitive to varying the parameters for the venetoclax + azacitidine base-case EFS parametric function (Gompertz), followed by alternative approaches for ToT estimation, treatment costs of venetoclax + azacitidine, standard mortality rate value and ToT estimation, alternative sources to inform HRU, different cure modeling assumptions, and the parameters for the venetoclax + azacitidine base-case OS parametric function (log-normal). Results from the PSA showed that, compared with azacitidine, venetoclax + azacitidine was cost-effective in 99.9% of cases at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $150,000 per QALY.

CONCLUSIONS

This analysis suggests that venetoclax + azacitidine offers a cost-effective strategy in the treatment of patients with newly diagnosed AML who are ineligible for intensive chemotherapy from a US third-party payer perspective.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02993523. Date of registration: 15 December 2016.

Treatment-free remission after ceasing venetoclax-based therapy in patients with acute myeloid leukemia

The clinical benefit of adding venetoclax (VEN) to hypomethylating agents or low dose cytarabine in older and/or unfit patients with newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia (AML) has been confirmed in phase 3 studies. With the increased uptake of VEN-based therapies for patients with AML, a pertinent question is whether treatment can be safely ceased among patients who have achieved sustained remission. We hypothesized that a proportion of patients opting to cease therapy may benefit from a treatment-free remission (TFR) period without indefinite treatment. We report the retrospective outcomes of 29 patients in remission for a minimum of 12 months on VEN-based therapy, with 55% continuing therapy (CONT) until disease progression and the 45% electively ceasing treatment (STOP). With follow up exceeding 5 years, we observed a median TFR lasting 45.8 months among the STOP cohort, with >50% of patients still in sustained remission at the data cut-off. The risk of relapse and duration of relapse-free and overall survival were similar between the two cohorts. Factors favoring sustained TFR within the cohort included NPM1 and/or IDH2 mutation at diagnosis, complete remission without measurable residual disease, and at least 12 months of VEN-based combination therapy prior to treatment cessation.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of azacitidine maintenance therapy in patients with acute myeloid leukemia

BACKGROUND

The QUAZAR AML-001 trial (NCT01757535) showed survival benefits with the maintenance treatment of oral azacitidine(CC-486) for acute myeloid leukemia(AML) in first complete remission. We conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis to explore the costs and benefits of oral azacitidine in AML from the perspective of payers in the United States.

METHODS

We constructed a Markov model to evaluate the economic value of oral azacitidine. The model was conducted with a 10-year time horizon. The health utility scores and until prices of medical costs were acquired from previous studies and GoodRX. The transition probabilities were derived from the survival curves of the QUAZAR AML-001 study. Outcomes were measured in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER).

RESULTS

Compared with placebo, oral azacitidine improved 0.39 QALY, with an increasing cost of $458928.66. The ICER of oral azacitidine is $1176740.15, higher than the willingness to pay (P < 0.05). Deterministic sensitivity analysis showed that the price of oral azacitidine has a significant impact on ICERs (P < 0.05). Probability sensitivity analysis showed that the probability of cost-effectiveness for oral azacitidine is 0.

CONCLUSION

In the United States, oral azacitidine is unlikely to be cost-effective for AML patients at current prices.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

The trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (CT.gov identifier: NCT01757535).

Venetoclax-based combinations for acute myeloid leukemia: optimizing their use in Latin-America

Objectives: Venetoclax combinations are a new standard for patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML). We aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of these combinations in a period of accelerated approval in Latin-America.Methods: This observational study evaluated adults with acute myeloid leukemia who received venetoclax-based therapy in 11 public or private centers in Mexico and Peru for both newly diagnosed or relapsed and refractory AML.Results: Fifty patients were included; 28 with newly diagnosed (ND) AML and 22 with relapsed/refractory (RR) disease. ND patients were older (64 vs. 40 years; p < 0.001) with a lower functional capacity (ECOG ≥2 64.3% vs 9%; p < 0.001). Venetoclax was frequently combined with azacytidine (60%) and prophylactic azoles (82%) with a median maximum dose of 200 mg (range, 100-600 mg). Hematologic toxicities were common. Complete response rates including patients with incomplete hematopoietic recovery were 78.6% in ND and 45.5% in RR patients, with a median overall survival of 9.6 (95% CI 3.7-15.5) and 8 months (95% CI 4.8-11.2).Discussion: Our study showed a preferred use of venetoclax plus azacytidine over cyatrabine. Patients in the first-line setting were similar to those in the landmark studies, while most patients with relapsed disease had received prior intensive therapies. Responses were favorable, with a median survival in agreement to other reports, albeit shorter than that observed in the randomized phase-3 trials.Conclusion: Venetoclax-based therapy in AML was effective despite dose reductions and prophylactic antifungals in two middle-income countries outside of a clinical trial setting.

TERT genetic variability and telomere length as factors affecting survival and risk in acute myeloid leukaemia

Acute myeloid leukaemia (AML) is a neoplasm of immature myeloid cells characterized by various cytogenetic alterations. The present study showed that in addition to the FLT3-ITD and NPM1 mutation status, telomere length (TL) and telomerase reverse transcriptase (TERT) gene polymorphisms may affect risk and overall survival (OS) in AML. TL was longer in healthy controls than in AML patients and positively correlated with age in the patients, but not in healthy subjects. TL was found to be independently affected by the presence of the FLT3-ITD mutation. As for the TERT gene polymorphism, AML patients with the TERT rs2853669 CC genotype were characterized by significantly shorter OS than patients carrying the T allele. Another observation in our study is the difference in TL and OS in patients belonging to various risk stratification groups related to the FLT3-ITD and NPM1 mutation status. Patients with adverse risk classification (mutation in FLT3-ITD and lack of mutation in NPM1) presented with the shortest telomeres and significantly worse OS. In conclusion, OS of AML patients appears to be affected by TERT gene variability and TL in addition to other well-established factors such as age, WBC count, or FLT3-ITD and NPM1 mutation status.

Evolving Therapeutic Approaches for Older Patients with Acute Myeloid Leukemia in 2021

Simple Summary

The better understanding of disease biology, the availability of new effective drugs and the increased awareness of patients’ heterogeneity in terms of fitness and personal expectations has made the current treatment paradigm of AML in the elderly very challenging. Here, we discuss the evolving criteria used to define eligibility for induction chemotherapy and transplantation, the introduction of new agents in the treatment of patients with very different clinical conditions, the implications of precision medicine and the importance of quality of life and supportive care, proposing a simplified algorithm that we follow in 2021.

Abstract

Acute myeloid leukemia (AML) in older patients is characterized by unfavorable prognosis due to adverse disease features and a high rate of treatment-related complications. Classical therapeutic options range from intensive chemotherapy in fit patients, potentially followed by allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (allo-HCT), to hypomethylating agents or palliative care alone for unfit/frail ones. In the era of precision medicine, the treatment paradigm of AML is rapidly changing. On the one hand, a plethora of new targeted drugs with good tolerability profiles are becoming available, offering the possibility to achieve a prolonged remission to many patients not otherwise eligible for more intensive therapies. On the other hand, better tools to assess patients’ fitness and improvements in the selection and management of those undergoing allo-HCT will hopefully reduce treatment-related mortality and complications. Importantly, a detailed genetic characterization of AML has become of paramount importance to choose the best therapeutic option in both intensively treated and unfit patients. Finally, improving supportive care and quality of life is of major importance in this age group, especially for the minority of patients that are still candidates for palliative care because of very poor clinical conditions or unwillingness to receive active treatments. In the present review, we discuss the evolving approaches in the treatment of older AML patients, which is becoming increasingly challenging following the advent of new effective drugs for a very heterogeneous and complex population.