Azacytidine for acute myeloid leukemia in elderly or frail patients: a phase II trial (SAKK 30/07)

Treatment regimens in patients over 64 years with acute myeloid leukaemia: a retrospective single-institution, multi-site analysis

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study is to investigate the effect of treatment choice on survival, transfusion needs and hospitalizations in patients > 64 years old with newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukaemia (AML).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This study retrospectively analysed patients over 64 years with AML diagnosed at a regional healthcare network in Switzerland between 2017 and 2020. Patients underwent four therapy groups: intensive chemotherapy (IC), hypomethylating agent in combination with the BCL2-Inhibitor venetoclax (HMA + VEN), hypomethylating agents alone (HMA) or best supportive care (BSC).

RESULTS

Of 54 patients 12 (22%) were selected for IC, 13 (24%) for HMA + VEN, 17 (32%) for HMA and 12 (22%) for BSC. The median overall survival of the patients was 76 days, with a significant difference in the four therapy groups (IC 119 days, HMA + VEN 732 days, HMA monotherapy 73 days and BSC 12 days Log-Rank Test Chi2(2): p < 0.001). Patients with HMA + VEN spent significantly less time in the hospital 6.8 days/month compared to IC (19.5 days/month), HMA (20.5 days/month) and BSC (10.5 days/month) (p = 0.005). Transfusion needs were the highest in IC (7.0 RBC/month, 8.0 PC/month) (p = 0.023), whereas there was no difference between HMA + VEN (2.5 RBC/month, 3.2 PC/month), HMA monotherapy (5.3 RBC/month, 6.2 PC/month) and BSC (3.0 RBC/month, 1.4 PC/month).

CONCLUSION

Our real-world data demonstrate superior OS rates of HMA + VEN when compared to IC, HMC or BSC, with a favourable side effect profile with regard to transfusion needs or hospitalization days.

Abbreviations: AML, acute myeloid leukaemia; BCL2, B-cell leukaemia/lymphoma-2; BSC, best supportive care; CR, complete response; Cri, complete response with incomplete haematologic regeneration; FLT3, Fms Related Receptor Tyrosine Kinase 3; EKOS, Ethikkomission Ostschweiz; ELN, European Leukaemia Net; HMA, hypomethylating agent; IC, intensive chemotherapy; IDH, Isocitratdehydrogenase; LDAC, low-dose Cytarabine; NCCN, National Comprehensive Cancer Network; OS, overall survival; PC, platelet concentrate; RBC, red blood cell; RCT, randomized controlled trials; t-AML, therapy relative acute myeloid leukaemia'; VEN, venetoclax.

Use of Azacitidine or Decitabine for the Up-Front Setting in Acute Myeloid Leukaemia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Simple Summary

Azacitidine and decitabine have been increasingly used for the treatment of acute myeloid leukaemia in older patients. The choice between azacitidine and decitabine depends mostly on the experience and preference of the attending physician, since they have not been compared directly in a randomised clinical trial. In this study, we identified the best treatment regimen for each drug and compare the efficacy of decitabine and azacitidine monotherapy in newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukaemia. We found no significant differences regarding 1-year mortality and overall survival for azacitidine and decitabine (roughly 9 months). Moreover, there were no significant differences in the efficacy of 5-day versus 10-day schedules of decitabine. However, patients treated with the shortened 5-day azacitidine scheme showed worsened outcomes compared to the standard 7-day regimen. Hopefully, our results might be helpful for the design of azacitidine/decitabine-based combination schedules to be tested in future trials.

Abstract

Irruption of decitabine and azacitidine has led to profound changes in the upfront management of older acute myeloid leukaemia (AML). However, they have not been directly compared in a randomised clinical trial. In addition, there are no studies comparing the optimal treatment schedule of each drug in AML. A systematic review and meta-analysis on the efficacy of decitabine and azacitidine monotherapy in newly diagnosed AML was conducted. Randomised controlled trials and retrospective studies were included. A total of 2743 patients from 23 cohorts were analysed (10 cohorts of azacitidine and 13 of decitabine). Similar response rates were observed for azacitidine (38%, 95% CI: 30–47%) compared to decitabine (40%, 95% CI: 32–48%) (p = 0.825). Overall survival (OS) between azacitidine (10.04 months, 95% CI: 8.36–11.72) and decitabine (8.79 months, 95% CI: 7.62–9.96) was also similar (p = 0.386). Patients treated with azacitidine showed a lower median OS when azacitidine was administered for 5 days (6.28 months, 95% CI: 4.23–8.32) compared to the standard 7-day schedule (10.83 months, 95% CI: 9.07–12.59, p = 0.002). Among patients treated with decitabine, response rates and OS were not significantly different between 5-day and 10-day decitabine regimens. Despite heterogeneity between studies, we found no differences in response rates and OS in AML patients treated with azacitidine or decitabine.

Effects of all-trans retinoic acid (ATRA) in addition to chemotherapy for adults with acute myeloid leukaemia (AML) (non-acute promyelocytic leukaemia (non-APL))

BACKGROUND

Acute myeloid leukaemia (AML) is the most common acute leukaemia affecting adults. Most patients diagnosed with AML are at advanced age and present with co-morbidities, so that intensive therapy such as stem cell transplantation (SCT) is impossible to provide or is accompanied by high risks for serious adverse events and treatment-related mortality. Especially for these patients, it is necessary to find out whether all-trans retinoic acid (ATRA), an intermediate of vitamin A inducing terminal differentiation of leukaemic cell lines, added to chemotherapy confers increased benefit or harm when compared with the same chemotherapy alone.

OBJECTIVES

This review aims to determine benefits and harms of ATRA in addition to chemotherapy compared to chemotherapy alone for adults with AML (not those with acute promyelocytic leukaemia (non-APL)).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, study registries and relevant conference proceedings up to July 2018 for randomised controlled trials (RCTs). We also contacted experts for unpublished data.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included RCTs comparing chemotherapy alone with chemotherapy plus ATRA in patients with all stages of AML. We excluded trials if less than 80% of participants were adults or participants with AML, and if no subgroup data were available. Patients with myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) were included, if they had a refractory anaemia and more than 20% of blasts.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed the quality of trials. We contacted study authors to obtain missing information. We used hazard ratios (HR) for overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS; instead of the pre-planned event-free survival, as this outcome was not reported), and we calculated risk ratios (RR) for the other outcomes quality of life, on-study mortality and adverse events. We presented all measures with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We assessed the certainty of evidence using GRADE methods.

MAIN RESULTS

Our search resulted in 2192 potentially relevant references, of which we included eight trials with 28 publications assessing 3998 patients. Overall, we judged the potential risk of bias of the eight included trials as moderate. Two of eight trials were published as abstracts only. All the included trials used different chemotherapy schedules and one trial only evaluated the effect of the hypomethylating agent decitabine, a drug know to affect epigenetics, in combination with ATRA.The addition of ATRA to chemotherapy resulted in probably little or no difference in OS compared to chemotherapy only (2985 participants; HR 0.94 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.87 to 1.02); moderate-certainty evidence). Based on a mortality rate at 24 months of 70% with chemotherapy alone, the mortality rate with chemotherapy plus ATRA was 68% (95% CI 65% to 71%).For DFS, complete response rate (CRR) and on-study mortality there was probably little or no difference between treatment groups (DFS: 1258 participants, HR 0.99, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.12; CRR: 3081 participants, RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.09; on-study mortality: 2839 participants, RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.30, all moderate-certainty evidence).Three trials with 1428 participants reported the adverse events 'infection' and 'cardiac toxicity': There was probably no, or little difference in terms of infection rate between participants receiving ATRA or not (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.15; moderate-certainty evidence). We are uncertain whether ATRA decreases cardiac toxicity (RR 0.46, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.90; P = 0.02, very low certainty-evidence, however, cardiac toxicity was low).Rates and severity of diarrhoea and nausea/vomiting were assessed in two trials with 337 patients and we are uncertain whether there is a difference between treatment arms (diarrhoea: RR 2.19, 95% CI 1.07 to 4.47; nausea/vomiting: RR 1.46, 95% CI 0.75 to 2.85; both very low-certainty evidence).Quality of life was not reported by any of the included trials.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found no evidence for a difference between participants receiving ATRA in addition to chemotherapy or chemotherapy only for the outcome OS. Regarding DFS, CRR and on-study mortality, there is probably no evidence for a difference between treatment groups. Currently, it seems the risk of adverse events are comparable to chemotherapy only.As quality of life has not been evaluated in any of the included trials, further research is needed to clarify the effect of ATRA on quality of life.

Systematic review of azacitidine regimens in myelodysplastic syndrome and acute myeloid leukemia

Background

5-Azacitidine administered as a 7-day dosing regimen (7–0-0) is approved in high risk IPSS myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) patients. Alternative regimens such as a 5-day (5–0-0) or 7-day with a weekend break (5–2-2) are commonly used. No randomized controlled trial has been done directly comparing all three dosing regimens. The objective of this study was to compare the efficacies of the 5–0-0, 5–2-2, and 7–0-0 regimens in MDS and AML.

Methods

A systematic review was conducted using MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL. Eligible studies were randomized controlled trials (RCTs), observational prospective and retrospective studies. The primary clinical outcomes were Objective Response Rate (ORR) defined as the sum of complete response (CR), partial response (PR), and hematological improvement (HI) as defined by the IWG 2006 criteria. A meta-analysis of simple proportions was conducted using a random effects model with weights defined according to Laird and Mosteller. Comparisons between groups were not attempted due to the heterogeneity of study designs.

Results

The only RCT directly comparing alternative azacitidine regimens showed no difference in ORR between the 5–0-0 and 5–2-2 regimens. All other RCTs compared a dosing regimen to conventional care. The pooled proportion of ORR was 44.8% with 95% CI (42.8%, 45.5%) for 7–0-0, 41.2% with 95% CI (39.2%, 41.9%) for 5–0-0, and 45.8% with 95% CI (42.6%, 46.4%) for 5–2-2.

Conclusions

Indirect comparison of alternative azacitidine dosing regimens in MDS and AML shows a benefit for the 7-day regimen in attaining ORR. Additional RCTs are required to definitively address this comparison.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12878-017-0094-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Innovative strategies for adverse karyotype acute myeloid leukemia

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Adverse karyotype acute myeloid leukemia is a disease particularly of older patients, but also observed in younger patients. Despite all efforts, standard chemotherapy is still generally applied in fit patients, as already for decades, and for nearly all different subtypes of acute myeloid leukemia. Lack of more specifically targeted therapy and the often older age of the patients are complicating treatment, and in the subgroup of patients achieving a complete remission, the strikingly high frequency of relapse is a characteristic of this disease. This review aims to give an overview of current treatment approaches as well as emerging therapies.

RECENT FINDINGS

Currently, the approach of a targeted therapy specific to the genetic and/or epigenetic aberrations detected in the individual patient is still not possible, and a 'one treatment fits all' course of action is still used, with allografting as curative consolidation. However, first immunotherapeutic approaches are emerging as treatment options and first phase 1 and 2 studies are described.

SUMMARY

Treatment of acute myeloid leukemia with adverse karyotype is still not individualized, most treatment options currently not being curative. This can change in the near future, but recent findings will have to be implemented into larger phase 3 studies before being standard of care.

Novel therapeutic options in Acute Myeloid Leukemia

Acute myeloid leukemia (AML) is a biologically complex and molecularly and clinically heterogeneous disease, and its incidence is increasing as the population ages. Cytogenetic anomalies and mutation testing remain important prognostic tools for tailoring treatment after induction therapy. Despite major advances in understanding the genetic landscape of AML and its impact on the pathophysiology and biology of the disease, as well as the rapid development of new drugs, standard treatment options have not experienced major changes during the past three decades. Especially for patients with intermediate or high-risk AML, which often show relapse. Allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) remains the best chance for cure. Here we review the state of the art therapy of AML, with special focus on new developments in immunotherapies and cellular therapies including HSCT and particularly discuss the impact of new conditioning and haplo-identical donor regimens for HSCT, post-transplant strategies for preventing and treating relapse, and emerging novel therapeutic options.

Management of Newly Diagnosed Acute Myeloid Leukemia in the Elderly: Current Strategies and Future Directions

The incidence of acute myeloid leukemia (AML) increases with age, and the majority of cases occur in adults aged >55 years. The prognosis of AML in older adults is generally poor; however, AML is a heterogeneous disease regardless of age, and prognosis depends on cytogenetic changes, genetic mutations, and patient characteristics. Several lines of evidence support offering treatment to the vast majority of older patients, and the survival benefit associated with this approach generally outweighs the risk of toxicity. Response and long-term survival using intensive induction regimens are significantly lower in older patients, although a small proportion of patients can achieve durable remissions. Selection of patients for intensive induction therapy requires comprehensive assessment of disease characteristics, performance status, and comorbidities. In unfit patients, options for treatment include hypomethylating agents, low-dose ara-C, or consideration of a clinical trial if available. The incorporation of novel therapies into treatment, such as FLT3 inhibitors and antibody-drug conjugates, offers significant promise in older patients, although, thus far, increased responses using novel agents have often not translated to improved survival outcomes. The development of reduced-intensity conditioning regimens and improvements in supportive care has increased the use of allogeneic stem cell transplant (ASCT) in older patients. Selection of patients for ASCT requires an estimation of the trade-off between toxicity and risk of relapse.

Treatment patterns and comparative effectiveness in elderly acute myeloid leukemia patients (age 70 years or older): the Lyon-university hospital experience

The treatment of very elderly patients (≥70 years) with acute myeloid leukemia remains controversial. We present here 302 patients seen over a 14-year period in order to understand the real-world treatment patterns and outcomes in this patient population. Less than 25% of patients achieved a complete remission. The median overall survival was 12.4, 11.5 and 2.6 months, with a 3-year rates of 27%, 17% and 6%, for non-acute promyelocytic leukemia patients receiving intensive chemotherapy, lower-intensity therapy or best supportive care (BSC), respectively. In all ages, results were not significantly different among patients receiving low-intensity therapy and intensive chemotherapy, but significantly worse in those treated with BSC only. Similarly, intensive chemotherapy and low-intensity therapy gave better survival rates than BSC in patients with favorable- or intermediate-risk cytogenetics and in those with unfavorable cytogenetics (p < 0.0001 and p = 0.04, respectively).

Efficacy of Azacitidine in De Novo and Relapsed Acute Myeloid Leukemia: A Retrospective Comparative Study

INTRODUCTION

Azacitidine is a therapeutic alternative to low-dose cytarabine in patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) who are unfit for intensive chemotherapy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed all AML patients treated with azacitidine at the University Hospital Zurich and the Kantonsspital Munsterlingen between January 2005 and December 2011. The primary end point was overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

Thirty-eight patients were included in the analysis. Twenty-one (55%) patients had newly diagnosed AML, 14 (37%) had relapsed AML, and 3 (8%) underwent bridging therapy before allogeneic stem-cell transplantation. Age at diagnosis was 72 years in the newly diagnosed cohort and 58 years in the relapsed cohort, 19 (50%) patients were female, 20 (53%) patients were transfusion dependent, and bone marrow blast count was 43% (interquartile range, 26-80). Most patients (58%) had poor or very poor risk AML. Patients received a median (range) of 7 (3-13) therapy cycles. The median (range) OS in the newly diagnosed and previously treated patient groups were 308 (175-580) days and 346 (293-628) days, respectively (P = .94). Median OS in the 3 patients treated before allogeneic stem-cell transplantation has not been reached. Sixty-day mortality was 7.9%, with no difference between the 2 groups. Ongoing or increasing transfusion dependency was associated with adverse outcome (hazard ratio, 3.09; 95% confidence interval, 1.29-7.37, P = .011).

CONCLUSION

Treatment with azacitidine led to a median OS of 10 months in both a previously untreated and a previously treated frail AML patient cohort. A positive effect in transfusion dependency was observed in 29% of these patients and was associated with better survival.

Economic analysis of blood product transfusions according to the treatment of acute myeloid leukemia in the elderly

BACKGROUND

Blood transfusion requirement represents one of the most significant cost driver associated with acute myeloid leukemia (AML). Low-intensity treatments (low-dose cytarabine, hypomethylating agents) have the potential to reduce transfusion dependence, and improve health-related quality of life.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We assessed the cost-effectiveness of treatment types regarding blood product transfusions in a cohort of 214 AML patients aged ≥ 70 years.

RESULTS

Analyzes did not indicate any significant overall survival (OS) advantage of intensive chemotherapy comparatively to low-intensity treatment. The difference was significant when compared to best supportive care (BSC) (P<0.0001). Blood products transfusion cost per patient was 1.3 times lower with low-intensity therapy and 2.7 times lower with BSC than with intensive chemotherapy. Mean transfusion cost per patient according to OS varied from 2.4 to 1.3 times less with low-intensity treatment comparatively to intensive chemotherapy for patients having OS ≤ 13.3 months. Costs varied from 3.5 to 2.6 times less with BSC comparatively to intensive chemotherapy. In contrast, mean transfusion costs were comparable among treatments for patients with OS>13.3 months.

CONCLUSION

Low-intensity treatments represent a cost-effective alternative to BSC and require a reduced number of transfused blood products comparatively to intensive chemotherapy, while OS was not significantly different.

Survival and hospitalization among patients with acute myeloid leukemia treated with azacitidine or decitabine in a large managed care population: a real-world, retrospective, claims-based, comparative analysis

Background

This study examined patient outcomes using real world data for acute myeloid leukemia (AML) patients initiating treatment.

Methods

A retrospective, administrative claims-based, comparative analysis was developed to study outcomes for AML patients initiating treatment with decitabine or azacitidine between January 2006 and June 2012.

Results

Treatment with azacitidine was associated with a longer median overall survival (10.1 versus 6.9 mos., p = 0.007) and a lower risk of hospitalization (HR 0.787, p = 0.02) compared to treatment with decitabine.

Conclusions

This analysis of the outcomes of real-world treatment of AML patients with demethylating agents suggests that azacitidine may result in clinically superior outcomes than decitabine.

Intensive induction is effective in selected octogenarian acute myeloid leukemia patients: prognostic significance of karyotype and selected molecular markers used in the European LeukemiaNet classification

We investigated whether octogenarian patients with acute myeloid leukemia enrolled onto Cooperative Group clinical trials and treated with intensive induction therapy could be cured, and whether karyotype and selected molecular markers had any prognostic significance in these patients. Among 138 patients with cytogenetic information, normal karyotype was the most common (47.1%) followed by complex karyotype (14.5%) and sole +8 (9.4%). Among these patients, the relapse-free survival rate at 1 year was 37% and 13% at 3 years, and the respective overall survival rates were 24% and 8%. Whereas the 90 patients who survived beyond 30 days had the same relapse-free survival rates, their 1-year and 3-year overall survival rates were 36% and 11%, respectively. Of the 66 patients surviving beyond 30 days who could be classified into European LeukemiaNet genetic groups, those in the intermediate-I group had better overall survival than patients in the adverse group (P=0.01). Among patients with cytogenetically normal acute myeloid leukemia who were tested for the European LeukemiaNet-associated molecular alterations, FLT3-internal tandem duplication and NPM1 mutations, it was found that FLT3-internal tandem duplication (detected in 29% of patients) did not associate with overall survival (P=0.31), whereas NPM1 mutations (30%) were associated with a significantly longer overall survival (P=0.002). We conclude that intensive induction is effective and indicated in selected octogenarians with acute myeloid leukemia, that their overall survival varies among the European LeukemiaNet genetic groups and that NPM1 mutations may be of prognostic significance among octogenarian patients with cytogenetically normal acute myeloid leukemia.

DNA methylation and cancer diagnosis

DNA methylation is a major epigenetic modification that is strongly involved in the physiological control of genome expression. DNA methylation patterns are largely modified in cancer cells and can therefore be used to distinguish cancer cells from normal tissues. This review describes the main technologies available for the detection and the discovery of aberrantly methylated DNA patterns. It also presents the different sources of biological samples suitable for DNA methylation studies. We discuss the interest and perspectives on the use of DNA methylation measurements for cancer diagnosis through examples of methylated genes commonly documented in the literature. The discussion leads to our consideration for why DNA methylation is not commonly used in clinical practice through an examination of the main requirements that constitute a reliable biomarker. Finally, we describe the main DNA methylation inhibitors currently used in clinical trials and those that exhibit promising results.