Search

This retrospective study investigated outcomes of 404 patients with relapsed/refractory (R/R) FMS-like tyrosine kinase 3 (FLT3)-internal tandem duplication (ITD) acute myeloid leukemia (AML) enrolled in the PETHEMA registry, pre-approval of tyrosine kinase inhibitors. Most patients (63%) had received first-line intensive therapy with 3 + 7. Subsequently, patients received salvage with intensive therapy (n = 261), non-intensive therapy (n = 63) or supportive care only (n = 80). Active salvage therapy (i.e., intensive or non-intensive therapy) resulted in a complete remission (CR) or CR without hematological recovery (CRi) rate of 42%. More patients achieved a CR/CRi with intensive (48%) compared with non-intensive (19%) salvage therapy (p < 0.001). In the overall population, median overall survival (OS) was 5.5 months; 1- and 5-year OS rates were 25% and 7%. OS was significantly (p < 0.001) prolonged with intensive or non-intensive salvage therapy compared with supportive therapy, and in those achieving CR/CRi versus no responders. Of 280 evaluable patients, 61 (22%) had an allogeneic stem-cell transplant after they had achieved CR/CRi. In conclusion, in this large cohort study, salvage treatment approaches for patients with FLT3-ITD mutated R/R AML were heterogeneous. Median OS was poor with both non-intensive and intensive salvage therapy, with best long-term outcomes obtained in patients who achieved CR/CRi and subsequently underwent allogeneic stem-cell transplant., Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red Cáncer (CIBERONC), Depto. de Medicina, Fac. de Medicina, TRUE, pub

Treatment of acute myeloid leukemia (AML) evolving from myeloproliferative (MPN) or myelodysplastic/myeloproliferative neoplasms (MDS/MPN) is challenging. We evaluated disease characteristics, treatment patterns and outcomes in 372 patients diagnosed with AML after MPN or MDS/MPN over a 27-year period. Frontline treatment was intensive chemotherapy (38%), hypomethylating agents [HMAs] (17%), non-intensive chemotherapy (14%), and supportive care (31%). Median overall survival was 4.8 months, with a 5-year survival rate of 4%. Median survival was 2.8, 3.9 and 8.3 months for the 1992-2010, 2011-2015 and 2016-2019 periods, respectively (test for trend p < 0.001). Complete response (CR) rate was higher with intensive chemotherapy (43%) than with non-intensive chemotherapy (12%) or HMAs (8.5%) [p < 0.001], but responses were short-lived without allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation. Patients treated with intensive chemotherapy or HMAs had superior survival than those receiving non-intensive chemotherapy (median: 8.5 vs. 8.6 vs. 4.2 months, respectively). No differences in treatment response or survival were observed according to prior disease subtypes. Patients undergoing transplantation in CR had better survival than those transplanted in other response categories (3-year survival rate of 64% vs. 22%, p = 0.002). Our results support the use of intensive chemotherapy followed by transplant whenever possible, and the preferential use of HMAs over attenuated chemotherapy regimens in unfit patients. In spite of the survival improvement in recent years, this subset of AML constitutes an unmet medical need and deserves systematic incorporation in clinical trials.

[Simple Summary] The use of azacitidine (AZA) and decitabine (DEC) have allowed more elderly acute myeloid leukemia (AML) patients to be treated. However, scarcely any direct comparative data exist between both drugs. This study shows no significant differences in response rates or overall survival (OS) between upfront AZA and DEC treatment in a large retrospective with long-term follow-up cohort of AML patients. However, we identified for the first time the baseline characteristics of patients benefitting from AZA vs. DEC in terms of responses, 120-day mortality and OS. We also show differences in salvage treatment patterns and outcomes after failure to both hypomethylating agents in a real-life setting. Taken together, these findings could help to select the most appropriate hypomethylating agent in monotherapy., The hypomethylating agents, decitabine (DEC) and azacitidine (AZA), allowed more elderly acute myeloid leukemia (AML) patients to be treated. However, there are little direct comparative data on AZA and DEC. This multicenter retrospective study compared the outcomes of AZA and DEC in terms of response and overall survival (OS). Potential predictors associated with response and OS were also evaluated. A total of 626 AML patients were included (487 treated with AZA and 139 with DEC). Response rates were similar in both groups: CR was 18% with AZA vs. 23% with DEC (p = 0.20), CR/CRi was 20.5% vs. 25% (p = 0.27) and ORR was 32% vs. 39.5% (p = 0.12), respectively. Patients with leukocytes < 10 × 109/L, bone marrow blasts < 50% and ECOG ≥ 2 had higher ORR with DEC than with AZA. OS was similar in both groups: 10.4 months (95% CI: 9.2–11.7) vs. 8.8 months (95% CI: 6.7–11.0, p = 0.455), for AZA and DEC, respectively. Age (≥80 years), leukocytes (≥ 10 × 109/L), platelet count (<20 × 109/L) and eGFR (≥45 mL/min/1.73 m2) were associated with higher OS with AZA compared to DEC. In conclusion, we found no differences in response and OS rates in AML patients treated with AZA or DEC.

Acute myeloid leukemia (AML) with intermediate risk cytogenetics (IRcyto) comprises a variety of biological entities with distinct mutational landscapes that translate into differential risks of relapse and prognosis. Optimal postremission therapy choice in this heterogeneous patient population is currently unsettled. In the current study, we compared outcomes in IRcyto AML recipients of autologous (autoSCT) (n = 312) or allogeneic stem cell transplantation (alloSCT) (n = 279) in first complete remission (CR1). Molecular risk was defined based on CEBPA, NPM1, and FLT3-ITD mutational status, per European LeukemiaNet 2017 criteria. Five-year overall survival (OS) in patients with favorable molecular risk (FRmol) was 62% (95% confidence interval [CI], 50-72) after autoSCT and 66% (95% CI, 41-83) after matched sibling donor (MSD) alloSCT (P = .68). For patients of intermediate molecular risk (IRmol), MSD alloSCT was associated with lower cumulative incidence of relapse (P < .001), as well as with increased nonrelapse mortality (P = .01), as compared to autoSCT. The 5-year OS was 47% (95% CI, 34-58) after autoSCT and 70% (95% CI, 59-79) after MSD alloSCT (P = .02) in this patient subgroup. In a propensity-score matched IRmol subcohort (n = 106), MSD alloSCT was associated with superior leukemia-free survival (hazard ratio [HR] 0.33, P = .004) and increased OS in patients alive 1 year after transplantation (HR 0.20, P = .004). These results indicate that, within IRcyto AML in CR1, autoSCT may be a valid option for FRmol patients, whereas MSD alloSCT should be the preferred postremission strategy in IRmol patients.

There are no studies analyzing how therapeutic changes impact on outcomes of older AML patients. This study analyzes patient´s and disease characteristics, treatment patterns, and outcomes of 3637 AML patients aged ≥60 years reported to the PETHEMA registry. Study periods were 1999–2006 (before hypomethylating agents-HMAs availability) vs 2007–2013, and treatments were intensive chemotherapy (IC), non-intensive, clinical trial (CT), and supportive care only (SC). Median age was 72 (range, 60–99), 57% male, median ECOG 1 (range, 0–4), secondary AML 914 (30%), with adverse-risk genetic in 720 (32%). Treatment differed between study periods (1999–2006 vs 2007–2013): IC 58% vs 32%, non-intensive 1 vs 23%, CT 0 vs 2%, SC 27 vs 28% (p < 0.001). Median OS was 4.7 months (1-year OS 29% and 5-years 7%, without differences between periods), 1.2 for SC, 7.8 for non-intensive, 8.6 for IC, and 10.4 for CT (p < 0.001). OS improved in the 2007–2013 period for IC patients (10.3 vs 7.5 months, p = 0.004), but worsened for SC patients (1.2 vs 1.6 months, p = 0.03). Our real-life study shows that, despite evolving treatment for elderly patients during the last decade, OS has remained unchanged. Epidemiologic registries will critically assess whether novel therapies lead to noteworthy advances in the near future (#NCT02606825).