Search

Background: The preplanned interim analysis of the COMMANDS trial showed greater efficacy of luspatercept than epoetin alfa for treating anaemia in erythropoiesis-stimulating agent (ESA)-naive patients with transfusion-dependent, lower-risk myelodysplastic syndromes. In this Article, we report the results of the primary analysis of the trial., Methods: COMMANDS is a phase 3, open-label, randomised, controlled trial conducted at 142 sites in 26 countries. Eligible patients were those aged 18 years or older, with myelodysplastic syndromes of very low risk, low risk, or intermediate risk (as defined by the Revised International Prognostic Scoring System), who were ESA-naive and transfusion dependent, and had a serum erythropoietin concentration of less than 500 U/L. Patients were stratified by baseline red blood cell transfusion burden, serum erythropoietin concentration, and ring sideroblast status, and randomly allocated (1:1) to receive luspatercept (1·0-1·75 mg/kg body weight, subcutaneously, once every 3 weeks) or epoetin alfa (450-1050 IU/kg body weight, subcutaneously, once a week; maximum total dose 80 000 IU) for at least 24 weeks. The primary endpoint was red blood cell transfusion independence lasting at least 12 weeks with a concurrent mean haemoglobin increase of at least 1·5 g/dL (weeks 1-24), evaluated in the intention-to-treat population. The safety population included all patients who received at least one dose of treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03682536; active, not recruiting)., Findings: Between Jan 2, 2019, and Sept 29, 2022, 363 patients were screened and randomly allocated: 182 (50%) to luspatercept and 181 (50%) to epoetin alfa. Median age was 74 years (IQR 69-80), 162 (45%) patients were female, and 201 (55%) were male. 289 (80%) were White, 44 (12%) were Asian, and two (1%) were Black or African American. 23 (6%) were Hispanic or Latino and 311 (86%) were not Hispanic or Latino. Median follow-up for the primary endpoint was 17·2 months (10·4-27·7) for the luspatercept group and 16·9 months (10·1-26·6) for the epoetin alfa group. A significantly greater proportion of patients in the luspatercept group reached the primary endpoint (110 [60%] vs 63 [35%]; common risk difference on response rate 25·4% [95% CI 15·8-35·0]; p<0·0001). Median follow-up for safety analyses was 21·4 months (IQR 14·2-32·4) for the luspatercept group and 20·3 months (12·7-30·9) for the epoetin alfa group. Common grade 3-4 treatment-emergent adverse events occurring among luspatercept recipients (n=182) were hypertension (19 [10%] patients), anaemia (18 [10%]), pneumonia (ten [5%]), syncope (ten [5%]), neutropenia (nine [5%]), thrombocytopenia (eight [4%]), dyspnoea (eight [4%]), and myelodysplastic syndromes (six [3%]); and among epoetin alfa recipients (n=179) were anaemia (14 [8%]), pneumonia (14 [8%]), neutropenia (11 [6%]), myelodysplastic syndromes (ten [6%]), hypertension (eight [4%]), iron overload (seven [4%]), and COVID-19 pneumonia (six [3%]). The most common serious treatment-emergent adverse events in both groups were pneumonia (nine [5%] luspatercept recipients and 13 [7%] epoetin alfa recipients) and COVID-19 (eight [4%] luspatercept recipients and ten [6%] epoetin alfa recipients). One death (due to acute myeloid leukaemia) considered to be luspatercept-related was reported at the interim analysis., Interpretation: Luspatercept represents a new standard of care for ESA-naive patients with transfusion-dependent, lower-risk myelodysplastic syndromes. Significantly more patients had red blood cell transfusion independence and haematological improvement with luspatercept than with epoetin alfa, with benefits observed across patient subgroups., Funding: Celgene and Acceleron Pharma., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests Editorial and medical writing support were funded by Bristol Myers Squibb. MGDP reports receiving honoraria from and advisory or data safety monitoring board fees from Bristol Myers Squibb. GG-M reports receiving consulting fees from Bristol Myers Squibb; research support from AbbVie, Astex, Bristol Myers Squibb, Chordia, Curis, Genentech, Novartis, Rigel Pharmaceuticals, and Zentalis; and honoraria from Astex and Curis. VS reports receiving honoraria from AbbVie, Bristol Myers Squibb, and Novartis; travel support from AbbVie and Jazz Pharmaceuticals; and advisory or data safety monitoring board fees from AbbVie, Bristol Myers Squibb, CTI BioPharma, Curis, Geron, Gilead, Keros, Menarini, Novartis, Servier, and Syros. AMZ reports receiving grant support from AbbVie, Amgen, Astex, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Geron, Kura, Novartis, Otsuka, Shattuck Labs, and Syros; and consulting fees and honoraria from AbbVie, Agios, Akeso Pharma, ALX Oncology, Amgen, Astellas Pharma, BeiGene, BioCryst, Bristol Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, Chiesi, Daiichi Sankyo, Epizyme, Faron, Genentech, Geron, Gilead, Glycomimetics, Hikma, Janssen, Karyopharma, Keros, Kura, Kyowa Kirin, Lava Therapeutics, Medus, Notable, Novartis, Orum, Otsuka, Pfizer, Regeneron, Rigel Pharmaceuticals, Schrodinger, Servier, Sumitomo Pharma, Syndax, Syros, Taiho, Takeda, Treadwell, Vincerx, and Zentalis. RSK reports receiving grant support from Bristol Myers Squibb; consulting fees from Geron, Janssen, and Sumitomo Pharma; speakers bureau fees from AbbVie, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Pharma Essentia, Rigel Pharmaceuticals, Servio, and Sobi; and advisory or data safety monitoring board fees from AbbVie, Bristol Myers Squibb, DSI, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Pharma Essentia, Rigel Pharmaceuticals, Servio, Sobi, and Sumitomo Pharma. JS reports receiving grant support from Amgen Australia, Astex Pharmaceuticals, and Bristol Myers Squibb; consulting fees paid to himself from Astellas Pharma, Mundipharma, Novartis, Otsuka, and Pfizer; speakers bureau fees paid to himself and his institution from Mundipharma and Novartis; support for meeting attendance from AstraZeneca (no payment to healthcare provider); being a named investigator on patent PCT/AU2021/050562 assigned to his institution; trial steering committee fees paid to his institution from Bristol Myers Squibb; and serving an unpaid appointment on the Australasia Leukaemia and Lymphoma Group Scientific Advisory Committee. DV reports receiving consulting fees from Amgen, Astellas Pharma, Bristol Myers Squibb, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Kite Pharma, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Sanofi, and Sobi; honoraria from Agios, Amgen, Astellas Pharma, Bristol Myers Squibb, Gebro, Grifols, Janssen, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Kite Pharma, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi, and Sobi; travel support from Bristol Myers Squibb, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Novartis, Sanofi, and Sobi; and advisory or data safety monitoring board fees from Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Grifols, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Novartis, Servier, and Sobi. AJ reports receiving support for study materials from Bristol Myers Squibb; consulting fees from Bristol Myers Squibb; honoraria from AbbVie, Bristol Myers Squibb, and Novartis; travel support from AbbVie and Novartis; advisory or data safety monitoring board fees from AbbVie, Bristol Myers Squibb, GSK, and Novartis; and a leadership or fiduciary role as the head of the Czech MDS Group. JL, RP, SK, KLK, TP, and YL are employed by and own stock in Bristol Myers Squibb. JZ is employed by Bristol Myers Squibb. VP is employed by and owns stock in Bristol Myers Squibb and owns stock in Merck. SR is employed by, owns stock in, and has received travel support from Bristol Myers Squibb and owns stock in Celgene. AD reports receiving honoraria from Bristol Myers Squibb; travel support from Johnson & Johnson; and advisory or data safety monitoring board fees from Swixx BioPharma. TC reports receiving consulting fees from AbbVie, Agios, BluePrint, Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Novartis, and Servier; honoraria from Astellas, Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene, Incyte, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Novartis, Servier, and Takeda; travel support from AbbVie, Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene, Gilead, Novartis, Pfizer, and Servier; and advisory or data safety monitoring board fees from Astellas, Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene, Incyte, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Novartis, Servier, and Takeda. PF reports receiving grant support from AbbVie, Agios, Bristol Myers Squibb, and Novartis; and honoraria from AbbVie, Agios, Bristol Myers Squibb, and Novartis. UP reports receiving grant support paid to GWT-TUD, from Amgen and Janssen; grant support, paid to University of Leipzig, from Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck, and Novartis; consulting fees from AbbVie, Bristol Myers Squibb, Curis, Geron, Janssen, and Novartis; honoraria from Bristol Myers Squibb and Novartis; and fees for serving on a steering committee and travel support from Bristol Myers Squibb. All other authors declare no competing interests., (2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved, including those for text and data mining, AI training, and similar technologies.)

Background: CPX-351, an encapsulated form of cytarabine and daunorubicin, has shown greater efficacy than the classic 3 + 7 treatment administration in secondary acute myeloid leukaemia. Given that higher-risk myelodysplastic syndrome and chronic myelomonocytic leukaemia share similarities with secondary acute myeloid leukaemia, we aimed to investigate the safety and efficacy of CPX-351 in this context., Methods: This investigator-initiated two-cohort phase 2 trial was conducted by the Groupe Francophone des Myélodysplasies, with 12 participating centres in France. It comprised cohort A (reported here and completed), which included patients in first-line treatment, and cohort B, which was stopped for lack of inclusion (ie, not enough patients met the inclusion criteria), for patients with hypomethylating agent failure that is not reported here. Cohort A enrolled patients with newly diagnosed higher-risk myelodysplastic syndrome or chronic myelomonocytic leukaemia (aged 18-70 years old) with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1. Intravenous CPX-351 (100 mg/m 2 cytarabine and 44 mg/m 2 daunorubicin) was given on days 1, 3, and 5, with a second induction cycle given (same daily dose on days 1 and 3) if at least a partial response was not reached. Patients who responded could receive up to four monthly consolidation cycles (same daily dose on day 1) or allogeneic haematopoietic stem-cell transplantation (HSCT). Overall response rate after one or two induction courses according to European LeukemiaNet 2017 acute myeloid leukaemia was the primary endpoint after CPX-351 induction, whether patients received one or two induction cycles. Safety was assessed in all patients enrolled (in cohort A). This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04273802., Findings: Between April 29, 2020, and Feb 10, 2021, 21 (68%) male and ten (32%) female patients were enrolled. 27 (87%) of 31 patients responded (95% CI 70-96). 16 (52%) of the 31 patients received at least one consolidation cycle. 30 (97%) of the 31 patients included were initially considered eligible for allogeneic HSCT and 29 (94%) of the 31 patients had the procedure. Median follow-up was 16·1 months (IQR 8·3-18·1). The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were pulmonary (eight [26%] of 31 patients) and cardiovascular (six [19%] of 31 patients). There were 14 serious adverse events (mainly hospitalisation for infection [n=5] and only one was treatment-related) and no treatment-related death., Interpretation: CPX-351 appears to be active and safe in patients with higher-risk myelodysplastic syndrome and chronic myelomonocytic leukaemia, allowing bridging to allogenic HSCT in most patients., Funding: Jazz Pharmaceuticals., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)