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

Evolution of eligibility criteria for non-transplant randomized controlled trials in adults with acute myeloid leukemia

Eligibility criteria for clinical trials are intended to select suitable study subjects but can limit trial participation and generalization of results. While reported for other cancers, non-enrollment rates and evolution of eligibility criteria over time have so far not been studied for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving adults with acute myeloid leukemia (AML). Among 3698 studies published between 2010 and 2020, including 447 involving prospective clinical trials, we identified 75 phase three RCTs testing non-transplant therapies for adults with AML. Only 31 studies (41%) provided information on non-enrollment; in these studies, the median non-enrollment rate was 23%, primarily attributed to restrictive eligibility criteria. In 95% of trials, eligibility criteria were reported with the total number per trial increasing over time (P < 0.001), particularly in industry-funded trials. A total of 27 eligibility criteria were used across trials, mostly concerning comorbidities or performance status, with eight of them becoming more common over time. The concordance with recent ASCO - Friends of Cancer Research eligibility criteria recommendations greatly varied, from 35% to 99%. Together, our analyses suggest that the ability to generalize results from non-transplant RCTs may be increasingly limited because of high non-enrollment rates and increasingly restrictive eligibility criteria.

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.

Practice patterns and outcomes for adults with acute myeloid leukemia receiving care in community vs academic settings

Consistent with observations in other disease settings, retrospective studies have indicated that treatment outcomes for adults with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) are better in higher- vs lower-volume hospitals and academic vs nonacademic centers, with greatest benefits noted in acute promyelocytic leukemia. Younger age, more frequent receipt of chemotherapy and hematopoietic cell transplantation, and differences in comorbidities and socioeconomic factors may partially account for these differences. With new therapeutic options including oral small molecule inhibitors and parenteral drugs suitable for outpatient administration, there is increasing interest from patients and physicians in treating AML in the community setting and avoiding referral to academic centers. This may be particularly true for older adults, for whom treatment rates in the community have historically been low, and for those with comorbidities, because treatment benefits are estimated to be low, and thus travel to academic centers is perceived as especially burdensome. How the volume-outcome relationship is affected by the shift of the treatment landscape in AML over the last few years is unknown. Additionally, improvements in supportive care (transfusion support, broad-spectrum oral antimicrobials), resulting in gradually decreasing early death rates over time, and the growing focus on the impact of AML therapy on quality of life and treatment cost concerns further fuel the larger trend toward an increasing proportion of care delivered in the outpatient setting. Here, we examine whether the current shift of administering chemotherapy and supportive care to the outpatient setting can be translated to the community setting without compromising patient outcomes.

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.