A randomized assessment of adding the kinase inhibitor lestaurtinib to first-line chemotherapy for FLT3-mutated AML

The clinical benefit of adding FMS-like tyrosine kinase-3 (FLT3)-directed small molecule therapy to standard first-line treatment of acute myeloid leukemia (AML) has not yet been established. As part of the UK AML15 and AML17 trials, patients with previously untreated AML and confirmed FLT3-activating mutations, mostly younger than 60 years, were randomly assigned either to receive oral lestaurtinib (CEP701) or not after each of 4 cycles of induction and consolidation chemotherapy. Lestaurtinib was commenced 2 days after completing chemotherapy and administered in cycles of up to 28 days. The trials ran consecutively. Primary endpoints were overall survival in AML15 and relapse-free survival in AML17; outcome data were meta-analyzed. Five hundred patients were randomly assigned between lestaurtinib and control: 74% had FLT3-internal tandem duplication mutations, 23% FLT3–tyrosine kinase domain point mutations, and 2% both types. No significant differences were seen in either 5-year overall survival (lestaurtinib 46% vs control 45%; hazard ratio, 0.90; 95% CI 0.70-1.15; P = .3) or 5-year relapse-free survival (40% vs 36%; hazard ratio, 0.88; 95% CI 0.69-1.12; P = .3). Exploratory subgroup analysis suggested survival benefit with lestaurtinib in patients receiving concomitant azole antifungal prophylaxis and gemtuzumab ozogamicin with the first course of chemotherapy. Correlative studies included analysis of in vivo FLT3 inhibition by plasma inhibitory activity assay and indicated improved overall survival and significantly reduced rates of relapse in lestaurtinib-treated patients who achieved sustained greater than 85% FLT3 inhibition. In conclusion, combining lestaurtinib with intensive chemotherapy proved feasible in younger patients with newly diagnosed FLT3-mutated AML, but yielded no overall clinical benefit. The improved clinical outcomes seen in patients achieving sustained FLT3 inhibition encourage continued evaluation of FLT3-directed therapy alongside front-line AML treatment. The UK AML15 and AML17 trials are registered at www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN17161961 and www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN55675535 respectively

Measurable residual disease at induction redefines partial response in acute myeloid leukemia and stratifies outcomes in patients at standard risk without NPM1 mutations

Purpose: We investigated the effect on outcome of measurable or minimal residual disease (MRD) status after each induction course to evaluate the extent of its predictive value for acute myeloid leukemia (AML) risk groups, including NPM1 wild-type (wt) standard risk, when incorporated with other induction response criteria.Methods: As part of the NCRI AML17 trial, 2,450 younger adult patients with AML or high-risk myelodysplastic syndrome had prospective multiparameter flow cytometric MRD (MFC-MRD) assessment. After course 1 (C1), responses were categorized as resistant disease (RD), partial remission (PR), and complete remission (CR) or complete remission with absolute neutrophil count , 1,000/mL or thrombocytopenia , 100,000/mL (CRi) by clinicians, with CR/CRi subdivided by MFC-MRD assay into MRD+ and MRD2. Patients without high-risk factors, including Flt3 internal tandem duplication wt/2NPM1-wt subgroup, received a second daunorubicin/cytosine arabinoside induction; course 2 (C2) was intensified for patients with high-risk factors.Results: Survival outcomes from PR and MRD+ responses after C1 were similar, particularly for good- to standard-risk subgroups (5-year overall survival [OS], 27% RD v 46% PR v 51% MRD+ v 70% MRD2; P , .001). Adjusted analyses confirmed significant OS differences between C1 RD versus PR/MRD+ but not PR versus MRD+. CRi after C1 reduced OS in MRD+ (19% CRi v 45% CR; P = .001) patients, with a smaller effect after C2. The prognostic effect of C2 MFC-MRD status (relapse: hazard ratio [HR], 1.88 [95% CI, 1.50 to 2.36], P , .001; survival: HR, 1.77 [95% CI, 1.41 to 2.22], P , .001) remained significant when adjusting for C1 response. MRD positivity appeared less discriminatory in poor-risk patients by stratified analyses. For the NPM1-wt standard-risk subgroup, C2 MRD+ was significantly associated with poorer outcomes (OS, 33% v 63% MRD2, P = .003;relapse incidence, 89% when MRD+ $ 0.1%); transplant benefit was more apparent in patients with MRD+ (HR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.31 to 1.69) than those with MRD2 (HR, 1.68 [95% CI, 0.75 to 3.85]; P = .16 for interaction).Conclusion: MFC-MRD can improve outcome stratification by extending the definition of partial response after first induction and may help predict NPM1-wt standard-risk patients with poor outcome who benefit from transplant in the first CR

Criteria for the use of omics-based predictors in clinical trials: Explanation and elaboration

High-throughput 'omics' technologies that generate molecular profiles for biospecimens have been extensively used in preclinical studies to reveal molecular subtypes and elucidate the biological mechanisms of disease, and in retrospective studies on clinical specimens to develop mathematical models to predict clinical endpoints. Nevertheless, the translation of these technologies into clinical tests that are useful for guiding management decisions for patients has been relatively slow. It can be difficult to determine when the body of evidence for an omics-based test is sufficiently comprehensive and reliable to support claims that it is ready for clinical use, or even that it is ready for definitive evaluation in a clinical trial in which it may be used to direct patient therapy. Reasons for this difficulty include the exploratory and retrospective nature of many of these studies, the complexity of these assays and their application to clinical specimens, and the many potential pitfalls inherent in the development of mathematical predictor models from the very high-dimensional data generated by these omics technologies. Here we present a checklist of criteria to consider when evaluating the body of evidence supporting the clinical use of a predictor to guide patient therapy. Included are issues pertaining to specimen and assay requirements, the soundness of the process for developing predictor models, expectations regarding clinical study design and conduct, and attention to regulatory, ethical, and legal issues. The proposed checklist should serve as a useful guide to investigators preparing proposals for studies involving the use of omics-based tests. The US National Cancer Institute plans to refer to these guidelines for review of proposals for studies involving omics tests, and it is hoped that other sponsors will adopt the checklist as well. © 2013 McShane et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd

Resolution of dysglycaemia after treatment of monoclonal gammopathy of endocrine significance.

In very rare cases of monoclonal gammopathy, insulin-binding paraprotein can cause disabling hypoglycaemia. We report a 67-year-old man re-evaluated for hyperinsulinaemic hypoglycaemia that persisted despite distal pancreatectomy. He had no medical history of diabetes mellitus or autoimmune disease but was being monitored for an IgG kappa monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance. On glucose tolerance testing, hyperglycaemia occurred at 60 min (glucose 216 mg/dL) and hypoglycaemia at 300 min (52 mg/dL) concurrent with an apparent plasma insulin concentration of 52 850 pmol/L on immunoassay. Laboratory investigation revealed an IgG2 kappa with very high binding capacity but low affinity (Kd 1.43 × 10-6 mol/L) for insulin. The monoclonal gammopathy was restaged as smouldering myeloma not warranting plasma cell-directed therapy from a haematological standpoint. Plasma exchange reduced paraprotein levels and improved fasting capillary glucose concentrations. Lenalidomide was used to treat disabling hypoglycaemia, successfully depleting paraprotein and leading to resolution of symptoms

Outcome of azacitidine therapy in acute myeloid leukaemia is not improved by concurrent vorinostat therapy but is predicted by a diagnostic molecular signature

Purpose: Azacitidine (AZA) is a novel therapeutic option in older patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML), but its rational utilization is compromised by the fact that neither the determinants of clinical response nor its mechanism of action are defined. Co-administration of histone deacetylase inhibitors, such as vorinostat (VOR), is reported to improve the clinical activity of AZA, but this has not been prospectively studied in patients with AML. Experimental Design: We compared outcomes in 259 adults with AML (n = 217) and MDS (n = 42) randomized to receive either AZA monotherapy (75 mg/m2 × 7 days every 28 days) or AZA combined with VOR 300 mg twice a day on days 3 to 9 orally. Next-generation sequencing was performed in 250 patients on 41 genes commonly mutated in AML. Serial immunophenotyping of progenitor cells was performed in 47 patients. Results: Co-administration of VOR did not increase the overall response rate (P = 0.84) or overall survival (OS; P = 0.32). Specifically, no benefit was identified in either de novo or relapsed AML. Mutations in the genes CDKN2A (P = 0.0001), IDH1 (P = 0.004), and TP53 (P = 0.003) were associated with reduced OS. Lymphoid multipotential progenitor populations were greatly expanded at diagnosis and although reduced in size in responding patients remained detectable throughout treatment. Conclusions: This study demonstrates no benefit of concurrent administration of VOR with AZA but identifies a mutational signature predictive of outcome after AZA-based therapy. The correlation between heterozygous loss of function CDKN2A mutations and decreased OS implicates induction of cell-cycle arrest as a mechanism by which AZA exerts its clinical activity

Molecular, clinical and therapeutic determinants of outcome in NPM1 mutated AML

Although NPM1-mutated acute myeloid leukemia (AML) carries a generally favorable prognosis, many patients still relapse and die. Previous studies identified several molecular and clinical features associated with poor outcome, however only FLT3-ITD mutation and adverse karyotype are currently used for risk stratification due to inconsistent results and uncertainty around how other factors should influence treatment, particularly given the strong prognostic impact of post-induction measurable residual disease (MRD). Here we analyzed a large group of patients with NPM1mut AML enrolled in prospective trials (NCRI AML17 and AML19, n=1357) to delineate the impact of baseline molecular and clinical features, post induction MRD status and treatment intensity on outcome. FLT3-ITD (HR 1.28, 95%CI 1.01-1.63), DNMT3A (HR 1.65, 95%CI 1.32-2.05), WT1 (HR 1.74, 95%CI 1272-2.38) and non-ABD NPM1 mutations (HR 1.64, 95%CI 1.22-2.21) were independently associated with poorer overall survival (OS). These factors were also strongly associated with MRD positivity. For patients achieving MRD negativity, these mutations (except FLT3-ITD) were associated with an increased cumulative incidence of relapse (CIR) and poorer OS. However, apart from the few patients with adverse cytogenetics, we could not identify any group of MRD negative patients with a CIR >40% or with benefit from allograft in first remission. Intensified chemotherapy with the FLAG-Ida regimen was associated with improved outcomes in all subgroups, with greater benefits observed in the highest risk molecular subgroups