Azacitidine front-line in 339 patients with myelodysplastic syndromes and acute myeloid leukaemia: comparison of French-American-British and World Health Organization classifications.
ABSTRACT: The MDS-IWG and NCCN currently endorse both FAB and WHO classifications of MDS and AML, thus allowing patients with 20-30 % bone marrow blasts (AML20-30, formerly MDS-RAEB-t) to be categorised and treated as either MDS or AML. In addition, an artificial distinction between AML20-30 and AML30+ was made by regulatory agencies by initially restricting approval of azacitidine to AML20-30. Thus, uncertainty prevails regarding the diagnosis, prognosis and optimal treatment timing and strategy for patients with AML20-30. Here, we aim to provide clarification for patients treated with azacitidine front-line.The Austrian Azacitidine Registry is a multicentre database (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01595295). For this analysis, we selected 339 patients treated with azacitidine front-line. According to the WHO classification 53, 96 and 190 patients had MDS-RAEB-I, MDS-RAEB-II and AML (AML20-30: n?=?79; AML30+: n?=?111), respectively. According to the FAB classification, 131, 101 and 111 patients had MDS-RAEB, MDS-RAEB-t and AML, respectively.The median ages of patients with MDS and AML were 72 (range 37-87) and 77 (range 23-93) years, respectively. Overall, 80 % of classifiable patients (?30 % bone marrow blasts) had intermediate-2 or high-risk IPSS scores. Most other baseline, treatment and response characteristics were similar between patients diagnosed with MDS or AML. WHO-classified patients with AML20-30 had significantly worse OS than patients with MDS-RAEB-II (13.1 vs 18.9 months; p?=?0.010), but similar OS to patients with AML30+ (10.9 vs 13.1 months; p?=?0.238). AML patients that showed MDS-related features did not have worse outcomes compared with patients who did not (13.2 vs 8.9 months; p?=?0.104). FAB-classified patients with MDS-RAEB-t had similar survival to patients with AML30+ (12.8 vs 10.9 months; p?=?0.376), but significantly worse OS than patients with MDS-RAEB (10.9 vs 24.4 months; p?
Project description:This analysis compared azacitidine (AZA) to conventional care regimens (CCR) and their associated overall survival (OS) and tolerability in the subset of 87 elderly (? 75 years) patients with higher-risk MDS (FAB: RAEB, RAEB-t, CMML and IPSS: Int-2 or High) from the AZA-001 trial. Patients were randomized to AZA (75 mg/m(2)/daysubcutaneously × 7 days every 28 days) (n=38) or CCR (n=49) and had median ages of 78 and 77 years, respectively. AZA significantly improved OS vs CCR (HR: 0.48 [95%CI: 0.26, 0.89]; p=0.0193) and 2-year OS rates were 55% vs 15% (p<0.001), respectively. AZA was generally well tolerated compared with CCR, which was primarily best supportive care (67%). Grade 3-4 anemia, neutropenia, and thrombocytopenia with AZA vs CCR were 13% vs 4%, 61% vs 17%, and 50% vs 30%, respectively. Given this efficacy and tolerability, AZA should be considered the treatment of choice in patients aged ? 75 years with good performance status and higher-risk MDS.
Project description:After the World Health Organization (WHO) changed the definition of acute myeloid leukemia (AML) to ? 20% blasts, the International Working Group (IWG) response criteria for myelodysplasia were updated. This retrospective analysis evaluated response to decitabine using updated IWG criteria in patients pooled from 2 decitabine trials.Outcomes for patients with myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) with baseline marrow blasts ? 20% and < 30% (RAEB-t group) and < 20% (MDS group) were compared.Patients with RAEB-t (n = 26) had a significantly shorter time from diagnosis to study treatment (7.3 vs. 18.3 months), a higher International Prognostic Scoring System (IPSS) risk (77% vs. 16% high-risk patients), and lower median baseline platelet count (62.3 vs. 112.7 × 10(3)/?L) vs. patients with MDS (n = 157), yet no significant difference in overall response rate (ORR) (15.4% vs. 28.0%). Patients with MDS had better duration of response (9.9 vs. 5 months; P = .024) and overall survival (OS) (16.6 vs. 9.0 months; P = .021) compared with patients with RAEB-t.Decitabine is active in and may benefit patients with > 20% blasts (RAEB-t).
Project description:The myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) comprise a heterogeneous group of clonal myeloid malignancies characterized by multilineage cytopenias, recurrent cytogenetic abnormalities, and risk of progression to acute myeloid leukemia (AML). AML, which can occur de novo as well as secondary to MDS, is characterized by malignant clones of myeloid lineage in the bone marrow and peripheral blood, with dissemination into tissues. The cytidine nucleoside analog and epigenetic modifier azacitidine is approved in the U.S. for the treatment of all French-American-British subtypes of MDS and in many countries for the treatment of AML with 20%-30% blasts and multilineage dysplasia according to the World Health Organization classification. Benefits of azacitidine treatment of patients with AML with >30% blasts have also been shown in a recent phase III trial. Oral administration of azacitidine may enhance patient convenience, eliminate injection-site reactions, allow for alternative dosing and scheduling, and enable long-term treatment. Phase I studies with oral azacitidine (CC-486) have shown biological activity, clinical responses, and tolerability in patients with MDS and AML. Extended dosing schedules of oral azacitidine (for 14 or 21 days of 28-day cycles) are currently under investigation as frontline therapy in patients with lower risk MDS, as maintenance therapy for patients with AML not eligible for stem cell transplant, and as maintenance therapy for patients with MDS or AML following stem cell transplant. This review presents clinical data supporting the use of injectable azacitidine in MDS and AML and examines the rationale for and results of the clinical development of oral azacitidine.
Project description:In the phase III AZA-001 trial, low-dose cytarabine (LDara-C), the most widely used low-dose chemotherapy in patients with higher-risk myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) who are ineligible for intensive treatment, was found to be associated with poorer survival compared with azacitidine. This analysis further compared the efficacy and the toxicity of these two drug regimens. Before randomization, investigators preselected patients to receive a conventional care regimen, one of which was LDara-C. Of 94 patients preselected to LDara-C, 45 were randomized to azacitidine and 49 to LDara-C. Azacitidine patients had significantly more and longer haematological responses and increased red blood cell transfusion independence. Azacitidine prolonged overall survival versus LDara-C in patients with poor cytogenetic risk, presence of -7/del(7q), and French-American-British subtypes refractory anaemia with excess blasts (RAEB) and RAEB in transformation. When analyzed per patient year of drug exposure, azacitidine treatment was associated with fewer grade 3-4 cytopenias and shorter hospitalisation time than LDara-C in these higher-risk MDS patients.
Project description:We recently published a clinically-meaningful improvement in median overall survival (OS) for patients with acute myeloid leukaemia (AML), >30% bone marrow (BM) blasts and white blood cell (WBC) count ?15 G/L, treated with front-line azacitidine versus conventional care regimens within a phase 3 clinical trial (AZA-AML-001; NCT01074047; registered: February 2010). As results obtained in clinical trials are facing increased pressure to be confirmed by real-world data, we aimed to test whether data obtained in the AZA-AML-001 trial accurately represent observations made in routine clinical practice by analysing additional AML patients treated with azacitidine front-line within the Austrian Azacitidine Registry (AAR; NCT01595295; registered: May 2012) and directly comparing patient-level data of both cohorts. We assessed the efficacy of front-line azacitidine in a total of 407 patients with newly-diagnosed AML. Firstly, we compared data from AML patients with WBC ? 15 G/L and >30% BM blasts included within the AZA-AML-001 trial treated with azacitidine ("AML-001" cohort; n = 214) with AAR patients meeting the same inclusion criteria ("AAR (001-like)" cohort; n = 95). The current analysis thus represents a new sub-analysis of the AML-001 trial, which is directly compared with a new sub-analysis of the AAR. Baseline characteristics, azacitidine application, response rates and OS were comparable between all patient cohorts within the trial or registry setting. Median OS was 9.9 versus 10.8 months (p = 0.616) for "AML-001" versus "AAR (001-like)" cohorts, respectively. Secondly, we pooled data from both cohorts (n = 309) and assessed the outcome. Median OS of the pooled cohorts was 10.3 (95% confidence interval: 8.7, 12.6) months, and the one-year survival rate was 45.8%. Thirdly, we compared data from AAR patients meeting AZA-AML-001 trial inclusion criteria (n = 95) versus all AAR patients with World Health Organization (WHO)-defined AML ("AAR (WHO-AML)" cohort; n = 193). Within the registry population, median OS for AAR patients meeting trial inclusion criteria versus all WHO-AML patients was 10.8 versus 11.8 months (p = 0.599), respectively. We thus tested and confirmed the efficacy of azacitidine as a front-line agent in patients with AML, >30% BM blasts and WBC ? 15 G/L in a routine clinical practice setting. We further show that the efficacy of azacitidine does not appear to be limited to AML patients who meet stringent clinical trial inclusion criteria, but instead appears efficacious as front-line treatment in all patients with WHO-AML.
Project description:Therapeutic options are limited for elderly patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML). A phase Ib/II study was undertaken to evaluate the maximum-tolerated dose (MTD) and preliminary efficacy of the pan-histone deacetylase inhibitor panobinostat (LBH589) in combination with azacitidine in patients with AML or high-risk myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) naïve to intensive chemotherapy. Thirty-nine patients (AML=29, MDS=10) received azacitidine 75 mg/m(2) subcutaneously (days 1-5) and oral panobinostat (starting on day 5, thrice weekly for seven doses) in 28-day cycles until toxicity or disease progression. Dose-limiting toxicities during the phase Ib stage were observed in 0/4 patients receiving 10 mg panobinostat, in 1/7 patients (fatigue) receiving 20 mg, in 1/6 patients (fatigue) receiving 30 mg and in 4/5 patients (fatigue, syncope, hyponatremia and somnolence) receiving 40 mg. In phase II, an additional 17 patients received panobinostat at a MTD of 30 mg. The overall response rate (ORR=CR+CRi+PR) in patients with AML was 31% (9/29) and that in patients with MDS was 50% (5/10). After a median follow-up of 13 months, the median overall survival was 8 and 16 months in patients with AML and MDS, respectively. Increased histone H3 and H4 acetylation was a useful early biomarker of clinical response. Combining panobinostat with azacitidine was tolerable and clinically active in high-risk MDS/AML patients, warranting further exploration.
Project description:Data on efficacy and safety of azacitidine in acute myeloid leukemia (AML) with >30 % bone marrow (BM) blasts are limited, and the drug can only be used off-label in these patients. We previously reported on the efficacy and safety of azacitidine in 155 AML patients treated within the Austrian Azacitidine Registry (clinicaltrials.gov identifier NCT01595295). We herein update this report with a population almost twice as large (n = 302). This cohort included 172 patients with >30 % BM blasts; 93 % would have been excluded from the pivotal AZA-001 trial (which led to European Medicines Agency (EMA) approval of azacitidine for high-risk myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) and AML with 20-30 % BM blasts). Despite this much more unfavorable profile, results are encouraging: overall response rate was 48 % in the total cohort and 72 % in patients evaluable according to MDS-IWG-2006 response criteria, respectively. Median OS was 9.6 (95 % CI 8.53-10.7) months. A clinically relevant OS benefit was observed with any form of disease stabilization (marrow stable disease (8.1 months), hematologic improvement (HI) (9.7 months), or the combination thereof (18.9 months)), as compared to patients without response and/or without disease stabilization (3.2 months). Age, white blood cell count, and BM blast count at start of therapy did not influence OS. The baseline factors LDH >225 U/l, ECOG ≥2, comorbidities ≥3, monosomal karyotype, and prior disease-modifying drugs, as well as the response-related factors hematologic improvement and further deepening of response after first response, were significant independent predictors of OS in multivariate analysis. Azacitidine seems effective in WHO-AML, including patients with >30 % BM blasts (currently off-label use). Although currently not regarded as standard form of response assessment in AML, disease stabilization and/or HI should be considered sufficient response to continue treatment with azacitidine.
Project description:BACKGROUND:Aberrant DNA methylation has been identified as a key molecular event regulating the pathogenesis of myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS); myeloid neoplasms with an inherent risk of transformation to acute myeloid leukemia (AML). Based on the above findings, DNA hypomethylating agents (HMA) have been widely used to treat AML and MDS, especially in elderly patients and in those who are not eligible for allogeneic stem cell transplantation (SCT). Our goal was to determine if there is any therapeutic advantage of HMA vs. conventional care regimens (CCR) and indirectly compare the efficacy of azacitidine and decitabine in this patient population. METHODS:Eligible studies were limited to randomized controlled trials comparing HMA to CCR in adult patients with AML or MDS. RESULTS:Overall survival (OS) rate was 33.2 vs. 21.4 % (RR 0.83, 95 % CI 0.71-0.98) and overall response rate (ORR) 23.7 vs. 13.4 % (RR 0.87, 95 % CI 0.81-0.93) for HMA and CCR, respectively. In subgroup analyses, only azacitidine treatment showed OS improvement (RR 0.75, 95 % CI 0.64-0.98) and not decitabine. Cytogenetic risk or bone marrow blast count did not have independent prognostic impact. CONCLUSION:Collectively, these results demonstrate that HMA have superior outcomes compared to CCR and suggest that azacitidine in comparison to decitabine, may be more effective.
Project description:In acute myeloid leukemia (AML) quiescence and low oxidative state, linked to BCL2 mitochondrial regulation, endow leukemic stem cells (LSC) with treatment-resistance. LSC in CD34+ and more mature CD34- AML have heterogeneous immunophenotypes overlapping with normal stem/progenitor cells (SPC) but may be differentiated by functional markers. We therefore investigated the oxidative/reactive oxygen species (ROS) profile, its relationship with cell-cycle/BCL2 for normal SPC, and whether altered in AML and myelodysplasia (MDS). In control BM (n = 24), ROS levels were highest in granulocyte-macrophage progenitors (GMP) and CD34- myeloid precursors but megakaryocyte-erythroid progenitors had equivalent levels to CD34+CD38low immature-SPC although they were ki67high. BCL2 upregulation was specific to GMPs. This profile was also observed for CD34+SPC in MDS-without-excess-blasts (MDS-noEB, n = 12). Erythroid CD34- precursors were, however, abnormally ROS-high in MDS-noEB, potentially linking oxidative stress to cell loss. In pre-treatment AML (n = 93) and MDS-with-excess-blasts (MDS-RAEB) (n = 14), immunophenotypic mature-SPC had similar ROS levels to co-existing immature-SPC. However ROS levels varied between AMLs; Flt3ITD+/NPM1wild-type CD34+SPC had higher ROS than NPM1mutated CD34+ or CD34- SPC. An aberrant ki67lowBCL2high immunophenotype was observed in CD34+AML (most prominent in Flt3ITD AMLs) but also in CD34- AMLs and MDS-RAEB, suggesting a shared redox/pro-survival adaptation. Some patients had BCL2 overexpression in CD34+ ROS-high as well as ROS-low fractions which may be indicative of poor early response to standard chemotherapy. Thus normal SPC subsets have distinct ROS, cell-cycle, BCL2 profiles that in AML /MDS-RAEB are decoupled from maturation. The combined profile of these functional properties in AML subpopulations may be relevant to differential treatment resistance.
Project description:The aim of this study was to examine whether decitabine priming prior to low-dose chemotherapeutic regimens could improve outcomes in patients with myelodysplastic syndromes-refractory anemia with excess of blasts (MDS-RAEB).The current retrospective analysis included all MDS-RAEB patients receiving idarubicin/cytarabine (IA) or aclacinomycin/cytarabine (AA), with or without decitabine priming during a period from February 2010 to May 2015. Treatment response and toxicity were compared between patients receiving decitabine priming and those who did not. A panel of 6 MDS-related genes was examined using bone marrow specimens.A total of 81 patients were included in the analysis: 40 received decitabine priming prior to chemotherapy (decitabine priming group). The median follow-up was 10.9 months (IQR: 6.2-21.9). The rate of overall response (OR) and complete remission (CR) was significantly higher in the decitabine priming group than in the chemotherapy group (OR: 75.0 vs. 51.2%, p?=?0.027; CR: 55.0 vs. 29.3%, p?=?0.019). Overall survival (OS) did not differ significantly between the two groups (19.5 vs. 14.7 months, p?=?0.082). In a subgroup analysis that included only patients at <?60 years of age, the CR rate in the decitabine priming group was significantly higher than in the chemotherapy group (65.5 vs. 31.0%, p?=?0.009). Survival benefit of decitabine priming was apparent in patients at <?60 years of age (22.4 months with 95% CI of 6.7-38.1 vs. 14.7 months with 95% CI of 11.4-18.0 months in the chemotherapy group, p?=?0.028), patients with intermediate and unfavorable karyotypes (22.4 months with 95% CI of 15.1-29.7 vs. 11.9 months with 95% CI of 4.0-19.8 months in the chemotherapy group, p?=?0.042), and patients with mutated splicing factor genes (35.3 months with 95% CI of 21.4-49.2 vs. 17.8 months with 95% CI of 13.8-21.8 months in the chemotherapy group, p?=?0.039). Grade 3-4 hematological and non-hematological toxicities were not significantly different between the two groups.Decitabine priming prior to low-dose chemotherapy could improve treatment responses in patients with MDS-RAEB.