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

A phase 1/2 study of the oral FLT3 inhibitor pexidartinib in relapsed/refractory FLT3-ITD-mutant acute myeloid leukemia.

FMS-like tyrosine kinase 3 (FLT3) tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) have activity in acute myeloid leukemia (AML) patients with FLT3 internal tandem duplication (ITD) mutations, but efficacy is limited by resistance-conferring kinase domain mutations. This phase 1/2 study evaluated the safety, tolerability, and efficacy of the oral FLT3 inhibitor PLX3397 (pexidartinib), which has activity against the FLT3 TKI-resistant F691L gatekeeper mutation in relapsed/refractory FLT3-ITD-mutant AML. Ninety patients were treated: 34 in dose escalation (part 1) and 56 in dose expansion (part 2). Doses of 800 to 5000 mg per day in divided doses were tested. No maximally tolerated dose was reached. Plasma inhibitory assay demonstrated that patients dosed with ≥3000 mg had sufficient levels of active drug in their trough plasma samples to achieve 95% inhibition of FLT3 phosphorylation in an FLT3-ITD AML cell line. Based on a plateau in drug exposure, the 3000-mg dose was chosen as the recommended phase 2 dose. The most frequently reported treatment-emergent adverse events were diarrhea (50%), fatigue (47%), and nausea (46%). Based on modified response criteria, the overall response rate to pexidartinib among all patients was 21%. Twenty-three percent of patients treated at ≥2000 mg responded. The overall composite complete response rate for the study was 11%. Six patients were successfully bridged to transplantation. Median overall survival (OS) of patients treated in dose expansion was 112 days (90% confidence interval [CI], 77-150 days), and median OS of responders with complete remission with or without recovery of blood counts was 265 days (90% CI, 170-422 days). This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT01349049

Impact of inotuzumab ozogamicin on outcome in relapsed or refractory acute B-cell lymphoblastic leukemia patients prior to allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation and risk of sinusoidal obstruction syndrome/venous occlusive disease

: We evaluated 58 patients with relapsed or refractory (r/r) acute B-lymphoblastic leukemia (B-ALL; median age 42.5 years; range, 16-69 years), treated with inotuzumab ozogamicin (INO) between 2016-2022 and who received an allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HCT) consecutively. Forty-seven (81%) of the 58 patients were heavily pretreated receiving intensive chemotherapy +/- tyrosine kinase inhibitor, blinatumomab in 24 (41%) and allo-HCT at first-line in 11 (19%) patients. Complete remission rate prior to allo-HCT was 84%. Median follow-up was 30.5 months and median overall survival (OS) measured from start of INO was 11.2 months. One- and 2-year OS rates were 50% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 38.4-56.1) and 36.7% (95% CI: 25.5-52.9), respectively. Sinusoidal obstruction syndrome/venous occlusive disease (SOS/ VOD) after allo-HCT occurred in 17 (29%) patients. Of those, nine (53%) patients died due to SOS/VOD and multi-organ failure. Two had received >2 INO cycles (3 cycles, 5 cycles, N=1, each), all others ≤2 INO cycles prior to allo-HCT. Logistic regression analysis revealed conditioning with double alkylators (P=0.038) and allo-HCT during first-line therapy (P=0.050) as significant risk factors for SOS/VOD and in trend allo-HCT ≤60 days from last INO application (P=0.07), whereas number of INO cycles before allo-HCT and time between last INO application and allo-HCT were not significant. Relapse/progressive disease occurred in 20 (34%) patients. Of those, five (25%) patients are still alive, whereas 15 succumbed of their disease. Treatment with INO seems to be an effective approach with successful bridge-to-transplant. However, risk of SOS/VOD is high, necessitating continuous monitoring and recognition of SOS/VOD risk factors

Depression prevalence using the HADS-D compared to SCID major depression classification:An individual participant data meta-analysis

Objectives: Validated diagnostic interviews are required to classify depression status and estimate prevalence of disorder, but screening tools are often used instead. We used individual participant data meta-analysis to compare prevalence based on standard Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale – depression subscale (HADS-D) cutoffs of ≥8 and ≥11 versus Structured Clinical Interview for DSM (SCID) major depression and determined if an alternative HADS-D cutoff could more accurately estimate prevalence. Methods: We searched Medline, Medline In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations via Ovid, PsycINFO, and Web of Science (inception-July 11, 2016) for studies comparing HADS-D scores to SCID major depression status. Pooled prevalence and pooled differences in prevalence for HADS-D cutoffs versus SCID major depression were estimated. Results: 6005 participants (689 SCID major depression cases) from 41 primary studies were included. Pooled prevalence was 24.5% (95% Confidence Interval (CI): 20.5%, 29.0%) for HADS-D ≥8, 10.7% (95% CI: 8.3%, 13.8%) for HADS-D ≥11, and 11.6% (95% CI: 9.2%, 14.6%) for SCID major depression. HADS-D ≥11 was closest to SCID major depression prevalence, but the 95% prediction interval for the difference that could be expected for HADS-D ≥11 versus SCID in a new study was −21.1% to 19.5%. Conclusions: HADS-D ≥8 substantially overestimates depression prevalence. Of all possible cutoff thresholds, HADS-D ≥11 was closest to the SCID, but there was substantial heterogeneity in the difference between HADS-D ≥11 and SCID-based estimates. HADS-D should not be used as a substitute for a validated diagnostic interview.This study was funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR, KRS-144045 & PCG 155468). Ms. Neupane was supported by a G.R. Caverhill Fellowship from the Faculty of Medicine, McGill University. Drs. Levis and Wu were supported by Fonds de recherche du Québec - Santé (FRQS) Postdoctoral Training Fellowships. Mr. Bhandari was supported by a studentship from the Research Institute of the McGill University Health Centre. Ms. Rice was supported by a Vanier Canada Graduate Scholarship. Dr. Patten was supported by a Senior Health Scholar award from Alberta Innovates, Health Solutions. The primary study by Scott et al. was supported by the Cumming School of Medicine and Alberta Health Services through the Calgary Health Trust, and funding from the Hotchkiss Brain Institute. The primary study by Amoozegar et al. was supported by the Alberta Health Services, the University of Calgary Faculty of Medicine, and the Hotchkiss Brain Institute. The primary study by Cheung et al. was supported by the Waikato Clinical School, University of Auckland, the Waikato Medical Research Foundation and the Waikato Respiratory Research Fund. The primary study by Cukor et al. was supported in part by a Promoting Psychological Research and Training on Health-Disparities Issues at Ethnic Minority Serving Institutions Grants (ProDIGs) awarded to Dr. Cukor from the American Psychological Association. The primary study by De Souza et al. was supported by Birmingham and Solihull Mental Health Foundation Trust. The primary study by Honarmand et al. was supported by a grant from the Multiple Sclerosis Society of Canada. The primary study by Fischer et al. was supported as part of the RECODEHF study by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (01GY1150). The primary study by Gagnon et al. was supported by the Drummond Foundation and the Department of Psychiatry, University Health Network. The primary study by Akechi et al. was supported in part by a Grant-in-Aid for Cancer Research (11−2) from the Japanese Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare and a Grant-in-Aid for Young Scientists (B) from the Japanese Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology. The primary study by Kugaya et al. was supported in part by a Grant-in-Aid for Cancer Research (9–31) and the Second-Term Comprehensive 10-year Strategy for Cancer Control from the Japanese Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare. The primary study Ryan et al. was supported by the Irish Cancer Society (Grant CRP08GAL). The primary study by Keller et al. was supported by the Medical Faculty of the University of Heidelberg (grant no. 175/2000). The primary study by Love et al. (2004) was supported by the Kathleen Cuningham Foundation (National Breast Cancer Foundation), the Cancer Council of Victoria and the National Health and Medical Research Council. The primary study by Love et al. (2002) was supported by a grant from the Bethlehem Griffiths Research Foundation. The primary study by Löwe et al. was supported by the medical faculty of the University of Heidelberg, Germany (Project 121/2000). The primary study by Navines et al. was supported in part by the Spanish grants from the Fondo de Investigación en Salud, Instituto de Salud Carlos III (EO PI08/90869 and PSIGEN-VHC Study: FIS-E08/00268) and the support of FEDER (one way to make Europe). The primary study by O'Rourke et al. was supported by the Scottish Home and Health Department, Stroke Association, and Medical Research Council. The primary study by Sanchez-Gistau et al. was supported by a grant from the Ministry of Health of Spain (PI040418) and in part by Catalonia Government, DURSI 2009SGR1119. The primary study by Gould et al. was supported by the Transport Accident Commission Grant. The primary study by Rooney et al. was supported by the NHS Lothian Neuro-Oncology Endowment Fund. The primary study by Schwarzbold et al. was supported by PRONEX Program (NENASC Project) and PPSUS Program of Fundaçao de Amparo a esquisa e Inovacao do Estado de Santa Catarina (FAPESC) and the National Science and Technology Institute for Translational Medicine (INCT-TM). The primary study by Simard et al. was supported by IDEA grants from the Canadian Prostate Cancer Research Initiative and the Canadian Breast Cancer Research Alliance, as well as a studentship from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research. The primary study by Singer et al. (2009) was supported by a grant from the German Federal Ministry for Education and Research (no. 01ZZ0106). The primary study by Singer et al. (2008) was supported by grants from the German Federal Ministry for Education and Research (# 7DZAIQTX) and of the University of Leipzig (# formel. 1–57). The primary study by Meyer et al. was supported by the Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF). The primary study by Stone et al. was supported by the Medical Research Council, UK and Chest Heart and Stroke, Scotland. The primary study by Turner et al. was supported by a bequest from Jennie Thomas through Hunter Medical Research Institute. The primary study by Walterfang et al. was supported by Melbourne Health. Drs. Benedetti and Thombs were supported by FRQS researcher salary awards. No other authors reported funding for primary studies or for their work on this study. No funder had any role in the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript; and decision to submit the manuscript for publication

Gilteritinib or chemotherapy for relapsed or refractory FLT3-mutated AML

BACKGROUND: Patients with relapsed or refractory acute myeloid leukemia (AML) with mutations in the FMS-like tyrosine kinase 3 gene (FLT3) infrequently have a response to salvage chemotherapy. Gilteritinib is an oral, potent, selective FLT3 inhibitor with single-agent activity in relapsed or refractory FLT3-mutated AML. METHODS: In a phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned adults with relapsed or refractory FLT3-mutated AML in a 2:1 ratio to receive either gilteritinib (at a dose of 120 mg per day) or salvage chemotherapy. The two primary end points were overall survival and the percentage of patients who had complete remission with full or partial hematologic recovery. Secondary end points included event-free survival (freedom from treatment failure [i.e., relapse or lack of remission] or death) and the percentage of patients who had complete remission. RESULTS: Of 371 eligible patients, 247 were randomly assigned to the gilteritinib group and 124 to the salvage chemotherapy group. The median overall survival in the gilteritinib group was significantly longer than that in the chemotherapy group (9.3 months vs. 5.6 months; hazard ratio for death, 0.64; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.49 to 0.83; P\u3c0.001). The median event-free survival was 2.8 months in the gilteritinib group and 0.7 months in the chemotherapy group (hazard ratio for treatment failure or death, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.58 to 1.09). The percentage of patients who had complete remission with full or partial hematologic recovery was 34.0% in the gilteritinib group and 15.3% in the chemotherapy group (risk difference, 18.6 percentage points; 95% CI, 9.8 to 27.4); the percentages with complete remission were 21.1% and 10.5%, respectively (risk difference, 10.6 percentage points; 95% CI, 2.8 to 18.4). In an analysis that was adjusted for therapy duration, adverse events of grade 3 or higher and serious adverse events occurred less frequently in the gilteritinib group than in the chemotherapy group; the most common adverse events of grade 3 or higher in the gilteritinib group were febrile neutropenia (45.9%), anemia (40.7%), and thrombocytopenia (22.8%). CONCLUSIONS: Gilteritinib resulted in significantly longer survival and higher percentages of patients with remission than salvage chemotherapy among patients with relapsed or refractory FLT3-mutated AML. (Funded by Astellas Pharma; ADMIRAL ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02421939.)

Erratum to: Methods for evaluating medical tests and biomarkers

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1186/s41512-016-0001-y.]

Pervasive gaps in Amazonian ecological research

Biodiversity loss is one of the main challenges of our time,1,2 and attempts to address it require a clear un derstanding of how ecological communities respond to environmental change across time and space.3,4 While the increasing availability of global databases on ecological communities has advanced our knowledge of biodiversity sensitivity to environmental changes,5–7 vast areas of the tropics remain understudied.8–11 In the American tropics, Amazonia stands out as the world’s most diverse rainforest and the primary source of Neotropical biodiversity,12 but it remains among the least known forests in America and is often underrepre sented in biodiversity databases.13–15 To worsen this situation, human-induced modifications16,17 may elim inate pieces of the Amazon’s biodiversity puzzle before we can use them to understand how ecological com munities are responding. To increase generalization and applicability of biodiversity knowledge,18,19 it is thus crucial to reduce biases in ecological research, particularly in regions projected to face the most pronounced environmental changes. We integrate ecological community metadata of 7,694 sampling sites for multiple or ganism groups in a machine learning model framework to map the research probability across the Brazilian Amazonia, while identifying the region’s vulnerability to environmental change. 15%–18% of the most ne glected areas in ecological research are expected to experience severe climate or land use changes by 2050. This means that unless we take immediate action, we will not be able to establish their current status, much less monitor how it is changing and what is being lostinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio