Search

Purpose: Azacitidine plus venetoclax is a standard of care for patients with newly diagnosed AML who are unfit for intensive chemotherapy. However, FLT3 mutations are a common mechanism of resistance to this regimen. The addition of gilteritinib, an oral FLT3 inhibitor, to azacitidine and venetoclax may improve outcomes in patients with FLT3 -mutated AML., Methods: This phase I/II study evaluated azacitidine, venetoclax, and gilteritinib in two cohorts: patients with (1) newly diagnosed FLT3 -mutated AML who were unfit for intensive chemotherapy or (2) relapsed/refractory FLT3 -mutated AML (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04140487). The primary end points were the maximum tolerated dose of gilteritinib (phase I) and the combined complete remission (CR)/CR with incomplete hematologic recovery (CRi) rate (phase II)., Results: Fifty-two patients were enrolled (frontline [n = 30]; relapsed/refractory [n = 22]). The recommended phase II dose was gilteritinib 80 mg once daily in combination with azacitidine and venetoclax. In the frontline cohort, the median age was 71 years and 73% of patients had an FLT3 -internal tandem duplication (ITD) mutation. The CR/CRi rate was 96% (CR, 90%; CRi, 6%). Sixty-five percent of evaluable patients achieved FLT3 -ITD measurable residual disease <5 × 10 -5 within four cycles. With a median follow-up of 19.3 months, the median relapse-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) have not been reached and the 18-month RFS and OS rates are 71% and 72%, respectively. In the relapsed/refractory cohort, the CR/CRi rate was 27%; nine additional patients (41%) achieved a morphologic leukemia-free state. The most common grade 3 or higher nonhematologic adverse events were infection (62%) and febrile neutropenia (38%), which were more frequent in the relapsed/refractory cohort., Conclusion: The combination of azacitidine, venetoclax, and gilteritinib resulted in high rates of CR/CRi, deep FLT3 molecular responses, and encouraging survival in newly diagnosed FLT3 -mutated AML. Myelosuppression was manageable with mitigative dosing strategies.

We conducted a phase Ib/II multi-arm, parallel cohort study to simultaneously evaluate various immunotherapeutic agents and combinations in relapsed/refractory acute myeloid leukemia (AML). Overall, 50 patients were enrolled into one of 6 arms: (A) single agent PF-04518600 (OX40 agonist monoclonal antibody), (B) azacitidine + venetoclax + gemtuzumab ozogamicin (GO), (C) azacitidine + avelumab (anti-PD-L1 monoclonal antibody) + GO, (D) azacitidine + venetoclax + avelumab, (E) azacitidine + avelumab + PF-04518600, and (F) glasdegib + GO. Among all regimens evaluated, azacitidine + venetoclax + GO appeared most promising. In this arm, the CR/CRi rates among venetoclax-naïve and prior venetoclax-exposed patients were 50% and 22%, respectively, and the 1-year OS rate was 31%. This study shows the feasibility of a conducting a multi-arm trial to efficiently and simultaneously evaluate novel therapies in AML, a needed strategy in light of the plethora of emerging therapies. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as NCT03390296.

Background: Treated secondary acute myeloid leukemia (ts-AML)-i.e., AML arising from a previously treated antecedent hematologic disorder-is associated with very poor outcomes. The optimal frontline treatment regimen for these patients is uncertain., Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 562 patients who developed AML from preceding myelodysplastic syndrome or chronic myelomonocytic leukemia for which they had received a hypomethylating agent (HMA). Patients with ts-AML were stratified by frontline AML treatment with intensive chemotherapy (IC, n = 271), low-intensity therapy (LIT) without venetoclax (n = 237), or HMA plus venetoclax (n = 54)., Results: Compared with IC or LIT without venetoclax, HMA plus venetoclax resulted in higher CR/CRi rates (39% and 25%, respectively; P = 0.02) and superior OS (1-year OS 34% and 17%, respectively; P = 0.05). The benefit of HMA plus venetoclax was restricted to patients with non-adverse risk karyotype, where HMA plus venetoclax resulted in a median OS of 13.7 months and 1-year OS rate of 54%; in contrast, for patients with adverse risk karyotype, OS was similarly dismal regardless of treatment approach (median OS 3-5 months). A propensity score analysis accounting for relevant clinical variables confirmed the significant OS benefit of HMA plus venetoclax, as compared with other frontline treatment approaches. In a landmark analysis, patients with ts-AML who underwent subsequent hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) had superior 3-year OS compared to non-transplanted patients (33% vs. 8%, respectively; P = 0.003)., Conclusions: The outcomes of ts-AML are poor but may be improved with use of an HMA plus venetoclax-based regimen, followed by HSCT, particularly in those with a non-adverse risk karyotype., (© 2022. The Author(s).)