ABSTRACT
This retrospective chart review study investigated the clinical burden of adult patients with chronic-phase chronic myeloid leukemia (CP-CML) treated at three centers in France (2006-2021) who failed on two or more tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs; third-line [3L]+ cohort) or harbored the BCR::ABL1 T315I mutation (T315I cohort). In the 3L+ cohort (N = 157; median age at diagnosis, 56 years), TKIs received in 3L (median duration: 17 months) were dasatinib (32%), nilotinib (19%), imatinib (18%), ponatinib (17%), and bosutinib (14%). Of the 145 patients with documented responses in 3L, 42% experienced major molecular response (MMR) at 12 months. Median event-free survival [95% confidence interval] was 53.6 [44.0, 67.5] months, and median progression-free survival and overall survival (OS) were not reached. Achieving MMR in 3L was associated with a decreased mortality risk. In the T315I cohort (N = 17; 52 years), 41% of patients received five or more lines of therapy. Following identification of the T315I mutation, ponatinib was the most common TKI used (59%); the median [interquartile range] OS was 5 [3-10] years. The most common adverse events were infections (3L+ cohort) and thrombocytopenia (T315I cohort) (both 18%). Well-tolerated therapies that achieve durable responses are needed in 3L or earlier to improve CP-CML prognosis.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: To assess and compare health care resource utilization (HCRU) rates of asciminib and bosutinib at the Week 24, Week 48, and Week 96 cutoffs among 3 L + patients with chronic myeloid leukemia in chronic phase (CML-CP) in the randomized ASCEMBL trial. METHODS: Patients in the ASCEMBL trial (Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT03106779) were randomized to receive asciminib 40 mg twice daily (n = 157) or bosutinib 500 mg once daily (n = 76). At each scheduled visit, investigators conducted HCRU assessment on hospitalization, emergency room visit, general practitioner visit, specialist visit and urgent care visit; duration and type of hospitalization for the hospitalized patients; and reasons for HCRU. The number of patients with HCRU, rate of HCRU per patient-year, and length of hospital stay by ward type were compared at Week 24, Week 48, and Week 96 analyses. RESULTS: Lower proportions of patients receiving asciminib versus bosutinib used any resources including hospitalizations, emergency room visits, general practitioner visits, specialist visits, and urgent care visits (23.6% versus 36.8%, 26.1% versus 39.5%, and 28.6% versus 42.6% at Week 24, Week 48, and Week 96 analyses, respectively). After normalizing for treatment exposure, rates of HCRU for any resource per patient-year were significantly lower for asciminib versus bosutinib: 0.25 (95% CI: 0.18-0.34) versus 0.80 (95% CI: 0.55-1.16) at the Week 24 analysis, 0.20 (95% CI: 0.15-0.27) versus 0.47 (95% CI: 0.32-0.66) at the Week 48 analysis, and 0.17 (95% CI: 0.12-0.22) versus 0.40 (95% CI: 0.27-0.55) at the Week 96 analysis. Among the hospitalized patients, mean length of hospital stay was lower for asciminib than bosutinib for most wards at all three timepoints. CONCLUSIONS: In the ASCEMBL trial, asciminib-treated patients with CML-CP in 3 L + maintained lower resource utilization compared to bosutinib over the long-term.
