Outcomes of acute myeloid leukemia patients who responded to venetoclax and azacitidine and stopped treatment.

Venetoclax-azacitidine is the standard of treatment for unfit acute myeloid leukemia patients. In the VIALE-A study, treatment was given until progression but there are no data on its optimal duration for responding patients who do not tolerate indefinite therapy. We retrospectively analyzed the outcome of patients who discontinued venetoclax or venetoclax-azacitidine due to poor tolerance. Sixty-two newly diagnosed (ND) AML patients and 22 patients with morphological relapse or refractory AML were included. In the ND cohort (n = 62), 28 patients stopped venetoclax and azacitidine and 34 patients continued azacitidine monotherapy. With a median follow-up of 23 months (IQR, 20-32), median overall survival and treatment-free survival were 44 (IQR, 16-NR) and 16 (IQR, 8-27) months, respectively. Patients who stopped both treatments and those who continued azacitidine monotherapy had the same outcomes. Negative minimal residual disease was associated with a 2-year treatment-free survival of 80%. In the RR cohort (n = 22), median overall survival and treatment-free survival were 19 (IQR, 17-31) and 10 (IQR, 5-NR) months, respectively. Prior number of venetoclax-azacitidine cycles and IDH mutations were associated with increased overall survival. The only factor significantly impacting treatment-free survival was the number of prior cycles. This study suggests that patients who discontinued treatment in remission have favorable outcomes supporting the rationale for prospective controlled trials.

Gilteritinib activity in refractory or relapsed FLT3-mutated acute myeloid leukemia patients previously treated by intensive chemotherapy and midostaurin: a study from the French AML Intergroup ALFA/FILO.

The real-world efficacy and safety of gilteritinib was assessed in an ambispective study that included 167 R/R FLT3-mutated AML patients. Among them, 140 received gilteritinib as single agent (cohort B), including 67 previously treated by intensive chemotherapy and midostaurin (cohort C). The main differences in patient characteristics in this study compared to the ADMIRAL trial were ECOG ≥ 2 (83.6% vs. 16.6%), FLT3-TKD mutation (21.0% vs. 8.5%), primary induction failure (15.0% vs. 40.0%) and line of treatment (beyond 2nd in 37.1% vs. 0.0%). The rates of composite complete remission, excluding those that occurred after hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT), were similar at respectively 25.4% and 27.5% in cohorts B and C. Median overall survival (OS) for these two groups was also similar at respectively 6.4 and 7.8 months. Multivariate analyses for prognostic factors associated with OS identified female gender (HR 1.61), adverse cytogenetic risk (HR 2.52), and allogenic HSCT after gilteritinib (HR 0.13). Although these patients were more heavily pretreated, these real-world data reproduce the results of ADMIRAL and provide new insights into the course of patients previously treated by intensive chemotherapy and midostaurin and beyond the 2nd line of treatment who can benefit from treatment in an outpatient setting.

Lomustine is beneficial to older AML with ELN2017 adverse risk profile and intermediate karyotype: a FILO study.

We previously reported the benefit of lomustine addition to conventional chemotherapy in older acute myeloid leukemias with nonadverse chromosomal aberrations in the LAM-SA 2007 randomized clinical trial (NCT00590837). A molecular analysis of 52 genes performed in 330 patients included in this trial, 163 patients being treated with lomustine in combination with idarubicin and cytarabine and 167 without lomustine, identified 1088 mutations with an average of 3.3 mutations per patient. NPM1, FLT3, and DNMT3A were the most frequently mutated genes. A putative therapeutic target was identified in 178 patients (54%). Among five molecular classifications analyzed, the ELN2017 risk classification has the stronger association with the clinical evolution. Patients not treated with lomustine have an expected survival prognosis in agreement with this classification regarding the overall and event-free survivals. In strong contrast, lomustine erased the ELN2017 classification prognosis. The benefit of lomustine in nonadverse chromosomal aberrations was restricted to patients with RUNX1, ASXL1, TP53, and FLT3-ITDhigh/NPM1WT mutations in contrast to the intermediate and favorable ELN2017 patients. This post-hoc analysis identified a subgroup of fit elderly AML patients with intermediate cytogenetics and molecular markers who may benefit from lomustine addition to intensive chemotherapy.

Improved Survival by Adding Lomustine to Conventional Chemotherapy for Elderly Patients With AML Without Unfavorable Cytogenetics: Results of the LAM-SA 2007 FILO Trial.

PURPOSE: Acute myeloid leukemia (AML) in elderly patients has a poor prognosis. In an attempt to improve outcome for these patients, the prospective open-label phase III LAM-SA 2007 (Adding Lomustine to Chemotherapy in Older Patients With Acute Myelogenous Leukemia (AML), and Allogeneic Transplantation for Patients From 60 to 65 Years Old) trial randomly assigned patients to a standard induction regimen with lomustine added or to a consolidation regimen with cytarabine and idarubicin. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Adults age 60 years or older with previously untreated AML who were fit to receive intensive chemotherapy and who were without unfavorable cytogenetics received standard chemotherapy with lomustine (idarubicin, cytarabine, and lomustine [ICL]) or without (idarubicin and cytarabine [IC]). The primary objective of the study was overall survival (OS); secondary objectives were response rate, cumulative incidence of relapse (CIR), event-free survival (EFS), and safety. RESULTS: From February 2008 to December 2011, 459 patients were enrolled. Comparing patients in the IC and ICL arms, complete response or complete response with incomplete recovery was achieved in 74.9% versus 84.7% (P = .01). The proportional hazards assumption was rejected for OS (P = .02), which led us to consider two separate time intervals: during and after induction. There was no significant difference between the two arms during induction, although induction deaths were 3.7% versus 7.7%, respectively (P = .11). However, significantly better results were observed after induction with an improved 2-year OS of 56% in the ICL arm versus 48% in the IC arm (P = .02). At 2 years, EFS was improved at 41% in the ICL arm versus 26% in the IC arm (P = .01). The CIR at 2 years was 41.2% in the ICL arm versus 60.9% in the IC arm (P = .003). Grade 3 and 4 toxicities, mostly hematologic, were significantly higher in the ICL arm (P = .04), and fewer patients required a second treatment after ICL. CONCLUSION: Adding lomustine to standard chemotherapy significantly improved the outcome of elderly patients with AML.