A Maintenance Therapy with Differentiating Agents and Low-Dose Chemotherapy Increases Remission Duration and Survival in High Risk AML and MDS Patients.

Blood ◽  
2005 ◽  
Vol 106 (11) ◽  
pp. 4614-4614
Author(s):  
Dario Ferrero ◽  
Chiara Dellacasa ◽  
Margherita Bonferroni ◽  
Mariella Grasso ◽  
Elisabetta Campa ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Overall Survival ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Maintenance Therapy ◽  
Maintenance Treatment ◽  
Low Dose ◽  
Normal Karyotype ◽  
Intensive Chemotherapy ◽  
Actuarial Survival ◽  
Maintenance Program ◽  
Low Dose Chemotherapy

Abstract Acute myeloid leukemia (AML) patients above the age of 60 or with secondary AML generally have an unfavourable outcome. The same is true for high risk myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) patients ineligible to bone marrow transplantation. Indeed, in spite of an improved CR rate after intensive chemotherapy (about 60–65%), median CR duration and survival remain short (9–12 months in most studies), due to early relapses. (Sekeres MA et al.: Curr Opin Oncol2002;14:24–30. Verbeek W et al.: Ann Hematol2001;80:499–509). On the basis of our previous clinical trials with differentiative agents + low dose chemotherapy in MDS/AML patients unsuitable to intensive treatments, (Ferrero D et al.: Leuk Res1996;20:867–876; Haematologica2004;89:619–620), we adopted the same strategy as a post-remission maintenance therapy to patients with AML or MDS at high risk of relapse and ineligible to allogeneic transplant. Thirty-six patients (27 AML and 9 high risk MDS) who had obtained a CR after different schemes of intensive chemotherapy were scheduled to receive the maintenance treatment with 13-cis-retinoic acid (20–40 mg/day) + 1,25-di-hydroxy-vitamin D3 (1 microgram /day) in association to intermittent, low dose chemotherapy: 6-thioguanine 40 mg/day x 21 days every 5 weeks, alternated every 2–3 months, in 24 patients, to a 14 day course of ARA-C 8 mg/m2 s.c. x 2/day + 6-mercaptopurine 50 mg/day. Patients’ median age was 64 years (range 27–76), with only 9 below the age of 60. Cytogenetic analysis was performed successfully in 27 cases, and an unfavourable karyotype was found in 10. All patients presented at least one poor prognosis determinant, including age >60 (27), previous AML relapse after autologous BMT (1), therapy-related disease (5), AML secondary to MDS (7), resistance to 1st induction therapy (4), hyperleukocytosis (8), RAEB-2 (8), abnormal karyotype (10). Twenty six had received 1 - 4 courses of consolidation treatment, including autologous stem cell transplantation in 2 MDS patients, before starting the maintenance program. Three patients underwent a very early relapse before maintenance start and 1 patient refused to prosecute the therapy after the first 2 months. The other 32 patients received the treatment as outpatients, with good tolerance and no major toxicity, until relapse, death or 4 years of continuous CR. After a median follow up for alive patients of 23 months (6–76), median disease-free (dfs) and overall survival, based on "intention to treat analysis" are 22 (1–74+) and 23 (5–76+) months, respectively, with a 28% 4 year actuarial survival. Inclusion of ARA-C in the maintenance treatment did not significantly prolong CR duration. The 17 patients with a normal karyotype enjoyed better median dfs (43 months) and overall survival (50,5 months) compared to the 10 patients with abnormal cytogenetics (12,5 and 15,5 months respectively); however, the differences are not significant, probably due to sample exiguity. In conclusion, our patients evidenced quite longer dfs and overall survival than expected from literature data on AML/MDS patients with similar features. However some late relapses (after 3–4 years) occurred. Therefore, our maintenance program seems worthy to be evaluated on larger casistics in randomised trials.

scholarly journals Open-Labeled, Multicenter Phase II Study of Bortezomib for Maintenance Therapy in Patients with High Risk Diffuse Large B Cell Lymphoma (DLBCL): Borma Trial from Consortium for Improving Survival of Lymphoma (CISL)

Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 2884-2884
Author(s):  
Jae-Cheol Jo ◽  
Ho Sup Lee ◽  
Cheolwon Suh ◽  
Hye Jin Kang ◽  
Won Seog Kim ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
High Risk ◽  
Maintenance Therapy ◽  
B Cell ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Maintenance Treatment ◽  
Cell Lymphoma ◽  
B Cell Lymphoma ◽  
High Risk Patients ◽  
Large B Cell Lymphoma ◽  
Risk Patients

Background: High-intermediate or high risk in international prognostic index (IPI) has a long-term chance of cure in the range about 50% in patients with diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL) treated by R-CHOP. These high risk patients should be considered for additional new treatment to standard R-CHOP or investigational approaches in the context of clinical trials that are designed to ensure that potentially curative therapy. Bortezomib inhibits NF-κB activation through proteasome inhibition, providing rationale for its use in cells that constitutively express NF-κB. Non-germinal center B cell (GCB) DLBCL has a worse survival after upfront chemotherapy and is characterized by constitutive activation of the antiapoptotic NF-κB pathway, which can inhibit chemotherapy. There is no study of bortezomib as maintenance therapy after treated with R-CHOP in high risk patients with DLBCL. So we applied additional bortezomib as maintenance therapy in order to assess improving efficacy and survival rates in high risk patients with non-GCB DLBCL who had been confirmed complete response (CR) after treated with R-CHOP. Methods: Patients with newly diagnosed stage II(bulky)-IV DLBCL with high or high intermediate IPI score of 3 to 5, and patients achieving a CR at the end of 6 or 8 cycles of R-CHOP21 were eligible for enrollment. Non-GCB DLBCL according to Hans criteria confirmed by central review was need before enrollment. Bortezomib maintenance treatment was consisted of bortezomib 1.3mg/m2 subcutaneously administration day 1 and day 15 per 28-day cycle with a total of 12 cycles. The primary endpoint was 3-year progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints were 3-year overall survival (OS), and toxicites. Toxicity was graded according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v4.0. Results: Fifty-nine patients were enrolled between May 2014 and Oct 2018. The type of Non-GCB DLBCL in all patients was confirmed by the central pathology review. The median age was 65 years (range: 27-86 years), and 60% were > 61 years. The baseline clinical features were as follows: female sex, 45.8%; ECOG >1, 10.2%; stage II bulky (>10cm), 6.8%; stage III/IV, 93.2%. At the time of analysis, 29 patients completed 12-cycles of bortezomib maintenance, and 3 patients is ongoing. Seven patients did not finished maintenance therapy due to toxicities (fatigue, atrial flutter, neuropathy, pleural effusion, thrombocytopenia), and withdrawal of informed consent (n=4). Sixteen patients experienced disease progression during bortezomib maintenance treatment. With a median follow-up of 25.1 months, 3-year PFS rate was 56.9% and 3-year OS rate was 86.4% (Figure 1). Toxicity was assessed in 489 cycles of bortezomib maintenance in all 59 patients. There was no treatment-related death and febrile neutropenia. Conclusion: Bortezomib maintenance showed 3-year PFS rate of 56.9% with acceptable toxicities in patients with high risk DLBCL achieving a CR at the end of 6 or 8 cycles of R-CHOP21. Figure 1 Disclosures Kim: Celltrion: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; J + J: Research Funding; Donga: Research Funding; Kyowa-Kirin: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Research Funding.

scholarly journals Low-Dose Decitabine Plus Venetoclax Maintenance Therapy Can Decrease the Relapse after Allogeneic Stem Cell Transplantation for MRD Positive High-Risk Acute Myeloid Leukemia and Myelodysplastic Syndrome

Blood ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 33-33
Author(s):  
Yunxiong Wei ◽  
Yaqing Cao ◽  
Xin Jin ◽  
Xiaoyuan He ◽  
Rui Sun ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Acute Myeloid Leukemia ◽  
Stem Cell ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Maintenance Therapy ◽  
Cumulative Incidence ◽  
Myeloid Leukemia ◽  
Low Dose ◽  
Post Transplantation ◽  
Acute Myeloid

Background: Acute myeloid leukemia (AML) and myelodysplasia (MDS) are usually associated with poor outcomes, especially in high-risk AML/MDS. Allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HSCT) is the only curable option for patients suffering from high-risk AML/MDS. However, there were still many patients relapsed after allo-HSCT, especially for some patients are MRD positive before transplantation. Novel therapy to prevent replase is urgently needed. Both BCL-2 inhibitor, venetoclax (VEN) and hypomethylating agent, decitabine (DEC) possess significant antitumor activity effects against AML/MDS. Administration DEC has been shown to ameliorate GVHD and boost GVL post-transplantation. Several clinical trials have also shown that venetoclax plus decitabine can be a safety and effective salvage treatment for patients with AML/MDS relapsing after allo-HSCT. We therefore conducted a prospective study (ChiCTR1900025374) to exam the tolerability and efficacy of a maintenance therapy low-dose decitabine (LDEC) plus VEN to prevent relapse after allo-HSCT for MRD positive high-risk AML/MDS patients. To our knowledge, this is the first report of venetoclax combined decitabine in this setting. Methods: Six patients with MRD positive high-risk AML (n=5) /MDS(n=1) post transplantation were recruited. Around day 100 post transplantation, all patients received LDEC (15mg/m2 for 3 days) followed by VEN (200mg) on day 1 to 21. Two months is a cycle. The primary end points of this study were rates of Overall survival (OS) and event-free survival (EFS). The secondary endpoints included adverse events (AEs), incidence of cumulative incidence of relapse (CIR), nonrelapse mortality (NRM), incidences of acute GVHD (aGVHD) and chronic GVHD (cGVHD) and incidences of viral infection after allo-HSCT. Survival outcomes were analyzed using Kaplan-Meier analysis Results: Two of the six patients were partial remission (PR) before transplantation, and the remaining 4 patients were MRD+ before transplantation. The median follow-up was 16 (11-26.5) months. Both 2-year OS and 2-year EFS were 83%. The median 2-year EFS time was 16(9-26.5) months, and five patients still EFS alive at the time of this writing. The 2-year cumulative incidence of relapse after LDEC+VEN was 17% and 2-year non-relapse mortality was 0%. No tumor lysis syndrome (TLS) was observed. The most common AEs were neutropenia, anemia, thrombocytopenia, neutropenic fever, and fatigue. Grade 2 or 3 adverse events were observed in 33% (2/6). No grade>3 AEs were observed. Acute (any grade) and chronic (limited or extensive) graft-versus-host disease occurred in 67% and 17% of patients, respectively. The 2-year cumulative incidence of CMV viremia and EBV viremia were 33.3% and 16.7%, respectively. Conclusion: We conclude LDEC+VEN can be administered safely after allo-HSCT, without evidence for increased incidence of GVHD, and this combination demonstrates decreased relapse for MRD positive high-risk AML/MDS patients. This novel maintenance therapy may be a promising way to prevent replase for MRD positive high-risk AML/MDS patients, and the clinical benefits need to be assessed in a comparative prospective trial. Figure Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

scholarly journals Treatment of Polycythemia Vera: Use of 32P Alone or in Combination With Maintenance Therapy Using Hydroxyurea in 461 Patients Greater Than 65 Years of Age

Blood ◽  
1997 ◽  
Vol 89 (7) ◽  
pp. 2319-2327 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yves Najean ◽  
Jean-Didier Rain
Keyword(s):  
Life Expectancy ◽  
Maintenance Therapy ◽  
Maintenance Treatment ◽  
Low Dose ◽  
Vascular Complications ◽  
Vascular Risk ◽  
Risk Of Progression ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Continuous Use ◽  
To Receive

Abstract Despite myelosuppression, polycythemic (PV) patients greater than 65 years of age have a high risk of vascular complications, and the leukemic risk exceeds 15% after 12 years. Is the addition of low-dose maintenance treatment with hydroxyurea (HU) after radiophosphorus (32P) myelosuppression able to decrease these complications? Since the end of 1979, 461 patients were randomized to receive (or not) low-dose HU (5 to 10 mg/kg/d), after the first 32P-induced remission, and were observed until death or June 1996. Maintenance treatment very significantly prolonged the duration of 32P-induced remissions and reduced the annual mean dose received to one-third. However, despite this maintenance, 25% of the patients had an excessive platelet count and the rate of serious vascular complications was not decreased, except in the most severe cases with short-term relapse of polycythemia. Furthermore, the leukemia rate was significantly increased beyond 8 years and a significant excess of carcinomas was also observed. The continuous use of HU did not decrease the risk of progression to myelofibrosis (incidence of 20% after 15 years). Life expectancy was shorter (a median of 9.3 years v 10.9 years with 32P alone), except in the most severe cases (initial 32P-induced remission lasting <2 years) in which maintenance treatment moderately prolonged the survival by reducing the vascular risk. In most cases of PV, in which the duration of the first 32P-induced remission exceeded 2 years, the introduction of HU maintenance did not reduce the vascular risk. Although it considerably decreased the mean dose of 32P received, HU maintenance therapy significantly increased the leukemia and cancer risks and reduced the mean life expectancy by 15%. However, in cases with more rapid recurrence, the introduction of maintenance treatment reduced the vascular risks and moderately prolonged survival. The use of HU as a maintenance therapy is therefore only justified in this situation.

Randomized Trial of Low-Dose Chemotherapy Added to Tamoxifen in Patients With Receptor-Positive and Lymph Node–Positive Breast Cancer

1999 ◽  
Vol 17 (6) ◽  
pp. 1701-1701 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. Jakesz ◽  
H. Hausmaninger ◽  
K. Haider ◽  
E. Kubista ◽  
H. Samonigg ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Multivariate Analysis ◽  
Prognostic Factors ◽  
Hormone Receptor ◽  
Low Dose ◽  
Premenopausal Patients ◽  
Low Dose Chemotherapy ◽  
Disease Free ◽  
Positive Breast Cancer

PURPOSE: To evaluate the outcome in patients with stage II hormone receptor–positive breast cancer treated or not treated with low-dose, short-term chemotherapy in addition to tamoxifen in terms of disease-free and overall survival. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 613 patients were randomized to receive either low-dose chemotherapy (doxorubicin 20 mg/m2 and vincristine 1 mg/m2 on day 1; cyclophosphamide 300 mg/m2; methotrexate 25 mg/m2; and fluorouracil 600 mg/m2 on days 29 and 36 intravenously) or no chemotherapy in addition to 20 mg of tamoxifen orally for 2 years. A third group without any treatment (postmenopausal patients only) was terminated after the accrual of 79 patients due to ethical reasons. RESULTS: After a median follow-up period of 7.5 years, the addition of chemotherapy did not improve the outcome in patients as compared with those treated with tamoxifen alone, neither with respect to disease-free nor overall survival. Multivariate analysis of prognostic factors for disease-free survival revealed menopausal status, in addition to nodal status, progesterone receptor, and histologic grade as significant. Both untreated postmenopausal and tamoxifen-treated premenopausal patients showed identical prognoses significantly inferior to the tamoxifen-treated postmenopausal cohort. Prognostic factors for overall survival in the multivariate analysis showed nodal and tumor stage, tumor grade, and hormone receptor level as significant. CONCLUSION: Low-dose chemotherapy in addition to tamoxifen does not improve the prognosis of stage II breast cancer patients with hormone-responsive tumors. Tamoxifen-treated postmenopausal patients show a significantly better prognosis than premenopausal patients, favoring the hypothesis of a more pronounced effect of tamoxifen in the older age groups.

Real-World Data of Azacytidine Efficacy As Front-Line Treatment for AML Non-Eligible for Intensive Treatment and High-Risk MDS: A Peruvian Multicenter Study

Blood ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 40-41
Author(s):  
Angela Arbizu-Chipana ◽  
Daniel J Enriquez ◽  
Mariano Lopez-Pereyra ◽  
Claudio Flores ◽  
Tatiana Saldarriaga ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Overall Survival ◽  
Developing Countries ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Stable Disease ◽  
Clinical Characteristics ◽  
Laboratory Data ◽  
Intensive Treatment ◽  
Intensive Chemotherapy ◽  
Myeloid Neoplasms ◽  
Frontline Treatment

Background:Acute Myeloid leukemia (AML) and High-risk Myelodysplastic Syndrome (MDS) are two aggressive myeloid neoplasms characterized by dismal outcomes in patients not suitable for intensive treatment. During the last decades, hypomethylating agents (HMA) represented a valuable treatment option for AML and MDS, particularly in older or unfit patients. However, the limited efficacy and high-costs concerns in developing countries limited its general use. Azacytidine is the most representative and available HMA in limited-sources facilities. We aimed to explore the efficacy of azacytidine as frontline treatment in terms of event-free (EFS) and overall survival (OS) for newly diagnosed patients with AML non-candidates to intensive chemotherapy and MDS in Peru. Methods: We reviewed medical records of patients diagnosed and managed for AML at three private cancer institutions in Lima-Peru (Oncosalud, Clinica Delgado and Clinica Angloamericana) between 2010 and 2019. Cytogenetics and molecular markers were not retrospectively available during data obtention. Clinical characteristics, laboratory data and outcomes were evaluated for patients with AML and MDS who received at least 1 cycle of AZA as frontline treatment. AZA was given at accumulated dose of 75mg/m2/daily for 7 days every 4 weeks, however further dose reductions were allowed by physician criteria. Best responses were assessed according to Leukemia.net consensus, but summarize as complete remission (CR), partial response (PR) and stable disease (SD). Survival curves (event-free and overall survival) were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared with the Log-rank test. Results:A total of 76 patients were included and had sufficient data for analysis. Fifty-two cases had AML and 24 MDS. Clinical characteristics, Laboratory data, Treatment and Outcomes were summarized in Table 1. Median ages for AML was 74 and 69 for MDS, 37% and 54% had less than 70 years in AML and MDS, respectively. Female/male ratio was 1:1 for AML and 1:3 for MDS. One-third of AML cases and 48% of MDS had an ECOG performance status ≤1. Twenty-five (48%) of AML patients had Secondary AML to MDS, and 25% had prior cancer treatment. Median number of cycles of AZA was 5 for both groups. A high composite CR rates were seen for AML (39%) and MDS (25%), PR were 10% and 8% for AML and MDS, respectively. The majority of MDS cases reached stable disease (62%), and 35% in AML. Three patients underwent to allo-transplant (2 AML and 1 MDS). Relapsed rates were more frequent in AML cases (AML 63% vs. 30%), however, deaths were similar in both groups. At a median follow-up of 4-years, the EFS was 3% for AML and 20% for MDS, and OS was 16% and 30% for AML and MDS patients, respectively. Conclusions: Azacytidine represents an effective and accessible therapy for AML non-candidates to intensive chemotherapy and MDS in limited-sources settings. Access to novel effective therapies must be warranted for these highly aggressive myeloid neoplasms in developing countries. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Low Dose Decitabine Versus Best Supportive Care in Elderly Patients with Intermediate or High Risk MDS Not Eligible for Intensive Chemotherapy: Final Results of the Randomized Phase III Study (06011) of the EORTC Leukemia and German MDS Study Groups

Blood ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 112 (11) ◽  
pp. 226-226 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pierre WijerMans ◽  
Stefan Suciu ◽  
Liliana Baila ◽  
Uwe Platzbecker ◽  
Aristoteles Giagounidis ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
High Risk ◽  
Supportive Care ◽  
Disease Progression ◽  
Low Dose ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Intensive Chemotherapy ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii Study ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Grade 3

Abstract Introduction: In 2002 the EORTC and the German MDS Study Group initiated a randomized phase III study comparing low dose Decitabine to supportive care in patients (pts) of 60 years or older with primary or secondary MDS or CMML. MDS patients with either 11–20% BM blasts or ≤ 10% blasts and poor cytogenetics could be included. Pts with a BM blast count between 21–30% without signs of disease progression for at least one month were also candidates for the study. Methods: Patients were centrally randomized; stratification factors were cytogenetics risk group, IPSS, MDS (primary vs secondary) and study centre, The treatment schedule was 15 mg/m2 Decitabine i.v. over 4 hours every 8 hours for the first 3 three consecutive days, of every 6 week-cycle, for a maximum of 8 cycles. Results were evaluated every 2nd cycle. When a complete remission was reached at least another 2 courses were given. The primary endpoint of the study was Overall Survival. AML free survival, Progression Free Survival (PFS), response rate, toxicity and QoL were secondary endpoints. A total of 185 deaths were required to detect a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.66 (alpha=5%, beta=20%). Intent-to-treat analysis was used. Results: Between 10.2002 and 5.2007 a total of 233 pts (149 male and 84 female) were recruited from 40 centres. The median age was 70 (60–90 years); RAEB-t was diagnosed in 32% of the pts. Most pts had an IPSS Intermediate-2 (55%) or high risk (38%). Poor risk cytogenetics was found in 46% of the patients. Prior therapy for MDS (not being intensive chemotherapy) was given in 20% of pts. The randomized groups were well balanced regarding stratification factors, age and FAB classification. The median follow up was 2.5 years. Time to Off Study was 180 (Decitabine) vs 112 days (SC arm). The median number of cycles given to the patients was 4 with 40%getting no more than 2 cycles. In a significant number of pts, subsequent treatment, consisting of transplant (10%) or induction chemotherapy (11%), was given. The distribution of best response in Decitabine vs SC arm was CR (13% vs 0%), PR (6% vs 0%), HI (15% vs 2%), SD (14% vs 22%), PD (29% vs 68%), hypoplasia (14% vs 0%), inevaluable (8% vs 8%). The 18 pts on Decitabine with a HI showed the following responses: 3-lineage (n=7), 2-lineage (n=5) and 1-lineage (n=6). The median time to response (CR/PR/HI) was 0.32 yrs and the response duration was 0.72 years. Median OS was 0.84 (Decitabine) vs 0.71 years (SC arm), estimated HR was 0.88, 95% CI 0.66–1.17, p=0.38 (logrank 2-sided). The PFS was significantly (p=0.004) longer in Decitabine vs SC arm: median was 0.55 vs 0.25 years, HR=0.68 (95% CI 0.52–0.88). Time to AML or Death was not significantly improved (p=0.24): median was 0.73 vs 0.51 years (HR=0.85, 95% CI 0.64–1.12). Toxicity. The toxicity was mainly cytopenia related toxicity that was either disease related or hematotoxicity; CTC grade 3–4 febrile neutropenia was 26% (Decitabine) vs 7% (SC arm) and Grade 3–4 infection was 59% vs 47%. Differences in non hematologic toxicities were mainly gastrointestinal: grade 1–2 nausea (28% vs 16%) and grade 1–2 vomiting (16% vs 9%). During the study period, 29 (Decitabine) vs 25 (SC arm) patients died: due to either progression to MDS/AML (7 vs 20), toxicity (9 vs 0), progression and/or toxicity (10 vs 1), other reasons (3 vs 4). Conclusions. Decitabine was found to be an effective drug in these high risk MDS patients with a overall RR of 34%, (similar to earlier studies), leading to a significant PFS improvement as compared to SC arm. The difference Decitabine vs SC arm regarding time to AML or Death was not significant. Due to shorter treatment duration (not being continued beyond 8 cycles) and maybe also due to subsequent treatments administered after disease progression, the difference regarding OS was lower (HR=0.88) and not statistically significant.

Maintenance Treatment with 5-Azacitidine for Patients with High Risk Myelodysplastic Syndr–ome (MDS) or Acute Myeloid Leukemia Following MDS (MDS-AML) in Complete Remission (CR) after Induction Chemotherapy

Blood ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 112 (11) ◽  
pp. 223-223 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Grövdal ◽  
Rasheed Khan ◽  
Anni Aggerholm ◽  
Petar Antunovic ◽  
Jan Astermark ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Overall Survival ◽  
Side Effects ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Induction Chemotherapy ◽  
Maintenance Treatment ◽  
Methylation Status ◽  
Induction Treatment ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Pre Treatment

Abstract Around 50% of patients with high-risk MDS or MDS-AML may enter CR after induction chemotherapy, but CR duration, as well as overall survival is usually short. To address this clinical problem the Nordic MDS Group designed a prospective multicenter phase II study, which assessed the clinical feasibility and utility of long-term maintenance treatment with azaciditine. Sixty patients with high-risk MDS (IPSS intermediate-2 or high) (n=23) or AML following a previous known MDS (n=37) were enrolled between 2004 and 2006. The mean age was 68 (54–83) and patients should not be eligible for stem cell transplantation. Induction treatment consisted of standard doses of daunorubicin and ara-C. Patients in CR received low dose azacitidine subcutaneously 5/28 days until relapse, unless unacceptable toxicity developed. Methylation status of the P15ink4b (P15), E-cadherine (CDH) and Hypermethylated in Cancer 1 (HIC) gene was analysed at study start, in CR and in some patients during follow up. Last follow up was on August 1 2008, 24 months after the last CR was reported. Twenty-four patients (40%) reached CR and 23 of these started maintenance treatment with azacitidine. The initial dose of azacitidine was 75 mg/m2 but as four of the first five enrolled patients developed grade 4 cytopenia, the starting dose was lowered to 60 mg/m2, and was allowed to be reduced to 45 or 30 mg/m2 to avoid severe cytopenias. The mean dose of azacitidine was 54.3 mg/m2. Azacitidine was well tolerated. In 52% of the cases no side effects at all were reported. The most commonly reported side effect was mild rashes at the injection site (35%). Twenty-two percent developed fever or some kind of infection, mostly mild. Myelosuppression (grade 1–3) was seen in 22% of the cases. As previously reported, the probability of reaching CR was negatively correlated to promoter hypermethylation of CDH (p=0.008) and none of the 6 patients hypermethylated on all 3 genes reached CR (p=0.03) and hence only four patients hypermethylated on other genes than P15 received demethylating therapy. The median CR duration for the azacididine treated group was 13.5 months (2–49+) and median survival time from time of inclusion in the study for the same group was 20 months (4–52+). Four of 23 patients (17%) had a CR exceeding 24 months (32–52+). The two patients hypermethylated on CDH pre-induction had CR durations of only 2 and 5 months respectively. By last follow up 3 patients were still in CR. Of 10 patients without any methylation pre-treatment, all but one maintained this pattern in CR. Of the nine patients with pre treatment methylation of at least one gene, only one remained hypermethylated in CR. This patient had a CR duration of only 5 months. One patient showed development of P15 hypermethylation in the bone marrow sampled at 12 months and relapsed at 15 months. These findings support previous reports on P15 hypermethylation as a marker for minimal residual disease (MRD) and threatening relapse. In the whole group, survival was significantly shorter in patients with CDH methylation (3 vs 9 months, p=0.005), while pre-treatment p15 methylation status did not affect CR duration or overall survival. In conclusion, we show for the first time that maintenance treatment with azacytidine is feasible and associated with a median CR duration of 13.5 months, and very mild side effects. However azacytidine does not seem to prevent relapse in the majority of patients, including those with hypermethylation pre-treatment and/or in CR. Hypermethylation of multiple genes is a strong negative factor for survival, probability of CR, and CR duration. We observe a subset of patients, 17%, with a CR duration of >24 months; but no persistent pattern regarding cytogenetics, methylation or morphology could be identified in this group. The strong negative impact of E-Cadherin methylation, a gene involved in adhesion, warrants further investigation.

The Addition of Gemtuzumab Ozogamicin to Low Dose Ara-C Improves Remission Rates but Not Survival: Results of the UK LRF AML14 and NCRI AML16 “Pick a Winner” Comparison

Blood ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 116 (21) ◽  
pp. 18-18 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alan Burnett ◽  
Robert Hills ◽  
Ann Elizabeth Hunter ◽  
Donald Milligan ◽  
William J. Kell ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Overall Survival ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Older Patients ◽  
Low Dose ◽  
Remission Rate ◽  
Significant Proportion ◽  
Gemtuzumab Ozogamicin ◽  
Fixed Dose ◽  
The Uk

Abstract Abstract 18 In a significant proportion of older patients with AML intensive chemotherapy is not considered a viable option[1]. Such patients may receive low-dose Ara-C (LDAC), best supportive care (BSC) with hydroxyurea or an experimental agent but outcomes are poor. We have shown that LDAC is superior to BSC [2], but only in patients who enter CR (fewer than 20%).[2]. There is therefore scope to improve outcomes in these patients, and a number of possible treatments have been evaluated in the randomised UK NCRI AML16 trial, one of which is gemtuzumab ozogamicin (GO), which we have shown to benefit the majority of younger patients when given in conjunction with standard chemotherapy[3]. In AML16 novel agents or combinations are tested in untreated older patients with AML or high risk MDS (marrow blasts >10%) using a “pick a winner” design. The design allows unpromising treatments to be identified early (typically after 50 or 100 patients per arm): only those arms which show promise will continue to a trial with OS and DFS as endpoints. The aim is to at least double the remission rate from 15% to 30%, and thus improve overall survival. We now report the results of LD Ara-C (20mg bd days 1–10 for 4 courses) versus LDAC combined with GO (at a fixed dose of 5mg on day 1 of each course for 4 courses at 6–8 week intervals). Patient Details: The comparison opened as part of the UK LRF AML14 trial and was carried forward to AML16 unchanged. Between June 2004 and June 2010, 495 patients were randomised, 249 to LDAC plus ATO, 246 to LDAC. The median age was 75 years (range 54–90); 83% of patients were aged over 70 years, and 61% were male. To be eligible patients’ LFTs had to be less than twice ULN. Treatment arms were balanced for age, gender, performance status, de novo/secondary AML/high risk MDS, presenting WBC and cytogenetic risk group. Follow-up is complete to 1st January 2010, with median follow up of 21 months. Survival and remission data is available on 412, 404 patients respectively. Treatment Results: The trial passed through both stopping hurdles based on CR/CRi rates and therefore continued to full accrual, with overall survival as primary outcome measure. The table shows the distribution of outcomes: there was no heterogeneity by recruitment period (AML14 vs AML16). The causes of death (316) were:- There were no significant interactions between treatment and any of the baseline variables on either remission or survival outcomes. Likewise there were no major toxicity implications, although resource usage tended to be higher in patients given GO. Discussion: While the addition of GO significantly improves CR rate, achieving the 30% response originally sought, this does not translate into survival. This is predominantly due to an increase in relapse, indicating that if GO is to have a role in this setting, it will require effective treatment to maintain remission. [1] Juliusson G et al. Blood 2009; 113: 4179 – 4187 [2] Burnett et al. Cancer 2007 109: 1114–1124 [3] Burnett et al. JCO 2010 to appear. Disclosures: Off Label Use: Mylotarg (gemtuzumab ozogamicin).

Sorafenib Is Contributing to Salvage Chemotherapy and Is Effective Given Alone for Maintenance in AML FLT3 ITD Patients Relapsing Post Allo Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation

Blood ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 124 (21) ◽  
pp. 5265-5265 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emilia Jaskula ◽  
Janusz Lange ◽  
Mariola Sedzimirska ◽  
Andrzej Lange
Keyword(s):  
Maintenance Therapy ◽  
Low Dose ◽  
Liver Toxicity ◽  
Conflicts Of Interest ◽  
Normal Karyotype ◽  
Salvage Chemotherapy ◽  
Remission Induction ◽  
Comparative Genomic ◽  
High Dose ◽  
Hematopoietic Stem

Abstract Normal karyotype AML patients with FLT3 ITD have a higher risk of relapse than those lacking this mutation (Estey EH, Am J Hematol. 2013). Our comparative genomic hybridization study (77 patients) showed that AML cases with as compared to those without FLT3 ITD had significantly lower number of amplifications or deletions (number of total CNV aberrations: 18±4 vs 51±8, p=0.003). The latter observation in concert with that of others (Thiede, Blood 2002) suggest that FLT3 ITD mutation if present in normal karyotype patients is a key player in the pathogenesis of leukaemia and targeting this mutation may be used successfully in FLT3 ITD positive patients relapsing post HSCT. This was also the case in the two patients presented in this study. Patient UPN 952, male, 53 years old, AML M4 (FAB), normal karyotype, received alloHSCT in 2 CR after completion of two lines of remission induction therapies (first: DA3+7 (Daunorubicin, Ara-C), HAM, high dose Ara-C; second: ICE (IDA, Ara-C, VP-16)) and then promptly transplanted. He relapsed 56 days after transplantation. Patient UPN 938, female, 50 years old, AML, normal karyotype, received as an induction DA 3+7, and for consolidation HAM and high dose Ara-C and completed only one course of the maintenance therapy and transplanted in CR. Both cases were transplanted from unrelated donors (10/10 HLA A, B, C, DR and DQ alleles matched), they received myeloablative conditioning (i.v. Busulfan and Cyclophosphamide) and Cyclosporin A as GvHD prophylaxis. At relapse they received salvage chemotherapy tailored to their biological performance (UPN 938 having Age Adjusted Charlson Comorbidity Index 3 received FLAG and UPN 952 with the index 9, ECOG 3, DA2+5). Both cases received in addition Sorafenib (two times 400 mg per day). The response was prompt and the marrow was free from blasts beginning from 11 day post chemotherapy. UPN 952 received as a maintenance only one course of 6-TG with low dose of Ara-C. Due to the substantial comorbidity and liver toxicity WHO3 further chemotherapy treatment was terminated. The patient was left only on Sorafenib (2 times 200 mg per day). UPN 938 was receiving the maintenance therapy (AML protocol) in 6 – 8 weeks intervals based on low dose Ara-C with 6TG or DNR and also Sorafenib (2 times 200 mg per day). In both cases FLT3 signalling pathway (FLT3 Pathway Mutation PCR Array, SABiosciences, Qiagen) revealed a lack of any additional mutation at the check points in FLT3, KRAS, HRAS, NRAS, MEK1, PIK3CA, BRAF and PTEN genes. UPN 938 had in addition to FLT3 ITD mutation c.1807_1808insATGAATATGATCTCAAAT (p.K602_W603insYEYDLK) insertion which relevance was not so far describe. Sorafenib resistance mutations were not found. The patients were on Sorafenib for 8 (UPN 938) and 9 months (UPN 952). The course of UPN938 was uncomplicated. The second case showed mild aGvHD symptoms evolving into cGvHD (skin lesions and dry eye) slowed down with rapamicine. Up to now the patients are in CR and free from FLT3 ITD. The main observation points: - Sorafenib with chemotherapy tailored to the biologic performance of patients contributes to the efficient salvage in patients with relapsing FLT3 ITD positive AML post HSCT and is also effective given alone as a maintenance. - Side effects were seen in one out of two patients likely associated with the blocking of VEGFR signalling transmission (hand foot skin rash, von Willebrandt factor activity – 388%). Conclusion: The use of multikinase inhibitor (Sorafenib) contributes effectively to salvage therapy in FLT3+ AML patients relapsing post alloHSCTSorafenib given alone is able to maintain long-lasting remissionSide effects are individually dependent Supported by NBiR CellsTherpy grant and Byer Health Care Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Impact of Addition of Maintenance Therapy to Intensive Induction and Consolidation Chemotherapy for Childhood Acute Myeloblastic Leukemia: Results of a Prospective Randomized Trial, LAME 89/91

2002 ◽  
Vol 20 (12) ◽  
pp. 2774-2782 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yves Perel ◽  
Anne Auvrignon ◽  
Thierry Leblanc ◽  
Jean-Pierre Vannier ◽  
Gerard Michel ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Overall Survival ◽  
Maintenance Therapy ◽  
Low Dose ◽  
Disease Free Survival ◽  
High Dose ◽  
Induction Phase ◽  
Consolidation Therapy ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Childhood Acute Myeloid Leukemia ◽  
To Receive

PURPOSE: To determine whether the use of maintenance therapy (MT) delivered after intensive induction and consolidation therapy confers any advantage in childhood acute myeloid leukemia (AML). PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 268 children with AML were registered in the Leucámie Aiquë Myéloïde Enfant (LAME) 89/91 protocol. This regimen included an intensive induction phase (mitoxantrone plus cytarabine) and, for patients without allograft, two consolidation courses, one containing timed-sequential high-dose cytarabine, asparaginase, and amsacrine. In the LAME 89 pilot study, patients were given an additional MT consisting of mercaptopurine and cytarabine for 18 months. In the LAME 91 trial, patients were randomized to receive or not receive MT. RESULTS: A total of 241 (90%) of 268 patients achieved a complete remission. The overall survival and event-free survival at 6 years were 60% ± 6% and 48% ± 6%, respectively. For the complete responders after consolidation therapy, the 5-year disease-free survival was not significantly different in MT-negative and in MT-positive randomized patients (respectively, 60% ± 19% v 50% ± 15%; P = .25), whereas the 5-year overall survival was significantly better in MT-negative randomized patients (81% ± 13% v 58% ± 15%; P = .04) due to a higher salvage rate after relapse. CONCLUSION: More than 50% of patients can be cured of AML in childhood. Either drug intensity or each of the induction and postremission phases may have contributed to the outstanding improvement in outcome. Low-dose MT is not recommended. Exposure to this low-dose MT may contribute to clinical drug resistance and treatment failure in patients who experience relapse.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document