Randomized study of continuous high-dose lenalidomide, sequential azacitidine and lenalidomide, or azacitidine in persons 65 years and over with newly-diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia

Efficacy of epigenetic agents for older patients with acute myeloid leukemia and myelodysplastic syndrome in randomized controlled trials: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

Myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) and acute myeloid leukemia (AML) are hematologic malignancies that mostly affect the elderly and have poor prognoses. Mutations in epigenetic regulatory genes cause AML/MDS through changes in DNA methylation and histone modifications. Some epigenetic agents are used in patients with AML and MDS. However, most studies have focused on azacitidine (AZA) or decitabine (DEC), and few studies have been conducted on combination therapies or other epigenetic therapies. This network meta-analysis (NMA) aimed to compare the efficacy of epigenetic agents overall in patients with AML and MDS. A systematic review and NMA of all available II-III phase randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing epigenetic agents were performed. The Embase and PubMed databases were searched for relevant studies. The Bayesian model was used in the NMA, and the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) was used to rank comparisons. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS), and the secondary endpoints were complete response (CR) and partial response (PR). OS was extended by AZA + venetoclax (SUCRA 0.94) in patients with AML and MDS. DEC (SUCRA 0.78) relatively improved CR and PR. In this study, AZA-related treatment was relatively effective in improving the OS of patients with AML and MDS, and DEC-related treatment showed a relatively high effect on CR and PR. The protocol for this systematic review was registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42022303601).

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.

Human leukocyte antigen (HLA) alleles as predictive factors for benefit from lenalidomide in acute myeloid leukemia (AML)

OBJECTIVES

Lenalidomide is an active agent in acute myeloid leukemia (AML); response rates are about 15-30%. There are no well-defined predictive factors for benefit from lenalidomide in AML. One of the mechanisms of lenalidomide is natural killer (NK) cell activation; hence human leukocyte antigen (HLA) class I alleles (serving as killer immunoglobulin-like receptor ligands) could play a predictive role. We here evaluate the same when lenalidomide was used as a bridge to transplant.

METHODS

Consecutive AML patients started on lenalidomide as bridge to transplant between Aug-2013 to Aug-2018 were included in this single centre retrospective analysis. The starting dose and schedule of lenalidomide were at the discretion of the treating clinician. Lenalidomide was scheduled to be stopped about 2-4 weeks prior to planned transplant admission (or was stopped earlier if there was intolerance). For this study, event was defined as progression/relapse while on lenalidomide or within 4 weeks of stopping the drug. The primary endpoint was event free survival (EFS). Those who underwent transplant without an event were censored on the day of transplant. Toxicities and post-transplant outcomes were secondary endpoints.

RESULTS

Twelve patients (8 males, median age 29 years) were included. At start of lenalidomide, 7 had complete remission (CR)-1 (measurable residual disease or MRD by flow cytometry was positive in 3, negative in 3, and 1 unknown), 4 CR-2 (all MRD negative) and 1 active disease. In the whole cohort, median EFS was not reached with projected 3 year EFS being 80%. There was a significantly reduced risk of event with HLA A*24 (0% vs 75%, P=0.018) or with HLA B*40 (0% vs 60%, P=0.045). Only 1 patient needed discontinuation due to toxicities (cytopenias). Among patients who underwent transplant, grade II-IV acute graft versus host disease (GVHD) was seen in 83%.

CONCLUSIONS

This is first study to show that HLA alleles may have a bearing on the effect of lenalidomide in AML and could serve as predictive biomarkers. These findings need to be confirmed in larger prospective studies.

Hypomethylating agents (HMA) for the treatment of acute myeloid leukemia and myelodysplastic syndromes: mechanisms of resistance and novel HMA-based therapies

Aberrant DNA methylation plays a pivotal role in tumor development and progression. DNA hypomethylating agents (HMA) constitute a class of drugs which are able to reverse DNA methylation, thereby triggering the re-programming of tumor cells. The first-generation HMA azacitidine and decitabine have now been in standard clinical use for some time, offering a valuable alternative to previous treatments in acute myeloid leukemia and myelodysplastic syndromes, so far particularly in older, medically non-fit patients. However, the longer we use these drugs, the more we are confronted with the (almost inevitable) development of resistance. This review provides insights into the mode of action of HMA, mechanisms of resistance to this treatment, and strategies to overcome HMA resistance including next-generation HMA and HMA-based combination therapies.

Addition of lenalidomide to intensive treatment in younger and middle-aged adults with newly diagnosed AML: the HOVON-SAKK-132 trial

Lenalidomide, an antineoplastic and immunomodulatory drug, has therapeutic activity in acute myeloid leukemia (AML), but definitive studies about its therapeutic utility have been lacking. In a phase 3 study, we compared 2 induction regimens in newly diagnosed patients age 18 to 65 years with AML: idarubicine-cytarabine (cycle 1) and daunorubicin and intermediate-dose cytarabine (cycle 2) without or with lenalidomide (15 mg orally on days 1-21). One final consolidation cycle of chemotherapy or autologous stem cell transplantation (auto-SCT) or allogeneic SCT (allo-SCT) was provided according to a prognostic risk and minimal residual disease (MRD)-adapted approach. Event-free survival (EFS; primary end point) and other clinical end points were assessed. A second random assignment in patients in complete response or in complete response with incomplete hematologic recovery after cycle 3 or auto-SCT involved 6 cycles of maintenance with lenalidomide (10 mg on days 1-21) or observation. In all, 392 patients were randomly assigned to the control group, and 388 patients were randomly assigned to lenalidomide induction. At a median follow-up of 41 months, the study revealed no differences in outcome between the treatments (EFS, 44% ± 2% standard error and overall survival, 54% ± 2% at 4 years for both arms) although in an exploratory post hoc analysis, a lenalidomide benefit was suggested in SRSF2-mutant AML. In relation to the previous Dutch-Belgian Hemato-Oncology Cooperative Group and Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research (HOVON-SAKK) studies that used a similar 3-cycle regimen but did not pursue an MRD-guided approach, these survival estimates compare markedly more favorably. MRD status after cycle 2 lost prognostic value in intermediate-risk AML in the risk-adjusted treatment context. Maintenance with lenalidomide showed no apparent effect on relapse probability in 88 patients randomly assigned for this part of the study.

Recent developments in epigenetic cancer therapeutics: clinical advancement and emerging trends

Epigenetic drug discovery field has evidenced significant advancement in the recent times. A plethora of small molecule inhibitors have progressed to clinical stage investigations and are being explored exhaustively to ascertain conclusive benefits in diverse malignancies. Literature precedents indicates that substantial amount of efforts were directed towards the use of epigenetic tools in monotherapy as well as in combination regimens at the clinical level, however, the preclinical/preliminary explorations were inclined towards the identification of prudent approaches that can leverage the anticancer potential of small molecule epigenetic inhibitors as single agents only. This review article presents an update of FDA approved epigenetic drugs along with the epigenetic inhibitors undergoing clinical stage investigations in different cancer types. A detailed discussion of the pragmatic strategies that are expected to steer the progress of the epigenetic therapy through the implementation of emerging approaches such as PROTACS and CRISPR/Cas9 along with logical ways for scaffold fabrication to selectively approach the enzyme isoforms in pursuit of garnering amplified antitumor effects has been covered. In addition, the compilation also presents the rational strategies for the construction of multi-targeting scaffold assemblages employing previously identified pharmacophores as potential alternatives to the combination therapy.

A phase I study of lenalidomide plus chemotherapy with idarubicin and cytarabine in patients with relapsed or refractory acute myeloid leukemia and high-risk myelodysplastic syndrome

Patients with relapsed/refractory (R/R) acute myeloid leukemia (AML) have poor outcomes and hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) is the only curative treatment. New targeted therapies improved survival in select patients with specific mutations, however management of patients without these molecular alterations is an unmet need. We conducted a phase one study of lenalidomide in combination with cytarabine/idarubicin salvage chemotherapy in patients with R/R AML and high‐risk myelodysplastic syndromes. A total of 33 patients were enrolled in the study (30 AML, 3 MDS), and treated at three dose levels with 3 + 3 design. Dose‐limiting toxicity (DLT) was seen in eight patients, including four hematologic DLTs. The most commonly observed non‐hematologic serious adverse events were febrile neutropenia, rash, sepsis and renal injury. Dose level −1, consisting of 25 mg/d lenalidomide D1‐21, 1 g/m² cytarabine D5‐8, and 8 mg/m² idarubicin D5‐7 was determined to be the maximum tolerated dose. Note, 15/33 (45%) of patients were able to receive pre‐planned 21 days of lenalidomide. Overall, 18 patients achieved complete remission (CR) (n = 14) or CR with incomplete count recovery (CRi) (n = 4) with total CR/CRi rate of 56%. The 1‐year and 2‐year overall survival (OS) were 24% and 10%, respectively. Among responders, 10/18 underwent allogeneic HCT and had a 1‐year OS of 40%. There was no molecular pattern associated with response. These data demonstrate that the combination had clinical activity in R/R AML. This regimen should be further investigated for patients who relapsed after HCT, and as a bridge therapy to HCT. (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01132586).

Immunomodulation with pomalidomide at early lymphocyte recovery after induction chemotherapy in newly diagnosed AML and high-risk MDS

An immunosuppressive microenvironment promoting leukemia cell immune escape plays an important role in the pathogenesis of AML. Through its interaction with cereblon, a substrate receptor for the E3 ubiquitin ligase complex, pomalidomide leads to selective ubiquitination of transcription factors Aiolos and Ikaros thereby promoting immune modulation. In this phase I trial, 51 newly diagnosed non-favorable risk AML and high-risk MDS patients were enrolled and treated with AcDVP16 (cytarabine 667 mg/m²/day IV continuous infusion days 1-3, daunorubicin 45 mg/m² IV days 1-3, etoposide 400 mg/m² IV days 8-10) induction therapy followed by dose- and duration-escalation pomalidomide beginning at early lymphocyte recovery. Forty-three patients (AML: n = 39, MDS: n = 4) received pomalidomide. The maximum tolerated dose of pomalidomide was 4 mg for 21 consecutive days. The overall complete remission (CR + CRi) rate, median overall survival, and disease-free survival were 75%, 27.1 and 20.6 months, respectively. Subset analyses revealed 86% CR/CRi rate in AML patients with unfavorable-risk karyotype treated with pomalidomide. Pomalidomide significantly decreased Aiolos expression in both CD4⁺ and CD8⁺ peripheral blood and bone marrow T cells, promoted T cell differentiation, proliferation, and heightened their cytokine production. Finally, pomalidomide induced distinct gene expression changes in immune function-related ontologies in CD4⁺ and CD8⁺ T cells.

Immunosuppression and Immunotargeted Therapy in Acute Myeloid Leukemia - The Potential Use of Checkpoint Inhibitors in Combination with Other Treatments

INTRODUCTION

Immunotherapy by using checkpoint inhibitors is now tried in the treatment of several malignancies, including Acute Myeloid Leukemia (AML). The treatment is tried both as monotherapy and as a part of combined therapy.

METHODS

Relevant publications were identified through literature searches in the PubMed database. We searched for (i) original articles describing the results from clinical studies of checkpoint inhibition; (ii) published articles describing the immunocompromised status of AML patients; and (iii) published studies of antileukemic immune reactivity and immunotherapy in AML.

RESULTS

Studies of monotherapy suggest that checkpoint inhibition has a modest antileukemic effect and complete hematological remissions are uncommon, whereas combination with conventional chemotherapy increases the antileukemic efficiency with acceptable toxicity. The experience with a combination of different checkpoint inhibitors is limited. Thalidomide derivatives are referred to as immunomodulatory drugs and seem to reverse leukemia-induced immunosuppression, but in addition, they have direct inhibitory effects on the AML cells. The combination of checkpoint targeting and thalidomide derivatives thus represents a strategy for dual immunotargeting together with a direct antileukemic effect.

CONCLUSION

Checkpoint inhibitors are now tried in AML. Experimental studies suggest that these inhibitors should be combined with immunomodulatory agents (i.e. thalidomide derivatives) and/or new targeted or conventional antileukemic treatment. Such combinations would allow dual immunotargeting (checkpoint inhibitor, immunomodulatory agents) together with a double/triple direct targeting of the leukemic cells.

A systematic review and metaanalysis of the efficacy and adverse events of azacitidinepluslenalidomide treatment for patients with acute myeloid leukemia, myelodysplastic syndromes and chronic myelomonocytic leukemia 1

OBJECTIVES

The addition of lenalidomide (LEN) to azacitidine (AZA) may further improve the outcomes of acute myeloid leukemia (AML) patients as well as patients with high-risk myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) and chronic myelomonocytic leukemia (CMML) patients although the evidence for this combination treatment is still relatively limited. This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate efficacy and adverse effects of AZA plus LEN for the treatment of patients with high-risk MDS, AML or CMML.

METHODS

The current study systematically identified all cohort studies of patients with AML and/or MDS and/or CMML who received AZA in combination with LEN that reported the overall complete remission (CR) rate and/or overall response rate (ORR). A DerSimonian-d random-effects model with double arcsine transformation was used for the pooled rates and 95% confidence interval (CI) of the all outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 10 studies with 406 patients were identified and included into the meta-analysis. The pooled CR rate after the treatment with AZA-plus-LEN regimen was 33.0% (95% CI, 27.7%-38.7%, I² = 18%) while the pooled ORR was 49.9% (95% CI, 38.4%-61.5%, I² = 72%). Nonetheless, adverse events including grade 3-4 neutrophil toxicity events, platelet toxicity events and febrile neutropenia were common with AZA-plus-LEN regimen.

CONCLUSIONS

The current study may serve as a preliminary data to suggest that the addition of LEN may offer incremental benefit to patients with high-risk MDS, AML and CMML. However, randomized-controlled studies that directly compare the efficacy and adverse events of AZA-plus-LEN regimen versus AZA monotherapy are still needed.

Key actors in cancer therapy: epigenetic modifiers

Epigenetic reprogramming plays a crucial role in the tumorigenicity and maintenance of tumor-specific gene expression that especially occurs through DNA methylation and/or histone modifications. It has well-defined mechanisms. It is known that alterations in the DNA methylation pattern and/or the loss of specific histone acetylation/methylation markers are related to several hallmarks of cancer, such as drug resistance, stemness, epithelial-mesenchymal transition, and metastasis. It has also recently been highlighted that epigenetic alterations are critical for the regulation of the stemlike properties of cancer cells (tumor-initiating cells; cancer stem cells). Cancer stem cells are thought to be responsible for the recurrence of cancer which makes the patient return to the clinic with metastatic tumor tissue. Hence, the dysregulation of epigenetic machinery represents potential new therapeutic targets. Therefore, compounds with epigenetic activities have become crucial for developing new therapy regimens (e.g., antimetastatic agents) in the fight against cancer. Here, we review the epigenetic modifiers that have already been used in the clinic and/or in clinical trials, related preclinical studies in cancer therapy, and the smart combination strategies that target cancer stem cells along with the other cancer cells. The emerging role of epitranscriptome (RNA epigenetic) in cancer therapy has also been included in this review as a new avenue and potential target for the better management of cancer-beneficial epigenetic machinery.

Sequential azacitidine and lenalidomide for patients with relapsed and refractory acute myeloid leukemia: Clinical results and predictive modeling using computational analysis

BACKGROUND

Patients with relapsed and refractory (R/R) acute myeloid leukemia (AML) have limited treatment options. Genomically-defined personalized therapies are only applicable for a minority of patients. Therapies without identifiable targets can be effective but patient selection is challenging. The sequential combination of azacitidine with high-dose lenalidomide has shown activity; we aimed to determine the efficacy of this genomically-agnostic regimen in patients with R/R AML, with the intention of applying sophisticated methods to predict responders.

METHODS

Thirty-seven R/R AML/myelodysplastic syndrome patients were enrolled in a phase 2 study of azacitidine with lenalidomide. The primary endpoint was complete remission (CR) and CR with incomplete blood count recovery (CRi) rate. A computational biological modeling (CBM) approach was applied retrospectively to predict outcomes based on the understood mechanisms of azacitidine and lenalidomide in the setting of each patients' disease.

FINDINGS

Four of 37 patients (11%) had a CR/CRi; the study failed to meet the alternative hypothesis. Significant toxicity was observed in some cases, with three treatment-related deaths and a 30-day mortality rate of 14%. However, the CBM method predicted responses in 83% of evaluable patients, with a positive and negative predictive value of 80% and 89%, respectively.

INTERPRETATION

Sequential azacitidine and high-dose lenalidomide is effective in a minority of R/R AML patients; it may be possible to predict responders at the time of diagnosis using a CBM approach. More efforts to predict responses in non-targeted therapies should be made, to spare toxicity in patients unlikely to respond and maximize treatments for those with limited options.

Azacitidine with or without lenalidomide in higher risk myelodysplastic syndrome & low blast acute myeloid leukemia

Standard treatment for higher risk myelodysplastic syndromes, chronic myelomonocytic leukemia and low blast acute myeloid leukemia is azacitidine. In single arm studies, adding lenalidomide had been suggested to improve outcomes. The ALLG MDS4 phase II trial randomized such patients to standard azacitidine or combination azacitidine (75mg/m²/d days 1 to 5) with lenalidomide (10mg days 1–21 of 28-day cycle from cycle 3) to assess clinical benefit (alive without progressive disease) at 12 months. A total of 160 patients were enrolled; median age 70.7 years (range 42.5-87.2), 31.3% female with 14% chronic myelomonocytic leukemia, 12% acute myeloid leukemia and 74% myelodysplastic syndromes. Adverse events were similar in both arms. There was excellent delivery of protocol therapy (median azacitidine cycles 11 both arms) with few dose reductions, delays or early cessations. At median follow up 33.1 months (range 0.7-59.5), the rate of clinical benefit at 12 months was 65% azacitidine arm and 54% lenalidomide+azacitidine arm (P=0.2). There was no difference in clinical benefit between each arm according to WHO diagnostic subgroup or IPSS-R. Overall response rate was 57% in azacitidine arm and 69% in lenalidomide+azacitidine (P=0.14). There was no difference in progression- free or overall survival between the arms (each P>0.12). Although the combination of lenalidomide and azacitidine was tolerable, there was no improvement in clinical benefit, response rates or overall survival in higher risk myelodysplastic syndrome, chronic myelomonocytic leukemia or low blast acute myeloid leukemia patients compared to treatment with azacitidine alone. This trial was registered at www.anzc-tr.org.au as ACTRN12610000271000.

Efficacy and safety of lenalidomide for the treatment of acute myeloid leukemia: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Lenalidomide is effective for the treatment of low-risk myelodysplastic syndromes with deletion 5q abnormalities. However, whether lenalidomide leads to a significant improvement in treatment response and overall survival (OS) in cases of acute myeloid leukemia (AML) remains controversial. A systematic review and a meta-analysis were performed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of lenalidomide in the treatment of AML.

Methods

Clinical studies were identified from the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PubMed, Embase, and ClinicalTrials.gov. Efficacy outcomes included overall response rate (ORR), complete remission (CR), and OS. Safety was evaluated based on the incidence of grade 3 and 4 treatment-related adverse events (AEs).

Results

Eleven studies were included in our meta-analysis; collectively these studies featured 407 AML patients. Pooled estimates for overall ORR and CR were 31% (95% CI: 26%–36%) and 21% (95% CI: 16%–27%), respectively. Thrombocytopenia, anemia, neutropenia, and infection were the most common grade 3 and 4 AEs.

Conclusion

Lenalidomide may have some clinical activity in AML, but the population that would benefit from lenalidomide and incorporating lenalidomide into combination drug strategies need to be better defined.