Cox proportional hazards deep neural network identifies peripheral blood complete remission to be at least equivalent to morphologic complete remission in predicting outcomes of patients treated with azacitidine - a prospective cohort study by the AGMT

The current gold standard of response assessment in patients with myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS), chronic myelomonocytic leukemia (CMML), and acute myeloid leukemia (AML) is morphologic complete remission (CR) and CR with incomplete count recovery (CRi), both of which require an invasive BM evaluation. Outside of clinical trials, BM evaluations are only performed in ~50% of patients during follow-up, pinpointing a clinical need for response endpoints that do not necessitate BM assessments. We define and validate a new response type termed "peripheral blood complete remission" (PB-CR) that can be determined from the differential blood count and clinical parameters without necessitating a BM assessment. We compared the predictive value of PB-CR with morphologic CR/CRi in 1441 non-selected, consecutive patients diagnosed with MDS (n = 522; 36.2%), CMML (n = 132; 9.2%), or AML (n = 787; 54.6%), included within the Austrian Myeloid Registry (aMYELOIDr; NCT04438889). Time-to-event analyses were adjusted for 17 covariates remaining in the final Cox proportional hazards (CPH) model. DeepSurv, a CPH neural network model, and permutation-based feature importance were used to validate results. 1441 patients were included. Adjusted median overall survival for patients achieving PB-CR was 22.8 months (95%CI 18.9-26.2) versus 10.4 months (95%CI 9.7-11.2) for those who did not; HR = 0.366 (95%CI 0.303-0.441; p < .0001). Among patients achieving CR, those additionally achieving PB-CR had a median adjusted OS of 32.6 months (95%CI 26.2-49.2) versus 21.7 months (95%CI 16.9-27.7; HR = 0.400 [95%CI 0.190-0.844; p = .0161]) for those who did not. Our deep neural network analysis-based findings from a large, prospective cohort study indicate that BM evaluations solely for the purpose of identifying CR/CRi can be omitted

PD-L1 overexpression correlates with JAK2-V617F mutational burden and is associated with 9p uniparental disomy in myeloproliferative neoplasms

-L1 overexpression correlates with JAK2-V617F mutational burden and is associated with 9p uniparental disomy in myeloproliferative neoplasm

Intensive chemotherapy with or without gemtuzumab ozogamicin in patients with NPM1-mutated acute myeloid leukaemia (AMLSG 09-09): a randomised, open-label, multicentre, phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND: Acute myeloid leukaemia with mutated NPM1 is associated with high CD33 expression and intermediate-risk cytogenetics. The aim of this study was to evaluate intensive chemotherapy with or without the anti-CD33 antibody-drug conjugate gemtuzumab ozogamicin in participants with newly diagnosed, NPM1-mutated acute myeloid leukaemia. METHODS: This open-label, phase 3 trial was conducted at 56 hospitals in Germany and Austria. Eligible participants were 18 years or older and had newly diagnosed NPM1-mutated acute myeloid leukaemia and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2. Participants were randomly assigned, using age as a stratification factor (18-60 years vs >60 years), 1:1 to the two treatment groups using allocation concealment; there was no masking of participants and investigators to treatment groups. Participants received two cycles of induction therapy (idarubicin, cytarabine, and etoposide) plus all-trans retinoic acid (ATRA) followed by three consolidation cycles of high-dose cytarabine (or an intermediate dose for those older than 60 years) and ATRA, without or with gemtuzumab ozogamicin (3 mg/m(2) administered intravenously on day 1 of induction cycles 1 and 2, and consolidation cycle 1). The primary endpoints were short-term event-free survival and overall survival in the intention-to-treat population (overall survival was added as a co-primary endpoint after amendment four of the protocol on Oct 13, 2013). The secondary endpoints were event-free survival with long-term follow-up, rates of complete remission, complete remission with partial haematological recovery (CRh), and complete remission with incomplete haematological recovery (CRi), cumulative incidences of relapse and death, and number of days in hospital. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT00893399) and has been completed. FINDINGS: Between May 12, 2010, and Sept 1, 2017, 600 participants were enrolled, of which 588 (315 women and 273 men) were randomly assigned (296 to the standard group and 292 to the gemtuzumab ozogamicin group). No difference was found in short-term event-free survival (short-term event-free survival at 6-month follow-up, 53% [95% CI 47-59] in the standard group and 58% [53-64] in the gemtuzumab ozogamicin group; hazard ratio [HR] 0·83; 95% CI 0·65-1·04; p=0·10) and overall survival between treatment groups (2-year overall survival, 69% [63-74] in the standard group and 73% [68-78] in the gemtuzumab ozogamicin group; 0·90; 0·70-1·16; p=0·43). There was no difference in complete remission or CRi rates (n=267 [90%] in the standard group vs n=251 [86%] in the gemtuzumab ozogamicin group; odds ratio [OR] 0·67; 95% CI 0·40-1·11; p=0·15) and complete remission or CRh rates (n=214 [72%] vs n=195 [67%]; OR 0·77; 0·54-1·10; p=0·18), whereas the complete remission rate was lower with gemtuzumab ozogamicin (n=172 [58%] vs n=136 [47%]; OR 0·63; 0·45-0·80; p=0·0068). Cumulative incidence of relapse was significantly reduced by gemtuzumab ozogamicin (2-year cumulative incidence of relapse, 37% [95% CI 31-43] in the standard group and 25% [20-30] in the gemtuzumab ozogamicin group; cause-specific HR 0·65; 0·49-0·86; p=0·0028), and there was no difference in the cumulative incidence of death (2-year cumulative incidence of death 6% [4-10] in the standard group and 7% [5-11] in the gemtuzumab ozogamicin group; HR 1·03; 0·59-1·81; p=0·91). There were no differences in the number of days in hospital across all cycles between treatment groups. The most common treatment-related grade 3-4 adverse events were febrile neutropenia (n=135 [47%] in the gemtuzumab ozogamicin group vs n=122 [41%] in the standard group), thrombocytopenia (n=261 [90%] vs n=265 [90%]), pneumonia (n=71 [25%] vs n=64 [22%]), sepsis (n=85 [29%] vs n=73 [25%]). Treatment-related deaths were documented in 25 participants (4%; n=8 [3%] in the standard group and n=17 [6%] in the gemtuzumab ozogamicin group), mostly due to sepsis and infections. INTERPRETATION: The primary endpoints of the trial of event-free survival and overall survival were not met. However, an anti-leukaemic efficacy of gemtuzumab ozogamicin in participants with NPM1-mutated acute myeloid leukaemia is shown by a significantly lower cumulative incidence of relapse rate, suggesting that the addition of gemtuzumab ozogamicin might reduce the need for salvage therapy in these participants. The results from this study provide further evidence that gemtuzumab ozogamicin should be added in the standard of care treatment in adults with NPM1-mutated acute myeloid leukaemia

Midostaurin plus intensive chemotherapy for younger and older patients with AML and FLT3 internal tandem duplications

We conducted a single-arm phase-II trial (AMLSG 16-10) to evaluate midostaurin with intensive chemotherapy followed by allogeneic hematopoietic-cell transplantation (HCT) and a one-year midostaurin maintenance therapy in adult patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) and FLT3 internal tandem duplication (ITD). Patients 18-70 years of age with newly diagnosed FLT3-ITD-positive AML were eligible. Primary and key secondary endpoints were event-free (EFS) and overall survival (OS). Results were compared to a historical cohort of 415 patients treated on 5 prior AMLSG trials; statistical analysis was performed using a double-robust adjustment with propensity score weighting and covariate adjustment. Results were also compared to patients (18-59yrs) treated on the placebo arm of the CALGB 10603/RATIFY trial. The trial accrued 440 patients (18-60yrs, n=312; 61-70yrs, n=128). In multivariate analysis, EFS was significantly in favor of patients treated within the AMLSG 16-10 trial compared to the AMLSG control (HR 0.55; P<0.001); both in younger (HR 0.59; P<0.001) and older patients (HR 0.42; P<0.001). Multivariate analysis also showed a significant beneficial effect on OS compared to the AMLSG control (HR 0.57; P<0.001) as well as to the CALGB 10603/RATIFY trial (HR 0.71; p=0.005). The treatment effect of midostaurin remained significant in sensitivity analysis including allogeneic HCT as a time-dependent covariate. Addition of midostaurin to chemotherapy was safe in younger and older patients. In comparison to historical controls, the addition of midostaurin to intensive therapy led to a significant improvement in outcome in younger and older patients with AML and FLT3-ITD. The AMLSG 16-10 trial is registered at clinicaltrialsregistry.eu (Eudra-CT number 2011-003168-63) and clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01477606)

Therapy-related myelodysplastic syndromes deserve specific diagnostic sub-classification and risk-stratification-an approach to classification of patients with t-MDS.

In the current World Health Organization (WHO)-classification, therapy-related myelodysplastic syndromes (t-MDS) are categorized together with therapy-related acute myeloid leukemia (AML) and t-myelodysplastic/myeloproliferative neoplasms into one subgroup independent of morphologic or prognostic features. Analyzing data of 2087 t-MDS patients from different international MDS groups to evaluate classification and prognostication tools we found that applying the WHO classification for p-MDS successfully predicts time to transformation and survival (both p &lt; 0.001). The results regarding carefully reviewed cytogenetic data, classifications, and prognostic scores confirmed that t-MDS are similarly heterogeneous as p-MDS and therefore deserve the same careful differentiation regarding risk. As reference, these results were compared with 4593 primary MDS (p-MDS) patients represented in the International Working Group for Prognosis in MDS database (IWG-PM). Although a less favorable clinical outcome occurred in each t-MDS subset compared with p-MDS subgroups, FAB and WHO-classification, IPSS-R, and WPSS-R separated t-MDS patients into differing risk groups effectively, indicating that all established risk factors for p-MDS maintained relevance in t-MDS, with cytogenetic features having enhanced predictive power. These data strongly argue to classify t-MDS as a separate entity distinct from other WHO-classified t-myeloid neoplasms, which would enhance treatment decisions and facilitate the inclusion of t-MDS patients into clinical studies