Phase 2 Study of Decitabine in Combination with Tretinoin in Myelodysplastic Syndromes and Acute Myelogenous Leukemia: Interim Results

Abstract Abstract 3815 Background: The activity of DNA methyltransferase inhibitor (DNMTI) monotherapy is suboptimal for most patients (pts) with myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) and acute myelogenous leukemia (AML). DNMTI combinations studied to date have not convincingly produced higher response rates compared to DNMTI monotherapy, although time to response appears to be improved in some studies. We combined decitabine (DAC) with tretinoin (ATRA), an RAR ligand which can recruit histone acetyltransferases to gene regulatory regions, as a means to upregulate gene expression, and to induce apoptosis or differentiation, as is seen in in vitro studies of non-M3 AML. Our previous phase 1 study established 65 mg/m2/day of ATRA as the MTD (headache was DLT at 85 mg/m2/d) when given on days 10–19 following standard dose decitabine (20 mg/m2/d), given on days 1–5 of a 28-day cycle (Klimek VM, et al. Leuk Res, 2011;35:S70-S). Materials and Methods: MDS pts with any FAB or WHO subtype were enrolled if they had an IPSS score ≥ 0.5, were ineligible for allogeneic stem cell transplant (AlloSCT) at study entry, and had adequate hepatic and renal function. Prior DAC or 5-azacytidine (5-aza) responders who then progressed off treatment, and pts whose MDS progressed on 5-aza were eligible. Pts received up to 10 cycles of DAC (given on days 1–5) and tretinoin (65 mg/m2/d on days 10–19 of a 28-day cycle), allowing for delays due to infection or to allow count recovery as deemed necessary by the treating physician. Those with an ongoing response after 10 cycles continued DAC alone off-study. The primary endpoint is efficacy, assessed after even-numbered cycles using the 2006 Modified International Working Group MDS response criteria. Kaplan-Meier methodology was used to estimate duration of best response due to the censoring for patients undergoing AlloSCT. Results: 36 eligible pts (27M, 9F; median age 66, range 45–84 yrs) were enrolled in the phase 2 cohort as of 6/2012. FAB/WHO subtypes included: RA/RCMD, n=3 (8%); RARS/RCMD-RARS, n=1 (3%); RAEB/RAEB-1 & 2, n= 24 (67%); RAEBt/AML, n= 6 (17%); CMML/CMML-1, n=2 (6%). IPSS risk categories included: Int-1, n=5 (14%); Int-2, n=16 (44%); High Risk, n=11 (31%), and pts with ≥ Int-1 (n=3) or ≥ Int-2 (n=1) risk disease who could not be definitively classified using the IPSS. Most pts (n=20) had IPSS poor risk cytogenetics (CG), 11 had IPSS good risk CG (all with normal karyotype), 3 had intermediate risk CG, and CG results were unknown in 2 pts. 15/36 (42%) had therapy-related disease (t-MDS/AML), all with IPSS poor risk CG and either IPSS Int-2 (n=9) or High Risk (n=6) disease. Marrow blasts were ≥ 5% in 26/36 pts: (5–10%, n=13; 11–20%, n=13; 21–30%, n=6). Prior MDS therapy included lenalidomide (n=2), thalidomide (n=1), 5-aza (n=3), DAC (n=1), and lintuzumab (n=1). Pts received a median of 4 cycles of therapy (range, 1–10), and started therapy 0.6–180 months (median, 1.42 months) from the time of diagnosis. Two pts were classified as treatment failures since they died during the first cycle of therapy. One pt with CMML-1 at baseline progressed to AML during the screening period, and was deemed ineligible. Two pts on study have not yet had a full response assessment. Best responses in the evaluable intent to treat cohort (n=33) include: CR, n=7 (21%); PR, n=1 (3%); mCR, n=3 (9%); mCR+HI, n=3 (9 %); HI alone, n=3 (9 %); Stable disease, n=10 (30%); Disease progression, n= 3 (9%). The composite CR rate (CR+mCR±HI) was 39% (13/33), and the overall response rate (CR+PR+mCR±HI+HI) is 51% (17/33). Median time from diagnosis to start of therapy for responders was 1.7 months (range, 0.8–180). The ORR for the 13 t-MDS/AML pts was 46% (6/13), including 5 pts with monosomy 17 and/or p53 loss by FISH. The median time to initial response and best response is 1.1 months and 2.3 months, respectively. The median response duration is 7.8 months, incorporating the 7 pts censored at the time they came off study to undergo AlloSCT. Conclusions: DAC/ATRA is active in IPSS Int-2 and High Risk MDS and in t-MDS/AML, which is characterized by poor risk cytogenetics and an increased frequency of p53 or chromosome 17p loss. Although our interim ORR appears similar to DAC and 5-aza monotherapy trials, our results were achieved in a higher risk cohort, and the CR rate is equal to or greater than some earlier monotherapy studies with a shorter median time to response. Ongoing and planned correlative studies may define pre-treatment biomarkers for response. Disclosures: Off Label Use: Tretinoin

Alpha-Particle Immunotherapy for Acute Myeloid Leukemia (AML) with Bismuth-213 (213Bi) and Actinium-225 (225Ac)

Lintuzumab, a humanized anti-CD33 antibody, targets myeloid leukemia cells and has modest activity against AML. To increase the antibody’s potency yet avoid nonspecific cytotoxicity seen with β-emitting isotopes, the α-emitter 213Bi was conjugated to lintuzumab. The safety, feasibility, and antileukemic activity of 213Bi-lintuzumab was demonstrated in a phase I trial (Jurcic, Blood 2002). Furthermore, 213Bi-lintuzumab produced remissions in 24% of AML patients receiving doses ≥ 37 MBq/kg after partial cytoreduction with cytarabine (Rosenblat, Clin Cancer Res 2010). The widespread use of 213Bi, however, is limited by its 46-min half-life. 225Ac (t½=10 d), a radiometal that generates four α-particles, can be conjugated to antibodies using DOTA-SCN. 225Ac-labeled immunoconjugates can kill in vitro at doses at least 1,000 times lower than 213Bi analogs and prolong survival in mouse xenograft models of several cancers (McDevitt, Science 2001). We sought to determine the safety, pharmacology, and biological activity of 225Ac-linutuzumab in patients with AML.JRC.E.5-Nuclear chemistr

Sequential Cytarabine and a-Particle Immunotherapy with Bismuth-213¿Lintuzumab (HuM195) for Acute Myeloid Leukemia

Purpose: Lintuzumab (HuM195), a humanized anti-CD33 antibody, targets myeloid leukemia cells and has modest single-agent activity against acute myeloid leukemia (AML). To increase the potency of the antibody without the nonspecific cytotoxicity associated with ß-emitters, the a-particle¿emitting radionuclide bismuth-213 (213Bi) was conjugated to lintuzumab. This phase I/II trial was conducted to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and antileukemic effects of 213Bi-lintuzumab, the first targeted a-emitter, after partially cytoreductive chemotherapy. Experimental Design: Thirty-one patients with newly diagnosed (n = 13) or relapsed/refractory (n = 18) AML (median age, 67 years; range, 37-80) were treated with cytarabine (200 mg/m2/d) for 5 days followed by 213Bi-lintuzumab (18.5-46.25 MBq/kg). Results: The MTD of 213Bi-lintuzumab was 37 MB/kg; myelosuppression lasting >35 days was dose limiting. Extramedullary toxicities were primarily limited to grade =2 events, including infusion-related reactions. Transient grade 3/4 liver function abnormalities were seen in five patients (16%). Treatment related deaths occurred in 2 of 21 (10%) patients who received the MTD. Significant reductions in marrow blasts were seen at all dose levels. The median response duration was 6 months (range, 2-12). Biodistribution and pharmacokinetic studies suggested that saturation of available CD33 sites by 213Bi-lintuzumab was achieved after partial cytoreduction with cytarabine. Conclusions: Sequential administration of cytarabine and 213Bi-lintuzumab is tolerable and can produce remissions in patients with AMLJRC.E.5-Nuclear chemistr

International randomized phase III study of elacytarabine versus investigator choice in patients with relapsed/refractory acute myeloid leukemia

Purpose: Most patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) eventually experience relapse. Relapsed/refractory AML has a dismal prognosis and currently available treatment options are generally ineffective. The objective of this large, international, randomized clinical trial was to investigate the efficacy of elacytarabine, a novel elaidic acid ester of cytarabine, versus the investigator's choice of one of seven commonly used AML salvage regimens, including high-dose cytarabine, multiagent chemotherapy, hypomethylating agents, hydroxyurea, and supportive care. Patients and Methods: A total of 381 patients with relapsed/refractory AML were treated in North America, Europe, and Australia. Investigators selected a control treatment for individual patients before random assignment. The primary end point was overall survival (OS). Results: There were no significant differences in OS (3.5 v 3.3 months), response rate (23% v 21%), or relapse-free survival (5.1 v 3.7 months) between the elacytarabine and control arms, respectively. There was no significant difference in OS among any of the investigator's choice regimens. Prolonged survival was only achieved in a few patients in both study arms whose disease responded and who underwent allogeneic stem-cell transplantation. Conclusion: Neither elacytarabine nor any of the seven alternative treatment regimens provided clinically meaningful benefit to these patients. OS in both study arms and for all treatments was extremely poor. Novel agents, novel clinical trial designs, and novel strategies of drug development are all desperately needed for this patient population

International Randomized Phase III Study of Elacytarabine Versus Investigator Choice in Patients With Relapsed/Refractory Acute Myeloid Leukemia

Purpose: Most patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) eventually experience relapse. Relapsed/refractory AML has a dismal prognosis and currently available treatment options are generally ineffective. The objective of this large, international, randomized clinical trial was to investigate the efficacy of elacytarabine, a novel elaidic acid ester of cytarabine, versus the investigator's choice of one of seven commonly used AML salvage regimens, including high-dose cytarabine, multiagent chemotherapy, hypomethylating agents, hydroxyurea, and supportive care. Patients and Methods: A total of 381 patients with relapsed/refractory AML were treated in North America, Europe, and Australia. Investigators selected a control treatment for individual patients before random assignment. The primary end point was overall survival (OS). Results: There were no significant differences in OS (3.5 v 3.3 months), response rate (23% v 21%), or relapse-free survival (5.1 v 3.7 months) between the elacytarabine and control arms, respectively. There was no significant difference in OS among any of the investigator's choice regimens. Prolonged survival was only achieved in a few patients in both study arms whose disease responded and who underwent allogeneic stem-cell transplantation. Conclusion: Neither elacytarabine nor any of the seven alternative treatment regimens provided clinically meaningful benefit to these patients. OS in both study arms and for all treatments was extremely poor. Novel agents, novel clinical trial designs, and novel strategies of drug development are all desperately needed for this patient population