Blinatumomab compared with standard of care for the treatment of adult patients with relapsed/refractory Philadelphia chromosome-positive B-precursor acute lymphoblastic leukemia

Background A single‐arm, phase 2 trial demonstrated the efficacy and safety of blinatumomab, a bispecific T‐cell–engaging antibody construct, in patients with relapsed/refractory (r/r) Philadelphia chromosome–positive (Ph+) acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL), a rare hematologic malignancy with limited treatment options. This study compared outcomes with blinatumomab with those of a historical control treated with the standard of care (SOC). Methods The blinatumomab trial enrolled adult patients with Ph+ ALL who were r/r to at least 1 second‐generation tyrosine kinase inhibitor (n = 45). Propensity score analysis (PSA) was used to compare outcomes with blinatumomab with those of an external cohort of similar patients receiving SOC chemotherapy (n = 55). The PSA mitigated confounding variables between studies by adjusting for imbalances in the age at diagnosis and start of treatment, sex, duration from diagnosis to most recent treatment, prior allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation, prior salvage therapy, and number of salvage therapies. Bayesian data augmentation was applied to improve power to 80% with data from a phase 3 blinatumomab study in r/r Philadelphia chromosome–negative ALL. Results In the PSA, the rate of complete remission or complete remission with partial hematologic recovery was 36% for blinatumomab and 25% for SOC, and this resulted in an odds ratio of 1.54 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.61‐3.89) or 1.70 (95% credible interval [CrI], 0.94‐2.94) with Bayesian data augmentation. Overall survival favored blinatumomab over SOC, with a hazard ratio of 0.81 (95% CI, 0.57‐1.14) or 0.77 (95% CrI, 0.61‐0.96) with Bayesian data augmentation. Conclusions These results further support blinatumomab as a treatment option for patients with r/r Ph+ ALL

Dasatinib crosses the blood-brain barrier and is an efficient therapy for central nervous system philadelphia chromosome positive leukemia

Although imatinib, a BCR-ABL tyrosine kinase inhibitor, is used to treat acute Philadelphia chromosome-positive (Ph+) leukemia, it does not prevent central nervous system (CNS) relapses resulting from poor drug penetration through the blood-brain barrier. Imatinib and dasatinib (a dual-specific SRC/BCR-ABL kinase inhibitor) were compared in a pre-clinical mouse model of intracranial Ph+ leukemia. Clinical dasatinib treatment in patients with CNS Ph+ leukemia was assessed. In preclinical studies, dasatinib increased survival, whereas imatinib failed to inhibit intracranial tumor growth. Stabilization and regression of CNS disease were achieved with continued dasatinib administration. The drug also demonstrated substantial activity in 11 adult and pediatric patients with CNS Ph+ leukemia. Eleven evaluable patients had clinically significant, long-lasting responses, which were complete in 7 patients. In 3 additional patients, isolated CNS relapse occurred during dasatinib therapy; and in 2 of them, it was caused by expansion of a BCR-ABL-mutated dasatinib-resistant clone, implying selection pressure exerted by the compound in the CNS. Dasatinib has promising therapeutic potential in managing intracranial leukemic disease and substantial clinical activity in patients who experience CNS relapse while on imatinib therapy. This study is registered at ClinicalTrials. gov as CA180006 (#NCT00108719) and CA180015 (#NCT00110097)

Oral azacitidine maintenance therapy for acute myeloid leukemia in first remission

Background: Although induction chemotherapy results in remission in many older patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML), relapse is common and overall survival is poor. Methods: We conducted a phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of the oral formulation of azacitidine (CC-486, a hypomethylating agent that is not bioequivalent to injectable azacitidine), as maintenance therapy in patients with AML who were in first remission after intensive chemotherapy. Patients who were 55 years of age or older, were in complete remission with or without complete blood count recovery, and were not candidates for hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation were randomly assigned to receive CC-486 (300 mg) or placebo once daily for 14 days per 28-day cycle. The primary end point was overall survival. Secondary end points included relapse-free survival and health-related quality of life. Results: A total of 472 patients underwent randomization; 238 were assigned to the CC-486 group and 234 were assigned to the placebo group. The median age was 68 years (range, 55 to 86). Median overall survival from the time of randomization was significantly longer with CC-486 than with placebo (24.7 months and 14.8 months, respectively; P<0.001). Median relapse-free survival was also significantly longer with CC-486 than with placebo (10.2 months and 4.8 months, respectively; P<0.001). Benefits of CC-486 with respect to overall and relapse-free survival were shown in most subgroups defined according to baseline characteristics. The most common adverse events in both groups were grade 1 or 2 gastrointestinal events. Common grade 3 or 4 adverse events were neutropenia (in 41% of patients in the CC-486 group and 24% of patients in the placebo group) and thrombocytopenia (in 22% and 21%, respectively). Overall health-related quality of life was preserved during CC-486 treatment. Conclusions: CC-486 maintenance therapy was associated with significantly longer overall and relapse-free survival than placebo among older patients with AML who were in remission after chemotherapy. Side effects were mainly gastrointestinal symptoms and neutropenia. Quality-of-life measures were maintained throughout treatment

Addition of gemtuzumab ozogamicin to induction chemotherapy in adult patients with acute myeloid leukaemia: a meta-analysis of individual patient data from randomised controlled trials

Background: Gemtuzumab ozogamicin was the first example of antibody-directed chemotherapy in cancer, and was developed for acute myeloid leukaemia. However, randomised trials in which it was combined with standard induction chemotherapy in adults have produced conflicting results. We did a meta-analysis of individual patient data to assess the efficacy of adding gemtuzumab ozogamicin to induction chemotherapy in adult patients with acute myeloid leukaemia. Methods: We searched PubMed for reports of randomised controlled trials published in any language up to May 1, 2013, that included an assessment of gemtuzumab ozogamicin given to adults (aged 15 years and older) in conjunction with the first course of intensive induction chemotherapy for acute myeloid leukaemia (excluding acute promyelocytic leukaemia) compared with chemotherapy alone. Published data were supplemented with additional data obtained by contacting individual trialists. The primary endpoint of interest was overall survival. We used standard meta-analytic techniques, with an assumption-free (or fixed-effect) method. We also did exploratory stratified analyses to investigate whether any baseline features predicted a greater or lesser benefit from gemtuzumab ozogamicin. Findings: We obtained data from five randomised controlled trials (3325 patients); all trials were centrally randomised and open label, with overall survival as the primary endpoint. The addition of gemtuzumab ozogamicin did not increase the proportion of patients achieving complete remission with or without complete peripheral count recovery (odds ratio [OR] 0·91, 95% CI 0·77–1·07; p=0·3). However, the addition of gemtuzumab ozogamicin significantly reduced the risk of relapse (OR 0·81, 0·73–0·90; p=0·0001), and improved overall survival at 5 years (OR 0·90, 0·82–0·98; p=0·01). At 6 years, the absolute survival benefit was especially apparent in patients with favourable cytogenetic characteristics (20·7%; OR 0·47, 0·31–0·73; p=0·0006), but was also seen in those with intermediate characteristics (5·7%; OR 0·84, 0·75–0·95; p=0·005). Patients with adverse cytogenetic characteristics did not benefit (2·2%; OR 0·99, 0·83–1·18; p=0·9). Doses of 3 mg/m2 were associated with fewer early deaths than doses of 6 mg/m2, with equal efficacy. Interpretation: Gemtuzumab ozogamicin can be safely added to conventional induction therapy and provides a significant survival benefit for patients without adverse cytogenetic characteristics. These data suggest that the use of gemtuzumab ozogamicin should be reassessed and its licence status might need to be reviewed. Funding: None

Prognostic impact of NPM1 and FLT3 mutations in patients with AML in first remission treated with oral azacitidine

The randomized, placebo-controlled, phase 3 QUAZAR AML-001 trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01757535) evaluated oral azacitidine (Oral-AZA) in patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) in first remission after intensive chemotherapy (IC) who were not candidates for hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Eligible patients were randomized 1:1 to Oral-AZA 300 mg or placebo for 14 days per 28-day cycle. We evaluated relapse-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) in patient subgroups defined by NPM1 and FLT3 mutational status at AML diagnosis and whether survival outcomes in these subgroups were influenced by presence of post-IC measurable residual disease (MRD). Gene mutations at diagnosis were collected from patient case report forms; MRD was determined centrally by multiparameter flow cytometry. Overall, 469 of 472 randomized patients (99.4%) had available mutational data; 137 patients (29.2%) had NPM1 mutations (NPM1mut), 66 patients (14.1%) had FLT3 mutations (FLT3mut; with internal tandem duplications [ITD], tyrosine kinase domain mutations [TKDmut], or both), and 30 patients (6.4%) had NPM1mut and FLT3-ITD at diagnosis. Among patients with NPM1mut, OS and RFS were improved with Oral-AZA by 37% (hazard ratio [HR], 0.63; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.41-0.98) and 45% (HR, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.35-0.84), respectively, vs placebo. Median OS was improved numerically with Oral-AZA among patients with NPM1mut whether without MRD (48.6 months vs 31.4 months with placebo) or with MRD (46.1 months vs 10.0 months with placebo) post-IC. Among patients with FLT3mut, Oral-AZA improved OS and RFS by 37% (HR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.35-1.12) and 49% (HR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.27-0.95), respectively, vs placebo. Median OS with Oral-AZA vs placebo was 28.2 months vs 16.2 months, respectively, for patients with FLT3mut and without MRD and 24.0 months vs 8.0 months for patients with FLT3mut and MRD. In multivariate analyses, Oral-AZA significantly improved survival independent of NPM1 or FLT3 mutational status, cytogenetic risk, or post-IC MRD status.Peer reviewe