Browse
Submit Data
Databases
API
Help

Dataset Information

0 Views

0 Connections

0 Citations

0 Reanalyses

0 Downloads

Omics score: 0

Are We Ready For "Triplet" Therapy in Higher-Risk MDS?

ABSTRACT: Higher-risk Myelodysplastic Syndromes/Neoplasms (MDS) represent an ongoing therapeutic challenge, with few effective therapies, many of which may have limited use in this older patient population often with considerations around comorbidities. Outside of transplant, azacitidine and decitabine remain the only disease-modifying therapies, and are palliative in nature. Recent interest has grown in extending combination chemotherapies used to treat acute myeloid leukemia (AML) to patients with MDS, including novel combination chemotherapy "doublets" and "triplets." In this review, we discuss considerations around combination chemotherapy in MDS, specifically as relates to study design, appropriate endpoints, supportive considerations, and how to integrate these into the current treatment paradigm. New therapies in MDS are desperately needed but also require considerations particular to this unique patient population.

SUBMITTER: Brunner AM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10625655 | biostudies-literature | 2023

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Json Xml

Publications

Are We Ready For "Triplet" Therapy in Higher-Risk MDS?

Brunner Andrew M AM Platzbecker Uwe U DeZern Amy E AE Zeidan Amer M AM

Clinical hematology international 20231103 4

Higher-risk Myelodysplastic Syndromes/Neoplasms (MDS) represent an ongoing therapeutic challenge, with few effective therapies, many of which may have limited use in this older patient population often with considerations around comorbidities. Outside of transplant, azacitidine and decitabine remain the only disease-modifying therapies, and are palliative in nature. Recent interest has grown in extending combination chemotherapies used to treat acute myeloid leukemia (AML) to patients with MDS, ...[more]

PMID: 37933301

Similar Datasets

In MDS, is higher risk higher reward?

Project description:Patients with higher-risk myelodysplastic syndrome (HR-MDS) are defined by the original or revised International Prognostic Scoring System and specific genetic features. Treatment of HR-MDS is challenging. Allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation, the only curative approach, is feasible in a minority of fit or intermediate fitness patients aged <70 to 75 years who are willing to face the risks of the procedure. Response to azacitidine and decitabine, the only approved drugs for HR-MDS and considered the standard of care, is partial and transient in most patients. The development of novel more personalized and efficient drugs is an unmet medical need. During the last decade, there have been substantial advances in understanding the multiple molecular, cellular, and immunological disturbances involved in the pathogenesis of myelodysplastic syndrome. As a result, a number of clinical and translational studies of new more focused treatment approaches for HR-MDS patients are underway. In contrast to acute myeloid leukemia, they have not resulted in any new drug approval. This review addresses the benefits and limitations of current treatment alternatives, offers a practical individualized treatment approach, and summarizes the clinical trials in progress for HR-MDS.

| S-EPMC6913486 | biostudies-literature

New investigational combinations for higher-risk MDS.

Project description:Myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) are typically a hematologic malignancy of older adults characterized by dysplastic hematopoiesis, cytopenia(s), and risk of acute myeloid leukemia transformation. The treatment approach to MDS depends largely on risk stratification of an individual's disease, most commonly using the Revised International Prognostic Scoring System, which takes into account peripheral blood cytopenias and bone marrow blast percentage and cytogenetics. The current standard of care for patients with higher-risk MDS (HR-MDS) includes hypomethylating agents (HMAs), decitabine and azacitidine, and allogenic stem cell transplant for patients able to undergo this therapy. However, leukemic transformation remains a significant challenge, and outcomes with these current therapies are still dismal. There are several novel therapies in development aiming to improve upon the outcomes of single-agent HMA therapy using combination strategies with HMAs. Here we discuss the current standard of care for HR-MDS treatment and explore some of the most promising combination therapies coming out of the pipeline for HR-MDS.

| S-EPMC9820246 | biostudies-literature

Therapy for lower-risk MDS.

Project description:Lower-risk myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) are characterized by the presence of dysplasia, low bone marrow blast percentage, low number and depth of cytopenia(s), and relatively good-risk karyotpic and molecular abnormalities. A score of ≤3.5 on the Revised International Prognostic Scoring System classifies patients as lower-risk MDS. Information from a mutational profile of the MDS at time of diagnosis (and over serial time points) can be reassuring for predicted behavior of lower-risk MDS compared with one expected to progress more rapidly (higher-risk MDS). Supportive care continues to be the crux of treatment, although the options to reduce transfusion needs have improved in 2020. Erythropoiesis stimulating agents, lenalidomide, and luspatercept address the most frequent (and symptomatic) cytopenia (anemia) and are started only when patients are transfusion dependent. Patients can derive long-term benefits (years) from these approaches but will often progress to higher-risk MDS. Interestingly, some patients with lower-risk MDS can present with an isolated thrombocytopenia for which thrombopoietin receptor analogs such as romiplostim and eltrombopag are options (as long as blast counts are low). The presence of pancytopenia and or intensifying and unremitting clinical symptoms are often treated with hypomethylating agents or (anti-thymocyte globulin if hypocellular MDS is of concern). Targeted therapies are emerging for small subsets of MDS patients with specific somatic mutations (ie, TP53, IDH1/2, FLT3), although currently, there are no approved, mutation-directed medications to treat MDS.

| S-EPMC7727572 | biostudies-literature

Risk prediction in MDS: independent validation of the IPSS-M-ready for routine?

Project description: Not available

| S-EPMC10079546 | biostudies-literature

Next-generation therapy for lower-risk MDS.

Project description:Myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) are malignant myeloid neoplasms characterized by ineffective clonal hematopoiesis leading to peripheral blood cytopenia and a variable risk of transformation to acute myeloid leukemia. In lower-risk (LR) MDS, as defined by prognostic scoring systems recently updated with the addition of a mutation profile, therapeutic options aim to reduce cytopenia, mainly anemia. Although options for reducing the transfusion burden have recently been improved, erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs), lenalidomide, hypomethylating agents, and, more recently, luspatercept have shown efficacy in rarely more than 50% of patients with a duration of response often far inferior to the patient's life expectancy. Nevertheless, several new therapies are currently under investigation aiming at improving cytopenia in patients with LR-MDS, mostly by targeting different biological pathways. Targeting ligands of the transforming growth factor β pathway has led to the approval of luspatercept in LR-MDS with ring sideroblasts or SF3B1 mutation, potentially replacing first-line ESAs in this population. Here, we also discuss the evolving standard of care for the treatment of LR-MDS and explore some of the most promising next-generation agents under investigation.

| S-EPMC10727062 | biostudies-literature

Frontline treatment options for higher-risk MDS: can we move past azacitidine?

Project description:Although remarkable international efforts have been ongoing for over 17 years to improve upon azacitidine, representing the standard of care therapy for higher-risk myelodysplastic neoplasms (MDS), there still has not been a positive randomized trial in comparison to azacitidine. Real-world data from numerous trials have shown similar results with a median overall survival of 14-18 months, a 40%-50% overall response rate, and a complete remission rate close to 20%. Despite these outcomes, 6 randomized controlled trials have failed to improve outcomes in this patient population, although relevant issues in some of these studies included improper dose adjustments of the hypomethylating agent, lack of placebo- controlled studies, and lack of overall survival (OS) as a primary endpoint, among others. Critical updates in MDS management include the development of molecular prognostication models (eg, the molecular international prognostic scoring system), updates in classification systems highlighting significant overlap in patients with MDS-increased blasts and acute myeloid leukemia (most relevant to TP53 mutations), and refinement of response criteria. Although these paradigm-shifting studies have had great impact in MDS management, the current ongoing randomized phase 3 trials were initiated prior, and prognostic stratification remains via the revised international prognostic scoring system) and with bone marrow blast counts of <20%. Notably, azacitidine + venetoclax, azacitidine + sabatolimab, and azacitidine + magrolimab have shown exciting results in large, single-arm studies and have completed accrual in placebo-controlled, double-blind studies with OS as a primary endpoint. We all eagerly await the results of these studies.

| S-EPMC10727006 | biostudies-literature

Ibrutinib added to 10-day decitabine for older patients with AML and higher risk MDS.

Project description:The treatment of older, unfit patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) is challenging. Based on preclinical data of Bruton tyrosine kinase expression/phosphorylation and ibrutinib cytotoxicity in AML blasts, we conducted a randomized phase 2 multicenter study to assess the tolerability and efficacy of the addition of ibrutinib to 10-day decitabine in unfit (ie, Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation Comorbidity Index ≥3) AML patients and higher risk myelodysplasia patients (HOVON135/SAKK30/15 trial). In total, 144 eligible patients were randomly (1:1) assigned to either 10-day decitabine combined with ibrutinib (560 mg; sequentially given, starting the day after the last dose of decitabine) (n = 72) or to 10-day decitabine (n = 72). The addition of ibrutinib was well tolerated, and the number of adverse events was comparable for both arms. In the decitabine plus ibrutinib arm, 41% reached complete remission/complete remission with incomplete hematologic recovery (CR/CRi), the median overall survival (OS) was 11 months, and 2-year OS was 27%; these findings compared with 50% CR/CRi, median OS of 11.5 months, and 2-year OS of 21% for the decitabine group (not significant). Extensive molecular profiling at diagnosis revealed that patients with STAG2, IDH2, and ASXL1 mutations had significantly lower CR/CRi rates, whereas patients with mutations in TP53 had significantly higher CR/CRi rates. Furthermore, multicolor flow cytometry revealed that after 3 cycles of treatment, 28 (49%) of 57 patients with available bone marrow samples had no measurable residual disease. In this limited number of cases, measurable residual disease revealed no apparent impact on event-free survival and OS. In conclusion, the addition of ibrutinib does not improve the therapeutic efficacy of decitabine. This trial was registered at the Netherlands Trial Register (NL5751 [NTR6017]) and has EudraCT number 2015-002855-85.

| S-EPMC7509861 | biostudies-literature

Higher-order temporal network effects through triplet evolution.

Project description:We study the evolution of networks through 'triplets'-three-node graphlets. We develop a method to compute a transition matrix to describe the evolution of triplets in temporal networks. To identify the importance of higher-order interactions in the evolution of networks, we compare both artificial and real-world data to a model based on pairwise interactions only. The significant differences between the computed matrix and the calculated matrix from the fitted parameters demonstrate that non-pairwise interactions exist for various real-world systems in space and time, such as our data sets. Furthermore, this also reveals that different patterns of higher-order interaction are involved in different real-world situations. To test our approach, we then use these transition matrices as the basis of a link prediction algorithm. We investigate our algorithm's performance on four temporal networks, comparing our approach against ten other link prediction methods. Our results show that higher-order interactions in both space and time play a crucial role in the evolution of networks as we find our method, along with two other methods based on non-local interactions, give the best overall performance. The results also confirm the concept that the higher-order interaction patterns, i.e., triplet dynamics, can help us understand and predict the evolution of different real-world systems.

| S-EPMC8322211 | biostudies-literature

Pevonedistat plus azacitidine vs azacitidine alone in higher-risk MDS/chronic myelomonocytic leukemia or low-blast-percentage AML.

Project description:PANTHER is a global, randomized phase 3 trial of pevonedistat+azacitidine (n = 227) vs azacitidine monotherapy (n = 227) in patients with newly diagnosed higher-risk myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS; n = 324), higher-risk chronic myelomonocytic leukemia (n = 27), or acute myeloid leukemia (AML) with 20% to 30% blasts (n = 103). The primary end point was event-free survival (EFS). In the intent-to-treat population, the median EFS was 17.7 months with pevonedistat+azacitidine vs 15.7 months with azacitidine (hazard ratio [HR], 0.968; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.757-1.238; P = .557) and in the higher-risk MDS cohort, median EFS was 19.2 vs 15.6 months (HR, 0.887; 95% CI, 0.659-1.193; P = .431). Median overall survival (OS) in the higher-risk MDS cohort was 21.6 vs 17.5 months (HR, 0.785; P = .092), and in patients with AML with 20% to 30% blasts was 14.5 vs 14.7 months (HR, 1.107; P = .664). In a post hoc analysis, median OS in the higher-risk MDS cohort for patients receiving >3 cycles was 23.8 vs 20.6 months (P = .021) and for >6 cycles was 27.1 vs 22.5 months (P = .008). No new safety signals were identified, and the azacitidine dose intensity was maintained. Common hematologic grade ≥3 treatment emergent adverse events were anemia (33% vs 34%), neutropenia (31% vs 33%), and thrombocytopenia (30% vs 30%). These results underscore the importance of large, randomized controlled trials in these heterogeneous myeloid diseases and the value of continuing therapy for >3 cycles. The trial was registered on clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT03268954.

| S-EPMC9631625 | biostudies-literature

Better transplant outcome with pre-transplant marrow response after hypomethylating treatment in higher-risk MDS with excess blasts.

Project description:Hypomethylating treatment (HMT) has been suggested as a feasible bridge to hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT), but controversies exist around influences of HMT response on transplant outcomes. To assess the safety and influences of pre-transplant HMT focusing on debulking effects and transplant outcomes, we retrospectively analyzed consecutive HSCT-eligible patients who received HMT for higher-risk MDS with excess blasts. Of all 98 patients, 11 patients failed to proceed to HSCT and HMT-related mortality occurred in 8 patients. When excluding 9 patients who refused HSCT, 87% of scheduled HSCT (77 of 89) was performed after a median of 3 cycles (range, 1-8) of HMT. The 4-year overall survival after HMT (n = 98) and HSCT (n = 77) was 44.0% and 53.6%, respectively. Transplant outcomes were significantly different by the final response at HSCT; marrow response group (complete remission, marrow complete remission with or without hematologic improvement) showed significantly better 4-year disease-free survival compared to no marrow response group (n = 36, 87.3% vs. n = 41, 10.7%, P < 0.001). This difference between the groups was also evident in overall survival (90.9% vs. 8.6%, P < 0.001) and cumulative incidences of relapse (6.5% vs. 45.4%, P < 0.001) and treatment-related mortality (6.2% vs. 43.9%, P < 0.001). These observations indicate that pre-transplant HMT is a feasible bridging treatment in patients with excess blasts regarding high success rate of proceeding to transplantation and good survival rate. Marrow response at HSCT regardless of concomitant hematological improvement is an independent predictor of better survival, suggesting that immediate HSCT rather than continuing HMT should be performed once marrow response is achieved.

| S-EPMC5355349 | biostudies-literature

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

OmicsDI is an Elixir interoperability service. Learn more ›

Tweets

OmicsDI Databases

PRIDE
PeptideAtlas
MassIVE
JPOST Repository
Physiome Model Repository

EGA
EVA
ENA
LINCS
PAXDB
Cell Collective

MetaboLights
Metabolomics Workbench
MetabolomeExpress
GNPS
BioModels
FAIRDOMHub

ArrayExpress
dbGaP
ExpressionAtlas
GEO
NODE

Information

Databases
Help
API
Contact us
Code on GitHub
Terms of use
Submit Data