AML

NEWPORT BEACH, CALIF. – Researchers have shown they can identify transgender leukemia patients by detecting gender-karyotype mismatches, but some transgender patients may be overlooked with this method.

The researchers’ work also highlights how little we know about transgender patients with leukemia and other cancers.

Alison Alpert, MD, of the University of Rochester (N.Y.) Medical Center, and her colleagues conducted this research and presented their findings in a poster at the Acute Leukemia Forum of Hemedicus.

“There’s almost no data about transgender people with cancer ... in terms of prevalence or anything else,” Dr. Alpert noted. “And because we don’t know which patients with cancer are transgender, we can’t begin to answer any of the other big questions for patients.”

Specifically, it’s unclear what kinds of cancer transgender patients have, if there are health disparities among transgender patients, if it is safe to continue hormone therapy during cancer treatment, and if it is possible to do transition-related surgeries in the context of cancer care.

With this in mind, Dr. Alpert and her colleagues set out to identify transgender patients by detecting gender-karyotype mismatches. The team analyzed data on patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) or myelodysplastic syndromes enrolled in five Southwest Oncology Group (SWOG) trials.

Of the 1,748 patients analyzed, six (0.3%) had a gender-karyotype mismatch. Five patients had a 46,XY karyotype and identified as female, and one patient had a 46,XX karyotype and identified as male.

“Some transgender patients have their gender identity accurately reflected in the electronic medical record, [but] some transgender patients probably don’t,” Dr. Alpert noted. “So we identified some, but probably not all, and probably not even most, transgender patients with leukemia in this cohort.”

All six of the transgender patients identified had AML, and all were white. They ranged in age from 18 to 57 years. Four patients had achieved a complete response to therapy, and two had refractory disease.

Four patients, including one who was refractory, were still alive at last follow-up. The remaining two patients, including one who had achieved a complete response, had died.

The transgender patients identified in this analysis represent a very small percentage of the population studied, Dr. Alpert noted. Therefore, the researchers could not draw any conclusions about transgender patients with AML.

“Mostly, what we did was, we pointed out how little information we have,” Dr. Alpert said. “Oncologists don’t routinely collect gender identity information, and this information doesn’t exist in cooperative group databases either.”

“But going forward, what probably really needs to happen is that oncologists need to ask their patients whether they are transgender or not. And then, ideally, consent forms for large cooperative groups like SWOG would include gender identity data, and then we would be able to answer some of our other questions and better counsel our patients.”

Dr. Alpert and her colleagues are hoping to gain insights regarding transgender patients with lymphoma as well. The researchers are analyzing the lymphoma database at the University of Rochester Medical Center, which includes about 2,200 patients.

The team is attempting to identify transgender lymphoma patients using gender-karyotype mismatch as well as other methods, including assessing patients’ medication and surgical histories, determining whether patients have any aliases, and looking for the word “transgender” in patient charts.

“Given that the country is finally starting to talk about transgender patients, their health disparities, and their needs and experiences, it’s really time that we start collecting this data,” Dr. Alpert said.

“[I]f we are able to start to collect this data, it can help us build relationships with our patients, improve their care and outcomes, and, hopefully, be able to better counsel them about hormones and surgery.”

Dr. Alpert and her colleagues did not disclose any conflicts of interest.

The Acute Leukemia Forum is organized by Hemedicus, which is owned by the same company as this news organization.

[email protected]

NEWPORT BEACH, CALIF. – Researchers have shown they can identify transgender leukemia patients by detecting gender-karyotype mismatches, but some transgender patients may be overlooked with this method.

The researchers’ work also highlights how little we know about transgender patients with leukemia and other cancers.

Alison Alpert, MD, of the University of Rochester (N.Y.) Medical Center, and her colleagues conducted this research and presented their findings in a poster at the Acute Leukemia Forum of Hemedicus.

“There’s almost no data about transgender people with cancer ... in terms of prevalence or anything else,” Dr. Alpert noted. “And because we don’t know which patients with cancer are transgender, we can’t begin to answer any of the other big questions for patients.”

Specifically, it’s unclear what kinds of cancer transgender patients have, if there are health disparities among transgender patients, if it is safe to continue hormone therapy during cancer treatment, and if it is possible to do transition-related surgeries in the context of cancer care.

With this in mind, Dr. Alpert and her colleagues set out to identify transgender patients by detecting gender-karyotype mismatches. The team analyzed data on patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) or myelodysplastic syndromes enrolled in five Southwest Oncology Group (SWOG) trials.

Of the 1,748 patients analyzed, six (0.3%) had a gender-karyotype mismatch. Five patients had a 46,XY karyotype and identified as female, and one patient had a 46,XX karyotype and identified as male.

“Some transgender patients have their gender identity accurately reflected in the electronic medical record, [but] some transgender patients probably don’t,” Dr. Alpert noted. “So we identified some, but probably not all, and probably not even most, transgender patients with leukemia in this cohort.”

All six of the transgender patients identified had AML, and all were white. They ranged in age from 18 to 57 years. Four patients had achieved a complete response to therapy, and two had refractory disease.

Four patients, including one who was refractory, were still alive at last follow-up. The remaining two patients, including one who had achieved a complete response, had died.

The transgender patients identified in this analysis represent a very small percentage of the population studied, Dr. Alpert noted. Therefore, the researchers could not draw any conclusions about transgender patients with AML.

“Mostly, what we did was, we pointed out how little information we have,” Dr. Alpert said. “Oncologists don’t routinely collect gender identity information, and this information doesn’t exist in cooperative group databases either.”

“But going forward, what probably really needs to happen is that oncologists need to ask their patients whether they are transgender or not. And then, ideally, consent forms for large cooperative groups like SWOG would include gender identity data, and then we would be able to answer some of our other questions and better counsel our patients.”

Dr. Alpert and her colleagues are hoping to gain insights regarding transgender patients with lymphoma as well. The researchers are analyzing the lymphoma database at the University of Rochester Medical Center, which includes about 2,200 patients.

The team is attempting to identify transgender lymphoma patients using gender-karyotype mismatch as well as other methods, including assessing patients’ medication and surgical histories, determining whether patients have any aliases, and looking for the word “transgender” in patient charts.

“Given that the country is finally starting to talk about transgender patients, their health disparities, and their needs and experiences, it’s really time that we start collecting this data,” Dr. Alpert said.

“[I]f we are able to start to collect this data, it can help us build relationships with our patients, improve their care and outcomes, and, hopefully, be able to better counsel them about hormones and surgery.”

Dr. Alpert and her colleagues did not disclose any conflicts of interest.

The Acute Leukemia Forum is organized by Hemedicus, which is owned by the same company as this news organization.

[email protected]

NEWPORT BEACH, CALIF. – Researchers have shown they can identify transgender leukemia patients by detecting gender-karyotype mismatches, but some transgender patients may be overlooked with this method.

The researchers’ work also highlights how little we know about transgender patients with leukemia and other cancers.

Alison Alpert, MD, of the University of Rochester (N.Y.) Medical Center, and her colleagues conducted this research and presented their findings in a poster at the Acute Leukemia Forum of Hemedicus.

“There’s almost no data about transgender people with cancer ... in terms of prevalence or anything else,” Dr. Alpert noted. “And because we don’t know which patients with cancer are transgender, we can’t begin to answer any of the other big questions for patients.”

Specifically, it’s unclear what kinds of cancer transgender patients have, if there are health disparities among transgender patients, if it is safe to continue hormone therapy during cancer treatment, and if it is possible to do transition-related surgeries in the context of cancer care.

With this in mind, Dr. Alpert and her colleagues set out to identify transgender patients by detecting gender-karyotype mismatches. The team analyzed data on patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) or myelodysplastic syndromes enrolled in five Southwest Oncology Group (SWOG) trials.

Of the 1,748 patients analyzed, six (0.3%) had a gender-karyotype mismatch. Five patients had a 46,XY karyotype and identified as female, and one patient had a 46,XX karyotype and identified as male.

“Some transgender patients have their gender identity accurately reflected in the electronic medical record, [but] some transgender patients probably don’t,” Dr. Alpert noted. “So we identified some, but probably not all, and probably not even most, transgender patients with leukemia in this cohort.”

All six of the transgender patients identified had AML, and all were white. They ranged in age from 18 to 57 years. Four patients had achieved a complete response to therapy, and two had refractory disease.

Four patients, including one who was refractory, were still alive at last follow-up. The remaining two patients, including one who had achieved a complete response, had died.

The transgender patients identified in this analysis represent a very small percentage of the population studied, Dr. Alpert noted. Therefore, the researchers could not draw any conclusions about transgender patients with AML.

“Mostly, what we did was, we pointed out how little information we have,” Dr. Alpert said. “Oncologists don’t routinely collect gender identity information, and this information doesn’t exist in cooperative group databases either.”

“But going forward, what probably really needs to happen is that oncologists need to ask their patients whether they are transgender or not. And then, ideally, consent forms for large cooperative groups like SWOG would include gender identity data, and then we would be able to answer some of our other questions and better counsel our patients.”

Dr. Alpert and her colleagues are hoping to gain insights regarding transgender patients with lymphoma as well. The researchers are analyzing the lymphoma database at the University of Rochester Medical Center, which includes about 2,200 patients.

The team is attempting to identify transgender lymphoma patients using gender-karyotype mismatch as well as other methods, including assessing patients’ medication and surgical histories, determining whether patients have any aliases, and looking for the word “transgender” in patient charts.

“Given that the country is finally starting to talk about transgender patients, their health disparities, and their needs and experiences, it’s really time that we start collecting this data,” Dr. Alpert said.

“[I]f we are able to start to collect this data, it can help us build relationships with our patients, improve their care and outcomes, and, hopefully, be able to better counsel them about hormones and surgery.”

Dr. Alpert and her colleagues did not disclose any conflicts of interest.

The Acute Leukemia Forum is organized by Hemedicus, which is owned by the same company as this news organization.

[email protected]

NEWPORT BEACH, CALIF. – The evolving treatment of acute myeloid leukemia (AML) was highlighted at the Acute Leukemia Forum of Hemedicus.

In a video interview, Martin Tallman, MD, of Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York, discussed several meeting presentations on the treatment of AML.

In his presentation, Craig Jordan, PhD, of the University of Colorado at Denver, Aurora, explained how the combination of venetoclax and azacitidine appears to target leukemic stem cells in AML.

Courtney DiNardo, MD, of the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, presented information on novel agents for AML, including antibody-drug conjugates; bispecific therapies; checkpoint inhibitors; and inhibitors of IDH1/2, MCL1, and MDM2.

Richard Larson, MD, of the University of Chicago, explored the possibility of an individualized approach to postremission therapy in AML.

Frederick Appelbaum, MD, of Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center in Seattle, showed that various maintenance therapies given after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) have not proven beneficial for AML patients.

Richard Jones, MD, of Johns Hopkins Medicine in Baltimore, presented data showing that post-HSCT cyclophosphamide has made haploidentical transplants safer and more effective for AML patients.

And James Ferrara, MD, of the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, detailed research showing that biomarkers of graft-versus-host disease can predict nonrelapse mortality after HSCT.

The Acute Leukemia Forum is held by Hemedicus, which is owned by the same company as this news organization.

[email protected]

NEWPORT BEACH, CALIF. – The evolving treatment of acute myeloid leukemia (AML) was highlighted at the Acute Leukemia Forum of Hemedicus.

In a video interview, Martin Tallman, MD, of Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York, discussed several meeting presentations on the treatment of AML.

In his presentation, Craig Jordan, PhD, of the University of Colorado at Denver, Aurora, explained how the combination of venetoclax and azacitidine appears to target leukemic stem cells in AML.

Courtney DiNardo, MD, of the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, presented information on novel agents for AML, including antibody-drug conjugates; bispecific therapies; checkpoint inhibitors; and inhibitors of IDH1/2, MCL1, and MDM2.

Richard Larson, MD, of the University of Chicago, explored the possibility of an individualized approach to postremission therapy in AML.

Frederick Appelbaum, MD, of Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center in Seattle, showed that various maintenance therapies given after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) have not proven beneficial for AML patients.

Richard Jones, MD, of Johns Hopkins Medicine in Baltimore, presented data showing that post-HSCT cyclophosphamide has made haploidentical transplants safer and more effective for AML patients.

And James Ferrara, MD, of the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, detailed research showing that biomarkers of graft-versus-host disease can predict nonrelapse mortality after HSCT.

The Acute Leukemia Forum is held by Hemedicus, which is owned by the same company as this news organization.

[email protected]

NEWPORT BEACH, CALIF. – The evolving treatment of acute myeloid leukemia (AML) was highlighted at the Acute Leukemia Forum of Hemedicus.

In a video interview, Martin Tallman, MD, of Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York, discussed several meeting presentations on the treatment of AML.

In his presentation, Craig Jordan, PhD, of the University of Colorado at Denver, Aurora, explained how the combination of venetoclax and azacitidine appears to target leukemic stem cells in AML.

Courtney DiNardo, MD, of the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, presented information on novel agents for AML, including antibody-drug conjugates; bispecific therapies; checkpoint inhibitors; and inhibitors of IDH1/2, MCL1, and MDM2.

Richard Larson, MD, of the University of Chicago, explored the possibility of an individualized approach to postremission therapy in AML.

Frederick Appelbaum, MD, of Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center in Seattle, showed that various maintenance therapies given after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) have not proven beneficial for AML patients.

Richard Jones, MD, of Johns Hopkins Medicine in Baltimore, presented data showing that post-HSCT cyclophosphamide has made haploidentical transplants safer and more effective for AML patients.

And James Ferrara, MD, of the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, detailed research showing that biomarkers of graft-versus-host disease can predict nonrelapse mortality after HSCT.

The Acute Leukemia Forum is held by Hemedicus, which is owned by the same company as this news organization.

[email protected]

NEWPORT BEACH, CALIF. – The combination of ruxolitinib and decitabine will not proceed to a phase 3 trial in patients with accelerated or blast phase myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs).

The combination demonstrated activity and tolerability in a phase 2 trial, but outcomes were not optimal, according to Raajit K. Rampal, MD, PhD, of Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York.

“[P]erhaps the outcomes might be favorable compared to standard induction chemotherapy regimens,” Dr. Rampal said. “Nonetheless, it’s clear that we still have a lot of work to do, and the outcomes are not optimal in these patients.”

However, Dr. Rampal and his colleagues are investigating the possibility of combining ruxolitinib and decitabine with other agents to treat patients with accelerated or blast phase MPNs.

Dr. Rampal and his colleagues presented results from the phase 2 trial in a poster at the Acute Leukemia Forum of Hemedicus.

The trial (NCT02076191) enrolled 25 patients, 10 with accelerated phase MPN (10%-19% blasts) and 15 with blast phase MPN (at least 20% blasts). The patients’ median age was 71 years.

Patients had a median disease duration of 72.9 months. Six patients (25%) had received prior ruxolitinib, and two (8.3%) had received prior decitabine.

Treatment and safety

For the first cycle, patients received decitabine at 20 mg/m² per day on days 8-12 and ruxolitinib at 25 mg twice a day on days 1-35. For subsequent cycles, patients received the same dose of decitabine on days 1-5 and ruxolitinib at 10 mg twice a day on days 6-28. Patients were treated until progression, withdrawal, or unacceptable toxicity.

“The adverse events we saw in this study were typical for this population, including fevers, mostly neutropenic fevers, as well as anemia and thrombocytopenia,” Dr. Rampal said.

Nonhematologic adverse events (AEs) included fatigue, abdominal pain, pneumonia, diarrhea, dizziness, and constipation. Hematologic AEs included anemia, neutropenia, febrile neutropenia, and thrombocytopenia.

Response and survival

Eighteen patients were evaluable for response. Four patients were not evaluable because they withdrew from the study due to secondary AEs and completed one cycle of therapy or less, two patients did not have circulating blasts at baseline, and one patient refused further treatment.

Among the evaluable patients, nine (50%) achieved a partial response, including four patients with accelerated phase MPN and five with blast phase MPN.

Two patients (11.1%), one with accelerated phase MPN and one with blast phase MPN, achieved a complete response with incomplete count recovery.

The remaining seven patients (38.9%), five with blast phase MPN and two with accelerated phase MPN, did not respond.

The median overall survival was 7.6 months for the entire cohort, 9.7 months for patients with blast phase MPN, and 5.8 months for patients with accelerated phase MPN.

Based on these results, Dr. Rampal and his colleagues theorized that ruxolitinib plus decitabine might be improved by the addition of other agents. The researchers are currently investigating this possibility.

“The work for this trial really came out of preclinical work in the laboratory where we combined these drugs and saw efficacy in murine models,” Dr. Rampal said. “So we’re going back to the drawing board and looking at those again to see, ‘Can we come up with new rational combinations?’ ”

Dr. Rampal and his colleagues reported having no conflicts of interest. Their study was supported by the National Institutes of Health, the National Cancer Institute, and Incyte Corporation.

The Acute Leukemia Forum is held by Hemedicus, which is owned by the same company as this news organization.

[email protected]

NEWPORT BEACH, CALIF. – The combination of ruxolitinib and decitabine will not proceed to a phase 3 trial in patients with accelerated or blast phase myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs).

The combination demonstrated activity and tolerability in a phase 2 trial, but outcomes were not optimal, according to Raajit K. Rampal, MD, PhD, of Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York.

“[P]erhaps the outcomes might be favorable compared to standard induction chemotherapy regimens,” Dr. Rampal said. “Nonetheless, it’s clear that we still have a lot of work to do, and the outcomes are not optimal in these patients.”

However, Dr. Rampal and his colleagues are investigating the possibility of combining ruxolitinib and decitabine with other agents to treat patients with accelerated or blast phase MPNs.

Dr. Rampal and his colleagues presented results from the phase 2 trial in a poster at the Acute Leukemia Forum of Hemedicus.

The trial (NCT02076191) enrolled 25 patients, 10 with accelerated phase MPN (10%-19% blasts) and 15 with blast phase MPN (at least 20% blasts). The patients’ median age was 71 years.

Patients had a median disease duration of 72.9 months. Six patients (25%) had received prior ruxolitinib, and two (8.3%) had received prior decitabine.

Treatment and safety

For the first cycle, patients received decitabine at 20 mg/m² per day on days 8-12 and ruxolitinib at 25 mg twice a day on days 1-35. For subsequent cycles, patients received the same dose of decitabine on days 1-5 and ruxolitinib at 10 mg twice a day on days 6-28. Patients were treated until progression, withdrawal, or unacceptable toxicity.

“The adverse events we saw in this study were typical for this population, including fevers, mostly neutropenic fevers, as well as anemia and thrombocytopenia,” Dr. Rampal said.

Nonhematologic adverse events (AEs) included fatigue, abdominal pain, pneumonia, diarrhea, dizziness, and constipation. Hematologic AEs included anemia, neutropenia, febrile neutropenia, and thrombocytopenia.

Response and survival

Eighteen patients were evaluable for response. Four patients were not evaluable because they withdrew from the study due to secondary AEs and completed one cycle of therapy or less, two patients did not have circulating blasts at baseline, and one patient refused further treatment.

Among the evaluable patients, nine (50%) achieved a partial response, including four patients with accelerated phase MPN and five with blast phase MPN.

Two patients (11.1%), one with accelerated phase MPN and one with blast phase MPN, achieved a complete response with incomplete count recovery.

The remaining seven patients (38.9%), five with blast phase MPN and two with accelerated phase MPN, did not respond.

The median overall survival was 7.6 months for the entire cohort, 9.7 months for patients with blast phase MPN, and 5.8 months for patients with accelerated phase MPN.

Based on these results, Dr. Rampal and his colleagues theorized that ruxolitinib plus decitabine might be improved by the addition of other agents. The researchers are currently investigating this possibility.

“The work for this trial really came out of preclinical work in the laboratory where we combined these drugs and saw efficacy in murine models,” Dr. Rampal said. “So we’re going back to the drawing board and looking at those again to see, ‘Can we come up with new rational combinations?’ ”

Dr. Rampal and his colleagues reported having no conflicts of interest. Their study was supported by the National Institutes of Health, the National Cancer Institute, and Incyte Corporation.

The Acute Leukemia Forum is held by Hemedicus, which is owned by the same company as this news organization.

[email protected]

NEWPORT BEACH, CALIF. – The combination of ruxolitinib and decitabine will not proceed to a phase 3 trial in patients with accelerated or blast phase myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs).

The combination demonstrated activity and tolerability in a phase 2 trial, but outcomes were not optimal, according to Raajit K. Rampal, MD, PhD, of Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York.

“[P]erhaps the outcomes might be favorable compared to standard induction chemotherapy regimens,” Dr. Rampal said. “Nonetheless, it’s clear that we still have a lot of work to do, and the outcomes are not optimal in these patients.”

However, Dr. Rampal and his colleagues are investigating the possibility of combining ruxolitinib and decitabine with other agents to treat patients with accelerated or blast phase MPNs.

Dr. Rampal and his colleagues presented results from the phase 2 trial in a poster at the Acute Leukemia Forum of Hemedicus.

The trial (NCT02076191) enrolled 25 patients, 10 with accelerated phase MPN (10%-19% blasts) and 15 with blast phase MPN (at least 20% blasts). The patients’ median age was 71 years.

Patients had a median disease duration of 72.9 months. Six patients (25%) had received prior ruxolitinib, and two (8.3%) had received prior decitabine.

Treatment and safety

For the first cycle, patients received decitabine at 20 mg/m² per day on days 8-12 and ruxolitinib at 25 mg twice a day on days 1-35. For subsequent cycles, patients received the same dose of decitabine on days 1-5 and ruxolitinib at 10 mg twice a day on days 6-28. Patients were treated until progression, withdrawal, or unacceptable toxicity.

“The adverse events we saw in this study were typical for this population, including fevers, mostly neutropenic fevers, as well as anemia and thrombocytopenia,” Dr. Rampal said.

Nonhematologic adverse events (AEs) included fatigue, abdominal pain, pneumonia, diarrhea, dizziness, and constipation. Hematologic AEs included anemia, neutropenia, febrile neutropenia, and thrombocytopenia.

Response and survival

Eighteen patients were evaluable for response. Four patients were not evaluable because they withdrew from the study due to secondary AEs and completed one cycle of therapy or less, two patients did not have circulating blasts at baseline, and one patient refused further treatment.

Among the evaluable patients, nine (50%) achieved a partial response, including four patients with accelerated phase MPN and five with blast phase MPN.

Two patients (11.1%), one with accelerated phase MPN and one with blast phase MPN, achieved a complete response with incomplete count recovery.

The remaining seven patients (38.9%), five with blast phase MPN and two with accelerated phase MPN, did not respond.

The median overall survival was 7.6 months for the entire cohort, 9.7 months for patients with blast phase MPN, and 5.8 months for patients with accelerated phase MPN.

Based on these results, Dr. Rampal and his colleagues theorized that ruxolitinib plus decitabine might be improved by the addition of other agents. The researchers are currently investigating this possibility.

“The work for this trial really came out of preclinical work in the laboratory where we combined these drugs and saw efficacy in murine models,” Dr. Rampal said. “So we’re going back to the drawing board and looking at those again to see, ‘Can we come up with new rational combinations?’ ”

Dr. Rampal and his colleagues reported having no conflicts of interest. Their study was supported by the National Institutes of Health, the National Cancer Institute, and Incyte Corporation.

The Acute Leukemia Forum is held by Hemedicus, which is owned by the same company as this news organization.

[email protected]

ATLANTA – The FLT3 inhibitor gilteritinib (Xospata) significantly prolonged overall survival, compared with salvage chemotherapy, in patients with FLT3-mutated relapsed/refractory acute myeloid leukemia, Alexander E. Perl, MD, from the Abramson Cancer Center at the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia reported at the 2019 annual meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research (AACR).

In a video interview, Dr. Perl discussed the results of the ADMIRAL global phase 3 randomized trial and described the current state of therapy for patients with relapsed/refractory AML bearing FLT3 mutations. Up to 70% of patients with acute myeloid leukemia will experience a relapse, and up to 40% may have disease that is resistant to induction chemotherapy. Survival for these patients is generally poor.

In particular, patients with acute myeloid leukemia and FLT3-activating mutations are at increased risk for early relapse and poor overall survival.

The ADMIRAL trial is funded by Astellas Pharma. Dr. Perl disclosed advisory board participation, consulting fees, and institutional support from Astellas and others.

ATLANTA – The FLT3 inhibitor gilteritinib (Xospata) significantly prolonged overall survival, compared with salvage chemotherapy, in patients with FLT3-mutated relapsed/refractory acute myeloid leukemia, Alexander E. Perl, MD, from the Abramson Cancer Center at the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia reported at the 2019 annual meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research (AACR).

In a video interview, Dr. Perl discussed the results of the ADMIRAL global phase 3 randomized trial and described the current state of therapy for patients with relapsed/refractory AML bearing FLT3 mutations. Up to 70% of patients with acute myeloid leukemia will experience a relapse, and up to 40% may have disease that is resistant to induction chemotherapy. Survival for these patients is generally poor.

In particular, patients with acute myeloid leukemia and FLT3-activating mutations are at increased risk for early relapse and poor overall survival.

The ADMIRAL trial is funded by Astellas Pharma. Dr. Perl disclosed advisory board participation, consulting fees, and institutional support from Astellas and others.

ATLANTA – The FLT3 inhibitor gilteritinib (Xospata) significantly prolonged overall survival, compared with salvage chemotherapy, in patients with FLT3-mutated relapsed/refractory acute myeloid leukemia, Alexander E. Perl, MD, from the Abramson Cancer Center at the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia reported at the 2019 annual meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research (AACR).

In a video interview, Dr. Perl discussed the results of the ADMIRAL global phase 3 randomized trial and described the current state of therapy for patients with relapsed/refractory AML bearing FLT3 mutations. Up to 70% of patients with acute myeloid leukemia will experience a relapse, and up to 40% may have disease that is resistant to induction chemotherapy. Survival for these patients is generally poor.

In particular, patients with acute myeloid leukemia and FLT3-activating mutations are at increased risk for early relapse and poor overall survival.

The ADMIRAL trial is funded by Astellas Pharma. Dr. Perl disclosed advisory board participation, consulting fees, and institutional support from Astellas and others.

GLASGOW – Whole genome sequencing (WGS) appears capable of replacing cytogenetic testing and next generation sequencing (NGS) for the detection of clinically relevant molecular abnormalities in hematological malignancies, according to investigators.

Will Pass/MDedge News

A comparison of WGS with fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) showed that WGS caught all the same significant structural variants, plus some abnormalities that FISH had not detected, reported lead author Shirley Henderson, PhD, lead for cancer molecular diagnostics at Genomics England in Oxford.

Although further validation is needed, these findings, reported at the annual meeting of the British Society for Haematology, support an ongoing effort to validate the clinical reliability of WGS, which is currently reserved for research purposes.

“It’s vitally important that the clinical community engage with this and understand both the power and the limitations of this technique and how this work is going to be interpreted for the benefit of patients,” said Adele Fielding, PhD, session chair from University College London’s Cancer Institute.

The investigators compared WGS with FISH for detection of clinically significant structural variants (SVs) and copy number variants (CNVs) in tumor samples from 34 patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) and acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL).

The 252 standard of care FISH tests – conducted at three separate clinical diagnostic centers in the United Kingdom – included 138 SVs and 114 CNVs. WGS relied on a combination of bioinformatics and visual inspection of Circos plots. WGS confirmed all of the SVs detected by FISH with high confidence; WGS detected four additional SVs, also with high confidence, including an ETV6-RUNX1 fusion not detected by FISH because of probe limitations.

Results for CNVs were similar, with WGS detecting 78 out of 85 positive CNVs. Six of the missed positives were associated with low quality samples or low level mutations in the FISH test, suggesting that at least some positives may have been detected with better samples. Only one negative CNV from FISH was missed by WGS.

Overall, WGS had a false positive rate of less than 5% and a positive percentage agreement with FISH that exceeded 90%.

“Further work is required to fully validate all aspects of the WGS analysis pipeline,” Dr. Henderson said. “But these results indicate that WGS has the potential to reliably detect SVs and CNVs in these conditions while offering the advantage of detecting all SVs and CNVs present without the need for additional interrogation of the sample by multiple tests or probes.”

Dr. Henderson noted that there is really no “perfect method” for identifying structural and copy number variants at the present time.

Small variants are relatively easy to detect with techniques such as karyotyping and gene banding, but these tests have shortcomings, namely, that they require live cells and have “fairly high failure rates for various reasons,” Dr. Henderson said.

“FISH is an incredibly useful test and it has higher resolution than gene banding, but the problem with FISH is that you only find what you’re looking at,” Dr. Henderson said. “It’s not genome wide; it’s very targeted.”

Similarly, polymerase chain reaction (PCR), including next generation sequencing (NGS), can detect molecular abnormalities, but only those that are targeted, which may necessitate multiple tests, she said.

“If you start looking for all of the structural variants [with existing techniques], then you’re going to be doing an awful lot of tests,” Dr. Henderson said.

Another potential benefit of WGS is that it is “future resistant,” Dr. Henderson said. “As new biomarkers are discovered, you don’t have to redesign a new targeted test. It will also detect emerging biomarkers, such as mutational signatures and burden.”

The study was sponsored by NHS England. The investigators reported having no conflicts of interest.

SOURCE: Henderson S et al. BSH 2019, Abstract OR-002.

GLASGOW – Whole genome sequencing (WGS) appears capable of replacing cytogenetic testing and next generation sequencing (NGS) for the detection of clinically relevant molecular abnormalities in hematological malignancies, according to investigators.

Will Pass/MDedge News

A comparison of WGS with fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) showed that WGS caught all the same significant structural variants, plus some abnormalities that FISH had not detected, reported lead author Shirley Henderson, PhD, lead for cancer molecular diagnostics at Genomics England in Oxford.

Although further validation is needed, these findings, reported at the annual meeting of the British Society for Haematology, support an ongoing effort to validate the clinical reliability of WGS, which is currently reserved for research purposes.

“It’s vitally important that the clinical community engage with this and understand both the power and the limitations of this technique and how this work is going to be interpreted for the benefit of patients,” said Adele Fielding, PhD, session chair from University College London’s Cancer Institute.

The investigators compared WGS with FISH for detection of clinically significant structural variants (SVs) and copy number variants (CNVs) in tumor samples from 34 patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) and acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL).

The 252 standard of care FISH tests – conducted at three separate clinical diagnostic centers in the United Kingdom – included 138 SVs and 114 CNVs. WGS relied on a combination of bioinformatics and visual inspection of Circos plots. WGS confirmed all of the SVs detected by FISH with high confidence; WGS detected four additional SVs, also with high confidence, including an ETV6-RUNX1 fusion not detected by FISH because of probe limitations.

Results for CNVs were similar, with WGS detecting 78 out of 85 positive CNVs. Six of the missed positives were associated with low quality samples or low level mutations in the FISH test, suggesting that at least some positives may have been detected with better samples. Only one negative CNV from FISH was missed by WGS.

Overall, WGS had a false positive rate of less than 5% and a positive percentage agreement with FISH that exceeded 90%.

“Further work is required to fully validate all aspects of the WGS analysis pipeline,” Dr. Henderson said. “But these results indicate that WGS has the potential to reliably detect SVs and CNVs in these conditions while offering the advantage of detecting all SVs and CNVs present without the need for additional interrogation of the sample by multiple tests or probes.”

Dr. Henderson noted that there is really no “perfect method” for identifying structural and copy number variants at the present time.

Small variants are relatively easy to detect with techniques such as karyotyping and gene banding, but these tests have shortcomings, namely, that they require live cells and have “fairly high failure rates for various reasons,” Dr. Henderson said.

“FISH is an incredibly useful test and it has higher resolution than gene banding, but the problem with FISH is that you only find what you’re looking at,” Dr. Henderson said. “It’s not genome wide; it’s very targeted.”

Similarly, polymerase chain reaction (PCR), including next generation sequencing (NGS), can detect molecular abnormalities, but only those that are targeted, which may necessitate multiple tests, she said.

“If you start looking for all of the structural variants [with existing techniques], then you’re going to be doing an awful lot of tests,” Dr. Henderson said.

Another potential benefit of WGS is that it is “future resistant,” Dr. Henderson said. “As new biomarkers are discovered, you don’t have to redesign a new targeted test. It will also detect emerging biomarkers, such as mutational signatures and burden.”

The study was sponsored by NHS England. The investigators reported having no conflicts of interest.

SOURCE: Henderson S et al. BSH 2019, Abstract OR-002.

GLASGOW – Whole genome sequencing (WGS) appears capable of replacing cytogenetic testing and next generation sequencing (NGS) for the detection of clinically relevant molecular abnormalities in hematological malignancies, according to investigators.

Will Pass/MDedge News

A comparison of WGS with fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) showed that WGS caught all the same significant structural variants, plus some abnormalities that FISH had not detected, reported lead author Shirley Henderson, PhD, lead for cancer molecular diagnostics at Genomics England in Oxford.

Although further validation is needed, these findings, reported at the annual meeting of the British Society for Haematology, support an ongoing effort to validate the clinical reliability of WGS, which is currently reserved for research purposes.

“It’s vitally important that the clinical community engage with this and understand both the power and the limitations of this technique and how this work is going to be interpreted for the benefit of patients,” said Adele Fielding, PhD, session chair from University College London’s Cancer Institute.

The investigators compared WGS with FISH for detection of clinically significant structural variants (SVs) and copy number variants (CNVs) in tumor samples from 34 patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) and acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL).

The 252 standard of care FISH tests – conducted at three separate clinical diagnostic centers in the United Kingdom – included 138 SVs and 114 CNVs. WGS relied on a combination of bioinformatics and visual inspection of Circos plots. WGS confirmed all of the SVs detected by FISH with high confidence; WGS detected four additional SVs, also with high confidence, including an ETV6-RUNX1 fusion not detected by FISH because of probe limitations.

Results for CNVs were similar, with WGS detecting 78 out of 85 positive CNVs. Six of the missed positives were associated with low quality samples or low level mutations in the FISH test, suggesting that at least some positives may have been detected with better samples. Only one negative CNV from FISH was missed by WGS.

Overall, WGS had a false positive rate of less than 5% and a positive percentage agreement with FISH that exceeded 90%.

“Further work is required to fully validate all aspects of the WGS analysis pipeline,” Dr. Henderson said. “But these results indicate that WGS has the potential to reliably detect SVs and CNVs in these conditions while offering the advantage of detecting all SVs and CNVs present without the need for additional interrogation of the sample by multiple tests or probes.”

Dr. Henderson noted that there is really no “perfect method” for identifying structural and copy number variants at the present time.

Small variants are relatively easy to detect with techniques such as karyotyping and gene banding, but these tests have shortcomings, namely, that they require live cells and have “fairly high failure rates for various reasons,” Dr. Henderson said.

“FISH is an incredibly useful test and it has higher resolution than gene banding, but the problem with FISH is that you only find what you’re looking at,” Dr. Henderson said. “It’s not genome wide; it’s very targeted.”

Similarly, polymerase chain reaction (PCR), including next generation sequencing (NGS), can detect molecular abnormalities, but only those that are targeted, which may necessitate multiple tests, she said.

“If you start looking for all of the structural variants [with existing techniques], then you’re going to be doing an awful lot of tests,” Dr. Henderson said.

Another potential benefit of WGS is that it is “future resistant,” Dr. Henderson said. “As new biomarkers are discovered, you don’t have to redesign a new targeted test. It will also detect emerging biomarkers, such as mutational signatures and burden.”

The study was sponsored by NHS England. The investigators reported having no conflicts of interest.

SOURCE: Henderson S et al. BSH 2019, Abstract OR-002.

Genome sequencing technologies are providing a valuable new window into the development and progression of pediatric cancers, according to the authors of a review.

In contrast to adult cancers, which are frequently driven by oncogenic mutations, many pediatric cancers have a low burden of somatic mutations, wrote E. Alejandro Sweet-Cordero, MD, from the University of California, San Francisco, and Jaclyn A. Biegel, MD, from the University of Southern California in Science. Instead, large-scale sequencing studies have found that childhood cancers have a much higher likelihood of being caused by germline mutations in genes that predispose development of cancer.

“Particularly surprising was the observation that even high-risk, highly aggressive cancers in many cases had no identifiable driver gene or pathway,” the authors wrote.

Some pediatric cancers do have identified driver genes, but even these are often different to those seen in adult cancers. The authors gave the example of one study of 1,699 patients and six types of cancer: This study identified 142 likely oncogenes, but only 45% of these matched those seen in the adult cancers.

Many pediatric cancers also have unique genetic features, such as the age-dependent gene fusion events, in which two genes join to form an oncogenic hybrid, and focal areas of gene deletion, which are often seen in pediatric acute myeloid leukemia but less so in adult forms of this cancer.

“In some instances, the fusion events involve genes that are known to be cancer drivers; this raises the intriguing possibility that some pediatric cancers are driven by ‘private’ oncogenic fusions,” the authors wrote, pointing out that this has daunting implications for the development of precision medicine. However they also noted that the presence of common gene fusion events could hold significance for choice of therapies; for example, central nervous system gliomas with the common BRAF V600E mutation may respond to specific BRAF inhibitors.

The authors drew particular attention to the role that genomic analysis could play in studying cancer during treatment and relapse, but they said few studies have explored this in pediatric patients.

“Such studies are critical given what we have learned from adult cancers, which show a capacity to evolve rapidly and acquire new driver mutations,” they wrote. One study found that only one-third of tumors with a potentially targetable genetic mutation had retained that target when analyzed at a later time.

On the issue of targeted therapy, the authors noted that no prospective study has yet looked at the use of sequencing approaches to define new therapies for pediatric cancer. However, they did refer to the Pediatric MATCH clinical trial, which is currently evaluating targeted therapies for relapsed solid tumors in children.

They also identified a need for research on predictors of treatment response in pediatric cancer.

“As the genetic variants that are associated with drug response are, by nature and design, variants present in the normal population, they are typically not included in DNA sequencing panels and are filtered out in WES [whole-exome sequencing] or WGS [whole-genome sequencing] bioinformatics pipelines,” they wrote.

They addressed the question of when to do germline testing in pediatric cancer, saying that, for most pediatric cancer patients, germline testing was indicated by the presence of a pathogenic genetic alternative affecting a gene known to be associated with a predisposition for germline cancer.

The authors suggested that data sharing was important to advancing genomic analysis in pediatric cancers because most of the studies so far had been relatively small. However, they highlighted emerging resources for large-scale analysis of pediatric cancer data, such as public portals for investigating discovery genomic data sets and data repositories of clinical-grade sequencing data.

The review was funded by the National Cancer Institute. No conflicts of interest were declared.

SOURCE: Sweet-Cordero A et al. Science 2019;363:1170-5.

Genome sequencing technologies are providing a valuable new window into the development and progression of pediatric cancers, according to the authors of a review.

In contrast to adult cancers, which are frequently driven by oncogenic mutations, many pediatric cancers have a low burden of somatic mutations, wrote E. Alejandro Sweet-Cordero, MD, from the University of California, San Francisco, and Jaclyn A. Biegel, MD, from the University of Southern California in Science. Instead, large-scale sequencing studies have found that childhood cancers have a much higher likelihood of being caused by germline mutations in genes that predispose development of cancer.

“Particularly surprising was the observation that even high-risk, highly aggressive cancers in many cases had no identifiable driver gene or pathway,” the authors wrote.

Some pediatric cancers do have identified driver genes, but even these are often different to those seen in adult cancers. The authors gave the example of one study of 1,699 patients and six types of cancer: This study identified 142 likely oncogenes, but only 45% of these matched those seen in the adult cancers.

Many pediatric cancers also have unique genetic features, such as the age-dependent gene fusion events, in which two genes join to form an oncogenic hybrid, and focal areas of gene deletion, which are often seen in pediatric acute myeloid leukemia but less so in adult forms of this cancer.

“In some instances, the fusion events involve genes that are known to be cancer drivers; this raises the intriguing possibility that some pediatric cancers are driven by ‘private’ oncogenic fusions,” the authors wrote, pointing out that this has daunting implications for the development of precision medicine. However they also noted that the presence of common gene fusion events could hold significance for choice of therapies; for example, central nervous system gliomas with the common BRAF V600E mutation may respond to specific BRAF inhibitors.

The authors drew particular attention to the role that genomic analysis could play in studying cancer during treatment and relapse, but they said few studies have explored this in pediatric patients.

“Such studies are critical given what we have learned from adult cancers, which show a capacity to evolve rapidly and acquire new driver mutations,” they wrote. One study found that only one-third of tumors with a potentially targetable genetic mutation had retained that target when analyzed at a later time.

On the issue of targeted therapy, the authors noted that no prospective study has yet looked at the use of sequencing approaches to define new therapies for pediatric cancer. However, they did refer to the Pediatric MATCH clinical trial, which is currently evaluating targeted therapies for relapsed solid tumors in children.

They also identified a need for research on predictors of treatment response in pediatric cancer.

“As the genetic variants that are associated with drug response are, by nature and design, variants present in the normal population, they are typically not included in DNA sequencing panels and are filtered out in WES [whole-exome sequencing] or WGS [whole-genome sequencing] bioinformatics pipelines,” they wrote.

They addressed the question of when to do germline testing in pediatric cancer, saying that, for most pediatric cancer patients, germline testing was indicated by the presence of a pathogenic genetic alternative affecting a gene known to be associated with a predisposition for germline cancer.

The authors suggested that data sharing was important to advancing genomic analysis in pediatric cancers because most of the studies so far had been relatively small. However, they highlighted emerging resources for large-scale analysis of pediatric cancer data, such as public portals for investigating discovery genomic data sets and data repositories of clinical-grade sequencing data.

The review was funded by the National Cancer Institute. No conflicts of interest were declared.

SOURCE: Sweet-Cordero A et al. Science 2019;363:1170-5.

Genome sequencing technologies are providing a valuable new window into the development and progression of pediatric cancers, according to the authors of a review.

In contrast to adult cancers, which are frequently driven by oncogenic mutations, many pediatric cancers have a low burden of somatic mutations, wrote E. Alejandro Sweet-Cordero, MD, from the University of California, San Francisco, and Jaclyn A. Biegel, MD, from the University of Southern California in Science. Instead, large-scale sequencing studies have found that childhood cancers have a much higher likelihood of being caused by germline mutations in genes that predispose development of cancer.

“Particularly surprising was the observation that even high-risk, highly aggressive cancers in many cases had no identifiable driver gene or pathway,” the authors wrote.

Some pediatric cancers do have identified driver genes, but even these are often different to those seen in adult cancers. The authors gave the example of one study of 1,699 patients and six types of cancer: This study identified 142 likely oncogenes, but only 45% of these matched those seen in the adult cancers.

Many pediatric cancers also have unique genetic features, such as the age-dependent gene fusion events, in which two genes join to form an oncogenic hybrid, and focal areas of gene deletion, which are often seen in pediatric acute myeloid leukemia but less so in adult forms of this cancer.

“In some instances, the fusion events involve genes that are known to be cancer drivers; this raises the intriguing possibility that some pediatric cancers are driven by ‘private’ oncogenic fusions,” the authors wrote, pointing out that this has daunting implications for the development of precision medicine. However they also noted that the presence of common gene fusion events could hold significance for choice of therapies; for example, central nervous system gliomas with the common BRAF V600E mutation may respond to specific BRAF inhibitors.

The authors drew particular attention to the role that genomic analysis could play in studying cancer during treatment and relapse, but they said few studies have explored this in pediatric patients.

“Such studies are critical given what we have learned from adult cancers, which show a capacity to evolve rapidly and acquire new driver mutations,” they wrote. One study found that only one-third of tumors with a potentially targetable genetic mutation had retained that target when analyzed at a later time.

On the issue of targeted therapy, the authors noted that no prospective study has yet looked at the use of sequencing approaches to define new therapies for pediatric cancer. However, they did refer to the Pediatric MATCH clinical trial, which is currently evaluating targeted therapies for relapsed solid tumors in children.

They also identified a need for research on predictors of treatment response in pediatric cancer.

“As the genetic variants that are associated with drug response are, by nature and design, variants present in the normal population, they are typically not included in DNA sequencing panels and are filtered out in WES [whole-exome sequencing] or WGS [whole-genome sequencing] bioinformatics pipelines,” they wrote.

They addressed the question of when to do germline testing in pediatric cancer, saying that, for most pediatric cancer patients, germline testing was indicated by the presence of a pathogenic genetic alternative affecting a gene known to be associated with a predisposition for germline cancer.

The authors suggested that data sharing was important to advancing genomic analysis in pediatric cancers because most of the studies so far had been relatively small. However, they highlighted emerging resources for large-scale analysis of pediatric cancer data, such as public portals for investigating discovery genomic data sets and data repositories of clinical-grade sequencing data.

The review was funded by the National Cancer Institute. No conflicts of interest were declared.

SOURCE: Sweet-Cordero A et al. Science 2019;363:1170-5.

HOUSTON – Secondary acute myeloid leukemia (sAML) predicts outcomes after stem cell transplantation in first complete remission, whereas factors such as age, cytogenetics, and performance status are more relevant predictors of outcomes in patients with de novo AML, according to a large, registry-based analysis.

Sharon Worcester/MDedge News

Of 11,439 patients with de novo AML and 1,325 with sAML identified in the registry, 7,691 and 909, respectively, underwent a stem cell transplant (SCT) in first complete remission (CR1), Bipin Savani, MD, said at the Transplantation & Cellular Therapies Meetings.

The 3-year cumulative incidence of relapse (CIR) and nonrelapse mortality (NRM) rates in those who underwent SCT in CR1 were higher in the sAML versus de novo AML groups (35% vs. 28.5% for CIR and 23.4% vs. 16.4% for NRM, respectively), said Dr. Savani, professor of medicine, director of the Long-Term Transplant Clinic, and medical director of the Stem Cell Transplant Processing Laboratory at Vanderbilt University Medical Center & Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Nashville, Tenn.

The 3-year overall survival (OS), leukemia-free survival (LFS), and graft-versus-host disease/relapse-free survival (GRFS) were significantly lower in the sAML group versus the de novo AML group (46.7% vs. 60.8% for OS; 41.6% vs. 55.1% for LFS; and 28.4% vs. 28.6% for GRFS).


Multivariate analysis controlling for risk factors and stratified by disease stage at SCT showed that sAML in CR1 was significantly associated with higher NRM (hazard ratio, 1.32) and CIR (HR, 1.28), and with lower LFS (HR, 1.30), OS (HR, 1.32) and GRFS (HR, 1.20).

Other significant predictors of OS in the model were age, cytogenetics, patient/donor sex combination, Karnofsky performance status (KPS), and donor, he said at the meeting held by the American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation and the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research. At its meeting, the American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation announced a new name for the society: American Society for Transplantation and Cellular Therapy (ASTCT).

In the patients who underwent SCT for primary refractory AML (607 with de novo AML and 199 with sAML) or relapsed AML (1,009 with de novo AML and 124 with sAML), the outcomes were generally inferior to those seen with SCT in CR1. However, sAML in those patients did not predict outcomes, Dr. Savani said, noting that outcome in those cases were predicted by age, cytogenetics, and KPS.

In an analysis of 877 pairs matched for age, disease stage at SCT, KPS, conditioning, in vivo/ex vivo T-cell depletion, donor, donor/recipient sex and cytomegalovirus-status combination, cytogenetics, and graft source, the finding that sAML was associated with significantly higher NRM, and lower LFS, OS, and GRFS overall was confirmed.

However, stratification by stage at the time of SCT again showed that the differences between groups were only seen among those transplanted in CR1, and not in those with advanced disease at the time of transplant.

Patients included in the study were adults aged 18 years and older who underwent SCT for de novo or sAML from a matched related, unrelated, or T-cell replete haploidentical donor between 2000 and 2016.

The findings confirm the general belief that the prognosis in AML secondary to another hematologic neoplasia or malignant disease is poorer than that for de novo AML, and clarify the role of this difference for SCT, Dr. Savani said.

“These data may help to improve risk stratification and prognostic estimates after allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation for acute myeloid leukemia,” he concluded.

Dr. Savani reported having no financial disclosures.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Savani B et al. TCT 2019, Abstract 12.

HOUSTON – Secondary acute myeloid leukemia (sAML) predicts outcomes after stem cell transplantation in first complete remission, whereas factors such as age, cytogenetics, and performance status are more relevant predictors of outcomes in patients with de novo AML, according to a large, registry-based analysis.

Sharon Worcester/MDedge News

Of 11,439 patients with de novo AML and 1,325 with sAML identified in the registry, 7,691 and 909, respectively, underwent a stem cell transplant (SCT) in first complete remission (CR1), Bipin Savani, MD, said at the Transplantation & Cellular Therapies Meetings.

The 3-year cumulative incidence of relapse (CIR) and nonrelapse mortality (NRM) rates in those who underwent SCT in CR1 were higher in the sAML versus de novo AML groups (35% vs. 28.5% for CIR and 23.4% vs. 16.4% for NRM, respectively), said Dr. Savani, professor of medicine, director of the Long-Term Transplant Clinic, and medical director of the Stem Cell Transplant Processing Laboratory at Vanderbilt University Medical Center & Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Nashville, Tenn.

The 3-year overall survival (OS), leukemia-free survival (LFS), and graft-versus-host disease/relapse-free survival (GRFS) were significantly lower in the sAML group versus the de novo AML group (46.7% vs. 60.8% for OS; 41.6% vs. 55.1% for LFS; and 28.4% vs. 28.6% for GRFS).


Multivariate analysis controlling for risk factors and stratified by disease stage at SCT showed that sAML in CR1 was significantly associated with higher NRM (hazard ratio, 1.32) and CIR (HR, 1.28), and with lower LFS (HR, 1.30), OS (HR, 1.32) and GRFS (HR, 1.20).

Other significant predictors of OS in the model were age, cytogenetics, patient/donor sex combination, Karnofsky performance status (KPS), and donor, he said at the meeting held by the American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation and the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research. At its meeting, the American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation announced a new name for the society: American Society for Transplantation and Cellular Therapy (ASTCT).

In the patients who underwent SCT for primary refractory AML (607 with de novo AML and 199 with sAML) or relapsed AML (1,009 with de novo AML and 124 with sAML), the outcomes were generally inferior to those seen with SCT in CR1. However, sAML in those patients did not predict outcomes, Dr. Savani said, noting that outcome in those cases were predicted by age, cytogenetics, and KPS.

In an analysis of 877 pairs matched for age, disease stage at SCT, KPS, conditioning, in vivo/ex vivo T-cell depletion, donor, donor/recipient sex and cytomegalovirus-status combination, cytogenetics, and graft source, the finding that sAML was associated with significantly higher NRM, and lower LFS, OS, and GRFS overall was confirmed.

However, stratification by stage at the time of SCT again showed that the differences between groups were only seen among those transplanted in CR1, and not in those with advanced disease at the time of transplant.

Patients included in the study were adults aged 18 years and older who underwent SCT for de novo or sAML from a matched related, unrelated, or T-cell replete haploidentical donor between 2000 and 2016.

The findings confirm the general belief that the prognosis in AML secondary to another hematologic neoplasia or malignant disease is poorer than that for de novo AML, and clarify the role of this difference for SCT, Dr. Savani said.

“These data may help to improve risk stratification and prognostic estimates after allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation for acute myeloid leukemia,” he concluded.

Dr. Savani reported having no financial disclosures.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Savani B et al. TCT 2019, Abstract 12.

HOUSTON – Secondary acute myeloid leukemia (sAML) predicts outcomes after stem cell transplantation in first complete remission, whereas factors such as age, cytogenetics, and performance status are more relevant predictors of outcomes in patients with de novo AML, according to a large, registry-based analysis.

Sharon Worcester/MDedge News

Of 11,439 patients with de novo AML and 1,325 with sAML identified in the registry, 7,691 and 909, respectively, underwent a stem cell transplant (SCT) in first complete remission (CR1), Bipin Savani, MD, said at the Transplantation & Cellular Therapies Meetings.

The 3-year cumulative incidence of relapse (CIR) and nonrelapse mortality (NRM) rates in those who underwent SCT in CR1 were higher in the sAML versus de novo AML groups (35% vs. 28.5% for CIR and 23.4% vs. 16.4% for NRM, respectively), said Dr. Savani, professor of medicine, director of the Long-Term Transplant Clinic, and medical director of the Stem Cell Transplant Processing Laboratory at Vanderbilt University Medical Center & Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Nashville, Tenn.

The 3-year overall survival (OS), leukemia-free survival (LFS), and graft-versus-host disease/relapse-free survival (GRFS) were significantly lower in the sAML group versus the de novo AML group (46.7% vs. 60.8% for OS; 41.6% vs. 55.1% for LFS; and 28.4% vs. 28.6% for GRFS).


Multivariate analysis controlling for risk factors and stratified by disease stage at SCT showed that sAML in CR1 was significantly associated with higher NRM (hazard ratio, 1.32) and CIR (HR, 1.28), and with lower LFS (HR, 1.30), OS (HR, 1.32) and GRFS (HR, 1.20).

Other significant predictors of OS in the model were age, cytogenetics, patient/donor sex combination, Karnofsky performance status (KPS), and donor, he said at the meeting held by the American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation and the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research. At its meeting, the American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation announced a new name for the society: American Society for Transplantation and Cellular Therapy (ASTCT).

In the patients who underwent SCT for primary refractory AML (607 with de novo AML and 199 with sAML) or relapsed AML (1,009 with de novo AML and 124 with sAML), the outcomes were generally inferior to those seen with SCT in CR1. However, sAML in those patients did not predict outcomes, Dr. Savani said, noting that outcome in those cases were predicted by age, cytogenetics, and KPS.

In an analysis of 877 pairs matched for age, disease stage at SCT, KPS, conditioning, in vivo/ex vivo T-cell depletion, donor, donor/recipient sex and cytomegalovirus-status combination, cytogenetics, and graft source, the finding that sAML was associated with significantly higher NRM, and lower LFS, OS, and GRFS overall was confirmed.

However, stratification by stage at the time of SCT again showed that the differences between groups were only seen among those transplanted in CR1, and not in those with advanced disease at the time of transplant.

Patients included in the study were adults aged 18 years and older who underwent SCT for de novo or sAML from a matched related, unrelated, or T-cell replete haploidentical donor between 2000 and 2016.

The findings confirm the general belief that the prognosis in AML secondary to another hematologic neoplasia or malignant disease is poorer than that for de novo AML, and clarify the role of this difference for SCT, Dr. Savani said.

“These data may help to improve risk stratification and prognostic estimates after allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation for acute myeloid leukemia,” he concluded.

Dr. Savani reported having no financial disclosures.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Savani B et al. TCT 2019, Abstract 12.

HOUSTON – A novel anti-CD45 targeted conditioning regimen is feasible for use in older patients with relapsed or refractory acute myeloid leukemia undergoing transplant, according to preliminary results of a randomized, phase 3 trial.

Treatment with iodine-131 apamistamab (Iomab-B) has thus far has resulted in successful engraftment for all patients who have received it and gone on to transplant, despite active disease and high bone marrow blast burden prior to transplantation, according to Sergio A. Giralt, MD, of Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York.

There has been no nonrelapse mortality related to the novel regimen in the ongoing trial, which compares Iomab-B as targeted conditioning prior to allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HCT) with standard of care regimens, Dr. Giralt said in an update on the trial, known as SIERRA.

SIERRA is the only ongoing, randomized, phase 3 clinical trial to offer a transplant option in patients aged 55 years or older with active relapsed or refractory acute myeloid leukemia (AML), Dr. Giralt said at the Transplantation & Cellular Therapy Meetings.

“This is an underserved population in which traditional transplant techniques have very poor results, and there are limited options for patients with active disease,” Dr. Giralt said. “Of note, many transplant centers today do not consider these patients eligible for transplant.”

A total of 150 patients are to be enrolled in SIERRA and randomized either to investigator’s choice of salvage induction chemotherapy including approved targeted agents or to the experimental arm, which consists of an individualized dose of Iomab-B 12 days prior to HCT with fludarabine and total body irradiation as transplant conditioning.

Dr. Giralt presented an update on the first 38 patients in SIERRA, representing 25% of the total enrollment target.

Of 18 patients randomized to Iomab-B and transplanted, the median number of days to absolute neutrophil count engraftment was 13, Dr. Giralt said.

In the control arm, 15 of 19 (79%) failed to achieve complete remission, and of those 10 crossed over to receive Iomab-B and transplant. Days to engraftment, full donor chimerism, and dose delivered to the bone marrow were all similar in the crossover group, compared with those initially randomized to the novel therapy.

Nonhematologic grade 3 or 4 toxicities were similar between the Iomab-B arm and the conventional care arm, and included febrile neutropenia, stomatitis, and other side effects typical for these patients.

There were no grade 3 or 4 Iomab-B infusion-related reactions, and four mild cases of chronic graft-versus-host disease occurred in Iomab-B treated patients.

Nonrelapse mortality was “extremely low” with no cases in the 100 days post transplant in those initially randomized to Iomab-B, and only one case in a crossover patient, Dr. Giralt said.

“These results are encouraging, and can broaden transplant eligibility and improve outcomes,” he added.

The meeting is held by the American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation and the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research. At its meeting, the American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation announced a new name for the society: American Society for Transplantation and Cellular Therapy (ASTCT).

The SIERRA study is supported by Actinium Pharmaceuticals. Dr. Giralt reported disclosures related to Actinium and several other companies.

SOURCE: Giralt SA et al. TCT 2019, Abstract LBA3.

HOUSTON – A novel anti-CD45 targeted conditioning regimen is feasible for use in older patients with relapsed or refractory acute myeloid leukemia undergoing transplant, according to preliminary results of a randomized, phase 3 trial.

Treatment with iodine-131 apamistamab (Iomab-B) has thus far has resulted in successful engraftment for all patients who have received it and gone on to transplant, despite active disease and high bone marrow blast burden prior to transplantation, according to Sergio A. Giralt, MD, of Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York.

There has been no nonrelapse mortality related to the novel regimen in the ongoing trial, which compares Iomab-B as targeted conditioning prior to allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HCT) with standard of care regimens, Dr. Giralt said in an update on the trial, known as SIERRA.

SIERRA is the only ongoing, randomized, phase 3 clinical trial to offer a transplant option in patients aged 55 years or older with active relapsed or refractory acute myeloid leukemia (AML), Dr. Giralt said at the Transplantation & Cellular Therapy Meetings.

“This is an underserved population in which traditional transplant techniques have very poor results, and there are limited options for patients with active disease,” Dr. Giralt said. “Of note, many transplant centers today do not consider these patients eligible for transplant.”

A total of 150 patients are to be enrolled in SIERRA and randomized either to investigator’s choice of salvage induction chemotherapy including approved targeted agents or to the experimental arm, which consists of an individualized dose of Iomab-B 12 days prior to HCT with fludarabine and total body irradiation as transplant conditioning.

Dr. Giralt presented an update on the first 38 patients in SIERRA, representing 25% of the total enrollment target.

Of 18 patients randomized to Iomab-B and transplanted, the median number of days to absolute neutrophil count engraftment was 13, Dr. Giralt said.

In the control arm, 15 of 19 (79%) failed to achieve complete remission, and of those 10 crossed over to receive Iomab-B and transplant. Days to engraftment, full donor chimerism, and dose delivered to the bone marrow were all similar in the crossover group, compared with those initially randomized to the novel therapy.

Nonhematologic grade 3 or 4 toxicities were similar between the Iomab-B arm and the conventional care arm, and included febrile neutropenia, stomatitis, and other side effects typical for these patients.

There were no grade 3 or 4 Iomab-B infusion-related reactions, and four mild cases of chronic graft-versus-host disease occurred in Iomab-B treated patients.

Nonrelapse mortality was “extremely low” with no cases in the 100 days post transplant in those initially randomized to Iomab-B, and only one case in a crossover patient, Dr. Giralt said.

“These results are encouraging, and can broaden transplant eligibility and improve outcomes,” he added.

The meeting is held by the American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation and the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research. At its meeting, the American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation announced a new name for the society: American Society for Transplantation and Cellular Therapy (ASTCT).

The SIERRA study is supported by Actinium Pharmaceuticals. Dr. Giralt reported disclosures related to Actinium and several other companies.

SOURCE: Giralt SA et al. TCT 2019, Abstract LBA3.

HOUSTON – A novel anti-CD45 targeted conditioning regimen is feasible for use in older patients with relapsed or refractory acute myeloid leukemia undergoing transplant, according to preliminary results of a randomized, phase 3 trial.

Treatment with iodine-131 apamistamab (Iomab-B) has thus far has resulted in successful engraftment for all patients who have received it and gone on to transplant, despite active disease and high bone marrow blast burden prior to transplantation, according to Sergio A. Giralt, MD, of Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York.

There has been no nonrelapse mortality related to the novel regimen in the ongoing trial, which compares Iomab-B as targeted conditioning prior to allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HCT) with standard of care regimens, Dr. Giralt said in an update on the trial, known as SIERRA.

SIERRA is the only ongoing, randomized, phase 3 clinical trial to offer a transplant option in patients aged 55 years or older with active relapsed or refractory acute myeloid leukemia (AML), Dr. Giralt said at the Transplantation & Cellular Therapy Meetings.

“This is an underserved population in which traditional transplant techniques have very poor results, and there are limited options for patients with active disease,” Dr. Giralt said. “Of note, many transplant centers today do not consider these patients eligible for transplant.”

A total of 150 patients are to be enrolled in SIERRA and randomized either to investigator’s choice of salvage induction chemotherapy including approved targeted agents or to the experimental arm, which consists of an individualized dose of Iomab-B 12 days prior to HCT with fludarabine and total body irradiation as transplant conditioning.

Dr. Giralt presented an update on the first 38 patients in SIERRA, representing 25% of the total enrollment target.

Of 18 patients randomized to Iomab-B and transplanted, the median number of days to absolute neutrophil count engraftment was 13, Dr. Giralt said.

In the control arm, 15 of 19 (79%) failed to achieve complete remission, and of those 10 crossed over to receive Iomab-B and transplant. Days to engraftment, full donor chimerism, and dose delivered to the bone marrow were all similar in the crossover group, compared with those initially randomized to the novel therapy.

Nonhematologic grade 3 or 4 toxicities were similar between the Iomab-B arm and the conventional care arm, and included febrile neutropenia, stomatitis, and other side effects typical for these patients.

There were no grade 3 or 4 Iomab-B infusion-related reactions, and four mild cases of chronic graft-versus-host disease occurred in Iomab-B treated patients.

Nonrelapse mortality was “extremely low” with no cases in the 100 days post transplant in those initially randomized to Iomab-B, and only one case in a crossover patient, Dr. Giralt said.

“These results are encouraging, and can broaden transplant eligibility and improve outcomes,” he added.

The meeting is held by the American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation and the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research. At its meeting, the American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation announced a new name for the society: American Society for Transplantation and Cellular Therapy (ASTCT).

The SIERRA study is supported by Actinium Pharmaceuticals. Dr. Giralt reported disclosures related to Actinium and several other companies.

SOURCE: Giralt SA et al. TCT 2019, Abstract LBA3.

For patients older than 65 years with newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia (AML) who were ineligible for standard induction therapy, adding the investigational pan-histone deacetylase (pan-HDAC) inhibitor pracinostat to azacitidine resulted in better complete remission and overall survival rates than azacitidine alone, results of a multicenter phase 2 trial showed.

Among 50 patients treated with the combination, 26 (52%) achieved the primary endpoint of either a complete remission (CR), CR with incomplete recovery of blood counts (CRi), or morphologic leukemia-free state (MLFS).

The median overall survival (OS) was 19.1 months, which compares favorably with historical data on similar patients treated with single-agent azacitidine, reported Guillermo Garcia-Manero, MD, from the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston and his colleagues.

“[T]his study shows that pracinostat in combination with azacitidine has the potential to be a safe and effective regimen in the frontline treatment of older patients with AML unfit for [induction chemotherapy],” they wrote in Blood Advances.

Pracinostat is an oral pan-HDAC inhibitor that has been shown to have modest activity against AML as a single agent, but synergistic activity when combined with hypomethylating agent azacitidine, a standard of care for older patients with AML in the trial.

The investigators enrolled 50 patients with a median age of 75 years (range, 66-84 years). The cohort included 33 patients with de novo AML, 12 with AML secondary to myelodysplasia syndrome or myleoproliferative neoplasia, and five with therapy-related AML.

The patients were treated with pracinostat 60 mg daily for 3 days each week for 3 consecutive weeks in addition to azacitidine 75 mg/m² daily for 7 days in a 28-day cycle.

As noted, 26 patients reached the clinical endpoint, including 21 with a CR, 2 with a CRi, and 3 with MLFS. Additionally, two patients had a partial response (PR) and four had a PR with incomplete recovery of blood counts.

The median OS was 19.1 months, and the median progression-free survival (PFS) was 12.6 months. The 1-year OS rate was 62%. The 60-day mortality rate was 10%.

The authors noted that the survival data were superior to those seen in the phase 3 AZA-AML-001 study, which compared azacitidine therapy with conventional regimens in patients older than 65 years with newly diagnosed AML who were not eligible for stem cell transplants. In that trial, median OS was 10.4 months, the CR rate was 19.5% (vs. 49% in the present study), the 1-year OS rate was 46.5%, and the 60-day mortality rate was 16.2%.

They acknowledged, however, that the validity of the comparison is limited by their study’s small sample size, potential differences between the study populations, and lack of a control group in the present study. The investigators also found that clearance rates of baseline somatic mutations correlated with response to treatment.

Grade 3 or greater treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in 43 of the 50 patients, including infections, thrombocytopenias, and febrile neutropenias.

“On the basis of these encouraging results, a phase 3, multicenter, double-blind, randomized study of pracinostat vs. placebo with azacitidine (NCT03151408) is currently ongoing to confirm superiority of the combination in this difficult-to-treat AML population,” the investigators wrote.

The study was supported by research funding from MEI Pharma, which helped develop pracinostat. Dr. Garcia-Manero reported having no disclosures. Multiple coauthors reported financial relationships with MEI and others. One coauthor is an MEI employee.

SOURCE: Garcia-Manero G et al. Blood Adv. 2019 Feb 26;3(4):508-18.

For patients older than 65 years with newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia (AML) who were ineligible for standard induction therapy, adding the investigational pan-histone deacetylase (pan-HDAC) inhibitor pracinostat to azacitidine resulted in better complete remission and overall survival rates than azacitidine alone, results of a multicenter phase 2 trial showed.

Among 50 patients treated with the combination, 26 (52%) achieved the primary endpoint of either a complete remission (CR), CR with incomplete recovery of blood counts (CRi), or morphologic leukemia-free state (MLFS).

The median overall survival (OS) was 19.1 months, which compares favorably with historical data on similar patients treated with single-agent azacitidine, reported Guillermo Garcia-Manero, MD, from the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston and his colleagues.

“[T]his study shows that pracinostat in combination with azacitidine has the potential to be a safe and effective regimen in the frontline treatment of older patients with AML unfit for [induction chemotherapy],” they wrote in Blood Advances.

Pracinostat is an oral pan-HDAC inhibitor that has been shown to have modest activity against AML as a single agent, but synergistic activity when combined with hypomethylating agent azacitidine, a standard of care for older patients with AML in the trial.

The investigators enrolled 50 patients with a median age of 75 years (range, 66-84 years). The cohort included 33 patients with de novo AML, 12 with AML secondary to myelodysplasia syndrome or myleoproliferative neoplasia, and five with therapy-related AML.

The patients were treated with pracinostat 60 mg daily for 3 days each week for 3 consecutive weeks in addition to azacitidine 75 mg/m² daily for 7 days in a 28-day cycle.

As noted, 26 patients reached the clinical endpoint, including 21 with a CR, 2 with a CRi, and 3 with MLFS. Additionally, two patients had a partial response (PR) and four had a PR with incomplete recovery of blood counts.

The median OS was 19.1 months, and the median progression-free survival (PFS) was 12.6 months. The 1-year OS rate was 62%. The 60-day mortality rate was 10%.

The authors noted that the survival data were superior to those seen in the phase 3 AZA-AML-001 study, which compared azacitidine therapy with conventional regimens in patients older than 65 years with newly diagnosed AML who were not eligible for stem cell transplants. In that trial, median OS was 10.4 months, the CR rate was 19.5% (vs. 49% in the present study), the 1-year OS rate was 46.5%, and the 60-day mortality rate was 16.2%.

They acknowledged, however, that the validity of the comparison is limited by their study’s small sample size, potential differences between the study populations, and lack of a control group in the present study. The investigators also found that clearance rates of baseline somatic mutations correlated with response to treatment.

Grade 3 or greater treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in 43 of the 50 patients, including infections, thrombocytopenias, and febrile neutropenias.

“On the basis of these encouraging results, a phase 3, multicenter, double-blind, randomized study of pracinostat vs. placebo with azacitidine (NCT03151408) is currently ongoing to confirm superiority of the combination in this difficult-to-treat AML population,” the investigators wrote.

The study was supported by research funding from MEI Pharma, which helped develop pracinostat. Dr. Garcia-Manero reported having no disclosures. Multiple coauthors reported financial relationships with MEI and others. One coauthor is an MEI employee.

SOURCE: Garcia-Manero G et al. Blood Adv. 2019 Feb 26;3(4):508-18.

For patients older than 65 years with newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia (AML) who were ineligible for standard induction therapy, adding the investigational pan-histone deacetylase (pan-HDAC) inhibitor pracinostat to azacitidine resulted in better complete remission and overall survival rates than azacitidine alone, results of a multicenter phase 2 trial showed.

Among 50 patients treated with the combination, 26 (52%) achieved the primary endpoint of either a complete remission (CR), CR with incomplete recovery of blood counts (CRi), or morphologic leukemia-free state (MLFS).

The median overall survival (OS) was 19.1 months, which compares favorably with historical data on similar patients treated with single-agent azacitidine, reported Guillermo Garcia-Manero, MD, from the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston and his colleagues.

“[T]his study shows that pracinostat in combination with azacitidine has the potential to be a safe and effective regimen in the frontline treatment of older patients with AML unfit for [induction chemotherapy],” they wrote in Blood Advances.

Pracinostat is an oral pan-HDAC inhibitor that has been shown to have modest activity against AML as a single agent, but synergistic activity when combined with hypomethylating agent azacitidine, a standard of care for older patients with AML in the trial.

The investigators enrolled 50 patients with a median age of 75 years (range, 66-84 years). The cohort included 33 patients with de novo AML, 12 with AML secondary to myelodysplasia syndrome or myleoproliferative neoplasia, and five with therapy-related AML.

The patients were treated with pracinostat 60 mg daily for 3 days each week for 3 consecutive weeks in addition to azacitidine 75 mg/m² daily for 7 days in a 28-day cycle.

As noted, 26 patients reached the clinical endpoint, including 21 with a CR, 2 with a CRi, and 3 with MLFS. Additionally, two patients had a partial response (PR) and four had a PR with incomplete recovery of blood counts.

The median OS was 19.1 months, and the median progression-free survival (PFS) was 12.6 months. The 1-year OS rate was 62%. The 60-day mortality rate was 10%.

The authors noted that the survival data were superior to those seen in the phase 3 AZA-AML-001 study, which compared azacitidine therapy with conventional regimens in patients older than 65 years with newly diagnosed AML who were not eligible for stem cell transplants. In that trial, median OS was 10.4 months, the CR rate was 19.5% (vs. 49% in the present study), the 1-year OS rate was 46.5%, and the 60-day mortality rate was 16.2%.

They acknowledged, however, that the validity of the comparison is limited by their study’s small sample size, potential differences between the study populations, and lack of a control group in the present study. The investigators also found that clearance rates of baseline somatic mutations correlated with response to treatment.

Grade 3 or greater treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in 43 of the 50 patients, including infections, thrombocytopenias, and febrile neutropenias.

“On the basis of these encouraging results, a phase 3, multicenter, double-blind, randomized study of pracinostat vs. placebo with azacitidine (NCT03151408) is currently ongoing to confirm superiority of the combination in this difficult-to-treat AML population,” the investigators wrote.

The study was supported by research funding from MEI Pharma, which helped develop pracinostat. Dr. Garcia-Manero reported having no disclosures. Multiple coauthors reported financial relationships with MEI and others. One coauthor is an MEI employee.

SOURCE: Garcia-Manero G et al. Blood Adv. 2019 Feb 26;3(4):508-18.

New research suggests guadecitabine may be an option for select patients with myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) or acute myeloid leukemia (AML) who have failed treatment with azacitidine.

National Institutes of Health/Wikimedia Commons/Public Domain

In a phase 2 trial, eight of 56 patients with high-risk MDS or low-blast-count AML responded to guadecitabine after azacitidine failure. Patients were significantly more likely to respond if they had few or no somatic mutations.

Marie Sébert, MD, of Hôpital Saint Louis in Paris and her colleagues conducted this trial and reported the results in Haematologica.

The trial (NCT02197676) included 56 patients with the following disease types:

• Refractory anemia with excess blasts (RAEB) type 2 (n = 31; 55%).
• RAEB type 1 (n = 11; 20%).
• Low-blast-count AML (n = 11; 20%).
• Refractory cytopenias with multilineage dysplasia (RCMD; n = 2; 4%).
• Chronic myelomonocytic leukemia (n = 1; 2%).

The patients had a median age of 75 years (range, 70-79) at baseline, and 37 (66%) were men. Thirty-four patients (61%) had very-high-risk disease according to the revised International Prognostic Scoring System. Forty-nine patients (87.5%) had at least one somatic mutation. The most commonly mutated genes were ASXL1, RUNX1, TP53, U2AF1, and DNMT3A.

Most patients (n = 41, 73%) had relapsed after azacitidine, and 15 (27%) had primary resistance to the drug. Patients had received a median of 13 azacitidine cycles (range, 6-23).

The patients received guadecitabine subcutaneously at 60 mg/m² on days 1-5 of a 28-day cycle. They were treated until progression, death, unacceptable toxicity, or no response after six to nine cycles. Patients received a median of three cycles (range, 0-27). One patient died of infection before receiving guadecitabine, but the remaining 55 patients received at least one cycle of treatment. Eighteen patients had a dose reduction.

Eight patients (14.3%) responded to guadecitabine. Two patients achieved a complete response (CR) – one who had RAEB-2 and one with AML. Two patients with RAEB-1 had marrow CRs. Two patients – one with RAEB-2 and one with AML – had marrow CRs with hematologic improvement. A patient with RCMD had hematologic improvement, and a patient with RAEB-2 had a partial response.

The researchers said mutation frequency was the only significant predictor of response. The response rate was significantly higher in patients who did not have somatic mutations (P = .036). The median number of mutations was one (range, zero to three) in responders and two (range, zero to six) in nonresponders (P = .035). None of the patients with TP53 mutations achieved a response.

The median duration of response was 11.5 months. The median overall survival was 17.9 months in responders and 7.1 months in the overall population.

In a multivariate analysis, the following factors were significantly associated with longer survival:
 

• Having low- to high-risk (vs. very-high-risk) disease (P = .03).
• Having experienced primary (vs. secondary) azacitidine failure (P = .01).
• Having a high rate of demethylation in blood during the first treatment cycle (P = .03).

There were 99 serious adverse events (AEs) reported in 44 patients. Most AEs were hematologic events, and the most common of these was myelosuppression (n = 88; 88%). The most common grade 3/4 nonhematologic AE was pulmonary toxicity (n = 7; 12.5%). Thirteen patients were hospitalized for febrile neutropenia for a median of 14 days.

The researchers said patients reported less pain and fewer secondary lesions with guadecitabine than they had with azacitidine.

This trial was sponsored by Groupe Francophone des Myelodysplasies in collaboration with Astex Pharmaceuticals. The researchers reported having no competing interests.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Sébert M et al. Haematologica. 2019 Feb 7. doi: 0.3324/haematol.2018.207118.

New research suggests guadecitabine may be an option for select patients with myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) or acute myeloid leukemia (AML) who have failed treatment with azacitidine.

National Institutes of Health/Wikimedia Commons/Public Domain

In a phase 2 trial, eight of 56 patients with high-risk MDS or low-blast-count AML responded to guadecitabine after azacitidine failure. Patients were significantly more likely to respond if they had few or no somatic mutations.

Marie Sébert, MD, of Hôpital Saint Louis in Paris and her colleagues conducted this trial and reported the results in Haematologica.

The trial (NCT02197676) included 56 patients with the following disease types:

• Refractory anemia with excess blasts (RAEB) type 2 (n = 31; 55%).
• RAEB type 1 (n = 11; 20%).
• Low-blast-count AML (n = 11; 20%).
• Refractory cytopenias with multilineage dysplasia (RCMD; n = 2; 4%).
• Chronic myelomonocytic leukemia (n = 1; 2%).

The patients had a median age of 75 years (range, 70-79) at baseline, and 37 (66%) were men. Thirty-four patients (61%) had very-high-risk disease according to the revised International Prognostic Scoring System. Forty-nine patients (87.5%) had at least one somatic mutation. The most commonly mutated genes were ASXL1, RUNX1, TP53, U2AF1, and DNMT3A.

Most patients (n = 41, 73%) had relapsed after azacitidine, and 15 (27%) had primary resistance to the drug. Patients had received a median of 13 azacitidine cycles (range, 6-23).

The patients received guadecitabine subcutaneously at 60 mg/m² on days 1-5 of a 28-day cycle. They were treated until progression, death, unacceptable toxicity, or no response after six to nine cycles. Patients received a median of three cycles (range, 0-27). One patient died of infection before receiving guadecitabine, but the remaining 55 patients received at least one cycle of treatment. Eighteen patients had a dose reduction.

Eight patients (14.3%) responded to guadecitabine. Two patients achieved a complete response (CR) – one who had RAEB-2 and one with AML. Two patients with RAEB-1 had marrow CRs. Two patients – one with RAEB-2 and one with AML – had marrow CRs with hematologic improvement. A patient with RCMD had hematologic improvement, and a patient with RAEB-2 had a partial response.

The researchers said mutation frequency was the only significant predictor of response. The response rate was significantly higher in patients who did not have somatic mutations (P = .036). The median number of mutations was one (range, zero to three) in responders and two (range, zero to six) in nonresponders (P = .035). None of the patients with TP53 mutations achieved a response.

The median duration of response was 11.5 months. The median overall survival was 17.9 months in responders and 7.1 months in the overall population.

In a multivariate analysis, the following factors were significantly associated with longer survival:
 

• Having low- to high-risk (vs. very-high-risk) disease (P = .03).
• Having experienced primary (vs. secondary) azacitidine failure (P = .01).
• Having a high rate of demethylation in blood during the first treatment cycle (P = .03).

There were 99 serious adverse events (AEs) reported in 44 patients. Most AEs were hematologic events, and the most common of these was myelosuppression (n = 88; 88%). The most common grade 3/4 nonhematologic AE was pulmonary toxicity (n = 7; 12.5%). Thirteen patients were hospitalized for febrile neutropenia for a median of 14 days.

The researchers said patients reported less pain and fewer secondary lesions with guadecitabine than they had with azacitidine.

This trial was sponsored by Groupe Francophone des Myelodysplasies in collaboration with Astex Pharmaceuticals. The researchers reported having no competing interests.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Sébert M et al. Haematologica. 2019 Feb 7. doi: 0.3324/haematol.2018.207118.

New research suggests guadecitabine may be an option for select patients with myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) or acute myeloid leukemia (AML) who have failed treatment with azacitidine.

National Institutes of Health/Wikimedia Commons/Public Domain

In a phase 2 trial, eight of 56 patients with high-risk MDS or low-blast-count AML responded to guadecitabine after azacitidine failure. Patients were significantly more likely to respond if they had few or no somatic mutations.

Marie Sébert, MD, of Hôpital Saint Louis in Paris and her colleagues conducted this trial and reported the results in Haematologica.

The trial (NCT02197676) included 56 patients with the following disease types:

• Refractory anemia with excess blasts (RAEB) type 2 (n = 31; 55%).
• RAEB type 1 (n = 11; 20%).
• Low-blast-count AML (n = 11; 20%).
• Refractory cytopenias with multilineage dysplasia (RCMD; n = 2; 4%).
• Chronic myelomonocytic leukemia (n = 1; 2%).

The patients had a median age of 75 years (range, 70-79) at baseline, and 37 (66%) were men. Thirty-four patients (61%) had very-high-risk disease according to the revised International Prognostic Scoring System. Forty-nine patients (87.5%) had at least one somatic mutation. The most commonly mutated genes were ASXL1, RUNX1, TP53, U2AF1, and DNMT3A.

Most patients (n = 41, 73%) had relapsed after azacitidine, and 15 (27%) had primary resistance to the drug. Patients had received a median of 13 azacitidine cycles (range, 6-23).

The patients received guadecitabine subcutaneously at 60 mg/m² on days 1-5 of a 28-day cycle. They were treated until progression, death, unacceptable toxicity, or no response after six to nine cycles. Patients received a median of three cycles (range, 0-27). One patient died of infection before receiving guadecitabine, but the remaining 55 patients received at least one cycle of treatment. Eighteen patients had a dose reduction.

Eight patients (14.3%) responded to guadecitabine. Two patients achieved a complete response (CR) – one who had RAEB-2 and one with AML. Two patients with RAEB-1 had marrow CRs. Two patients – one with RAEB-2 and one with AML – had marrow CRs with hematologic improvement. A patient with RCMD had hematologic improvement, and a patient with RAEB-2 had a partial response.

The researchers said mutation frequency was the only significant predictor of response. The response rate was significantly higher in patients who did not have somatic mutations (P = .036). The median number of mutations was one (range, zero to three) in responders and two (range, zero to six) in nonresponders (P = .035). None of the patients with TP53 mutations achieved a response.

The median duration of response was 11.5 months. The median overall survival was 17.9 months in responders and 7.1 months in the overall population.

In a multivariate analysis, the following factors were significantly associated with longer survival:
 

• Having low- to high-risk (vs. very-high-risk) disease (P = .03).
• Having experienced primary (vs. secondary) azacitidine failure (P = .01).
• Having a high rate of demethylation in blood during the first treatment cycle (P = .03).

There were 99 serious adverse events (AEs) reported in 44 patients. Most AEs were hematologic events, and the most common of these was myelosuppression (n = 88; 88%). The most common grade 3/4 nonhematologic AE was pulmonary toxicity (n = 7; 12.5%). Thirteen patients were hospitalized for febrile neutropenia for a median of 14 days.

The researchers said patients reported less pain and fewer secondary lesions with guadecitabine than they had with azacitidine.

This trial was sponsored by Groupe Francophone des Myelodysplasies in collaboration with Astex Pharmaceuticals. The researchers reported having no competing interests.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Sébert M et al. Haematologica. 2019 Feb 7. doi: 0.3324/haematol.2018.207118.