Comparison of Hypomethylator Monotherapy with Hypomethylator plus Chemotherapy for Intermediate/High-Risk MDS or AML: A Meta-Analysis

Efficacy and safety of venetoclax-based combination therapy for previously untreated acute myeloid leukemia: a meta-analysis

PURPOSE

To explore the efficacy and safety of venetoclax-based combination therapy for older patients with newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia (AML).

METHODS

We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical trials comparing venetoclax plus hypomethylating agents (HMAs) or low-dose cytarabine (LDAC) with mono-HMAs or LDAC. The random or fixed effects model was applied to the studies based on heterogeneity. Dichotomous data were summarized using the risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). Continuous variable data were reported as weighted mean differences (WMDs).

RESULTS

Nine studies, including a total of 1232 patients, were included in this meta-analysis. Thec complete remission (CR)/complete remission with incomplete hematological recovery (CRi) rate of the venetoclax (Ven) + azacytidine (Aza) group was significantly greater than that of the Aza monotherapy group (RR: 2.42; 95% CI: 1.85-3.15; P < 0.001). Similarly, the CR/CRi rate of the Ven + LDAC group was also significantly greater than that of the LDAC monotherapy group (RR: 2.57; 95% CI: 1.58-4.17; P = 0.00). The same results were observed for OS among these groups. However, the incidence of febrile neutropenia was greater in the Ven + Aza group than in the Ven + Decitabine (Dec) or monotherapy Aza group (RR: 0.69; 95% CI: 0.53-0.90; P = 0.006 and RR: 2.19; 95% CI: 1.58-3.03; P < 0.001, respectively). In addition, the Ven + LDAC group had significantly greater rates of constipation, diarrhea, nausea, and vomiting than the LDAC monotherapy group, with RRs and CIs of 0.61 (95% CI 0.44-0.83, P = 0.002), 1.81 (95% CI 1.22-2.67, P = 0.003), 1.39 (95% CI 1.06-1.82, P = 0.016), and 1.80 (95% CI 1.19-2.72, P = 0.005), respectively.

CONCLUSION

Venetoclax combined with azacitidine, decitabine, or LDAC significantly improved the CR/CRi and OS of patients with previously untreated AML. However, venetoclax plus azacitidine or LDAC was more likely to lead to increased febrile neutropenia and gastrointestinal toxicity.

Historical expectations with DNA methyltransferase inhibitor monotherapy in MDS: when is combination therapy truly "promising"?

DNA methyltransferase inhibitors (DNMTIs) for patients with higher risk myelodysplastic syndromes (HR-MDS) have low complete remission rates and are not curative. Early DNMTI combination clinical trials in HR-MDS are often termed "promising," but many randomized trials subsequently failed to show benefit. Clearer understanding of when a combination is likely to improve upon DNMTI monotherapy would inform randomized studies. We reviewed MDS azacitidine or decitabine monotherapy studies. We collected baseline demographics including International Prognostic Scoring System (IPSS) risk, DNMTI, disease characteristics; and response variables including survival and marrow and hematologic responses. Aggregate estimates across studies were calculated using meta-analyses techniques. Using a binomial design, we estimated the necessary operating characteristics to design a phase 2 study showing improved efficacy of a combination over monotherapy. Among 1908 patients, the overall response rate (ORR) was 24% (n = 464; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.22-0.26): 267 complete response (CR, 14%), 68 partial response (4%), and 129 marrow complete remission (7%). Among 1604 patients for whom a hematologic response was reported, 476 (30%; 95% CI, 0.27-0.32) reported hematologic improvement (HI). More patients treated with azacitidine achieved HI (38%; 95% CI, 0.35-0.41) compared with decitabine (15%; 95% CI, 0.13-0.19), whereas the marrow ORR rate was higher with decitabine (29%; 95% CI, 0.26-0.33) compared with azacitidine (21%; 95% CI, 0.19-0.23). CR rates were similar between DNMTIs: 13% with azacitidine and 16% with decitabine. Variables that influence MDS response include the specific DNMTI backbone and the distribution of IPSS risk of patients enrolled on a trial. Considering these factors can help identify which early combination approaches are worth assessing in larger randomized trials.

The efficacy and adverse events of venetoclax in combination with hypomethylating agents treatment for patients with acute myeloid leukemia and myelodysplastic syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy and adverse effects of venetoclax(VEN) in combination with hypomethylating agents(HMAs) in acute myeloid leukemia(AML) or myelodysplastic syndrome(MDS).

METHODS

Clinical studies were identified from the Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase, Google Scholar, and ClinicalTrials.gov. Overall complete remission (CR) and overall response rate (ORR) were used to evaluate the efficacy of VEN in combination with HMAs for AML/MDS, the incidence of the 4 most common grade 3-4 adverse events was used to evaluate safety.

RESULTS

We identified 13 studies that included a total of 1059 patients. 7 cohort studies and 5 non-randomized controlled trials(NRCTs) were analyzed by random-effects model, and subgroup analyses showed the pooled overall CR rate of 62% (95% CI 57-67%, I² = 3%) for the new-diagnosed(ND) AML group, 39% (95% CI 30-48%, I² = 28%) for relapsed/refractory(R/R)-AML, and 61% (95% CI 50-71%, I² = 25%) for MDS, respectively. There was only one randomized controlled trial(RCT) that showed a CR rate of 66.4% in the patients who received azacitidine(AZA) plus VEN. A total of 8 studies reported adverse events, with cytopenia and infection being the most common grade 3-4 adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

The addition of VEN to HMAs may provide significant clinical benefit for AML/MDS patients, where response rates are better in MDS and ND-AML than in R/R-AML, but attention should be paid to the possible increased risk of febrile neutropenia.

[Efficacy and safety of generic azacitidine in Chinese patients with higher-risk myelodysplastic syndromes: a multicenter, prospective, single-arm study]

Objective: To evaluate the efficacy, safety, and pharmacokinetics of the generic azacitidine in Chinese patients with higher-risk myelodysplastic syndromes(MDS). Methods: Between October 2013 and 2016, 72 patients were eligible for enrollment at 9 sites from China received generic subcutaneous azacitidine 75 mg·m(-2)·d(-1) for 7 days per 28-day cycle, for ≥6 cycles. Pharmacokinetic blood samples were collected on day 1 of a single-dose. Results: For each patient at cycle 6 or at the time of study discontinuation, whichever came first, the overall response rate, which included complete remission (CR)and partial remission(PR), was 6.9%(5/72), the rate of patients who had the best effect with CR or PR during the treatment was 12.5%(9/72). Patients who were dependent on red-blood-cell transfusions and platelet transfusions at baseline became transfusion independent were 46.3%(19/41)and 41.2% (7/17), respectively. The median time of treatment was 6 cycles, and the median OS was 16.1 months (95%CI 10.9-20.6 months). For 36 patients(50%)received treatment at ≥6 cycles, and the median OS was 22.3 months(95%CI 16.1- not evaluative). Most common grade Ⅲ-Ⅳ hematologic treatment-emergent adverse events were neutropenia(55%), leukopenia(47%), and thrombocytopenia(61%). Pharmacokinetic profiles were similar for generic and original azacitidine in Chinese patients. Conclusion: Generic azacitidine treatment was favorable and safe and can be used as a standard treatment for patients with higher-risk MDS.