Quantitative Detection of DNMT3A R882H Mutation in Course of Treatment of Acute Myeloid Leukemia Patients

Abstract Introduction: DNMT3A mutation is one of the most common somatic mutations in acute myeloid leukemia (AML) patients with normal karyotype. The most frequent mutation is located at R882 codon in the methyltransferase domain. Because of prognostic significance and high stability during the disease evolution, DNMT3A mutations might represent highly informative biomarkers for prognosis and outcome of disease. Methods: Using allele-specific PCR with a Blocking reagent (ASB-PCR assay) for the quantitative detection of DNMT3A R882H mutation, we analyzed 350 follow-up samples from 28 AML patients in complete remission (CR) after induction and consolidation treatment and allogeneic stem cell transplantation (alloSCT). Seventeen patients included in the follow-up analysis harbored a NPM1 mutation. Using a well-established marker for the detection of minimal residual disease (MRD) allowed to estimate the stability of DNMT3A mutation in CR and complete molecular remission (molCR). In addition, we analyzed FLT3, IDH1, and IDH2 mutations in diagnostic and follow up samples and donor chimerism after alloSCT. Results: We found the persistence of DNMT3A R882H mutations in all patients in CR after standard therapy. On the contrary, after alloSCT, DNMT3A R882H mutation was not found in patients with CR and complete donor chimerism. In relapse of leukemia, an increasing of both NPM1 and DNMT3A mutated alleles were shown all cases. Conclusion: Persistence of DNMT3A mutation after standard chemotherapy could indicate the origin of mutation in the early pre-leukemic stem cells. The loss of correlation between NPM1 and DNMT3A in CR could be associated with leukemic clone evolution. It is impotant to note, that the removal of mutated leukemic stem cells after allo SCT indicates therapeutic options allo SCT for high risk AML patients. Increased of both DNMT3A and NPM1 mutated alleles in relapse indicates the presence of both mutations, at least partly, in the same leukemic clone. We conclude that quantitative detection of DNMT3A R882H mutations at different time points of AML disease could provide additional information about the role of mutations in development and progression of AML. Disclosures Blau: BMS: Honoraria; MSD: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; AMGEN: Honoraria; JAZZ Pharma: Honoraria; Shire: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Baxalta: Honoraria.

Download Full-text

High Proportion of Leukemic Stem Cells at Diagnosis Is Correlated with Unfavorable Prognosis in Childhood Acute Myeloid Leukemia

Pediatric Hematology and Oncology ◽

10.3109/08880018.2010.528171 ◽

2011 ◽

Vol 28 (2) ◽

pp. 91-99 ◽

Cited By ~ 29

Author(s):

Kai-Erik Witte ◽

Jörg Ahlers ◽

Iris Schäfer ◽

Maya André ◽

Gunter Kerst ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Stem Cells ◽

Acute Myeloid Leukemia ◽

Myeloid Leukemia ◽

Leukemic Stem Cells ◽

Childhood Acute Myeloid Leukemia ◽

Acute Myeloid

Download Full-text

Mini- Vs. Regular-Dose CLAG-M (Cladribine, Cytarabine, G-CSF, and Mitoxantrone) in Medically Less Fit Adults with Newly-Diagnosed Acute Myeloid Leukemia (AML) and Other High-Grade Myeloid Neoplasms

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2019-123542 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽

pp. 1364-1364 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Anna B. Halpern ◽

Megan Othus ◽

Kelda Gardner ◽

Genevieve Alcorn ◽

Mary-Elizabeth M. Percival ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Acute Myeloid Leukemia ◽

Myeloid Leukemia ◽

Research Funding ◽

Intensive Therapy ◽

Treatment Intensity ◽

High Grade ◽

Intensive Chemotherapy ◽

Myeloid Neoplasms ◽

Acute Myeloid

Background: Optimal treatment for medically less fit adults with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) remains uncertain. Retrospective data suggest intensive therapy may lead to better outcomes in these patients. However, these findings must be interpreted cautiously because of the possibility of selection bias and other confounders. Ideally, the optimal treatment intensity is defined via randomized trial but whether patients and their physicians are amenable to such a study is unknown. We therefore designed a trial (NCT03012672) to 1) evaluate the feasibility of randomization between intensive and non-intensive therapy in this population and 2) examine the impact of treatment intensity on response rate and survival. We used CLAG-M as high-dose cytarabine-based intensive induction therapy. Rather than selecting different classes of drugs in the 2 treatment arms- which may have different modes of action and therefore confound the question of treatment intensity - we used reduced-dose ("mini") CLAG-M as the non-intensive comparator. Methods: Adults ≥18 years were eligible if they had untreated AML or high-grade myeloid neoplasms (≥10% blasts in blood or marrow) and were medically less fit as defined by having a "treatment related mortality" (TRM) score of ≥13.1, corresponding to a >10-15% 28-day mortality with intensive chemotherapy. Left ventricular ejection fraction ≤45% was the only organ function exclusion. Patient-physician pairs were first asked if they were amenable to randomized treatment allocation. If so, they were randomized 1:1 to mini- vs. regular-dose CLAG-M. If not, in order to evaluate our secondary endpoints, the patient or physician could choose the treatment arm and still enroll on study. Patients and physicians then completed surveys elucidating their decision-making processes. Up to 2 induction courses were given with mini- vs. regular-dose CLAG-M: cladribine 2 or 5 mg/m2/day (days 1-5), cytarabine 100 or 2,000 mg/m2/day (days 1-5), G-CSF 300 or 480µcg/day for weight </≥76kg in both arms (days 0-5), and mitoxantrone 6 or 18 mg/m2/day (days 1-3). CLAG at identical doses was used for post-remission therapy for up to 4 (regular-dose CLAG) or 12 (mini-CLAG) cycles. The primary endpoint was feasibility of randomization, defined as ≥26/50 of patient-physician pairs agreeing to randomization. Secondary outcomes included rate of complete remission (CR) negative for measurable ("minimal") residual disease (MRD), rate of CR plus CR with incomplete hematologic recovery (CR+CRi), and overall survival (OS). Results: This trial enrolled 33 patients. Only 3 (9%) patient/physician pairs agreed to randomization and thus randomization was deemed infeasible (primary endpoint). Eighteen pairs chose mini-CLAG-M and 12 regular-dose CLAG-M for a total of 19 subjects in the lower dose and 14 subjects in the higher dose arms. The decision favoring lower dose treatment was made largely by the physician in 5/18 (28%) cases, the patient in 11/18 (61%) cases and both in 2/18 (11%). The decision favoring the higher dose arm was made by the patient in most cases 9/12 (75%), both physician and patient in 2/12 (16%) and the physician in only 1/12 (8%) cases. Despite the limitations of lack of randomization, patients' baseline characteristics were well balanced with regard to age, performance status, TRM score, lab values and cytogenetic/mutational risk categories (Table 1). One patient was not yet evaluable for response or TRM at data cutoff. Rates of MRDneg CR were comparable: 6/19 (32%) in the lower and 3/14 (21%) in the higher dose groups (p=0.70). CR+CRi rates were also similar in both arms (43% vs. 56% in lower vs. higher dose arms; p=0.47). Three (16%) patients experienced early death in the lower dose arm vs. 1 (7%) in the higher dose arm (p=0.43). With a median follow up of 4.2 months, there was no survival difference between the two groups (median OS of 6.1 months in the lower vs. 4.7 months in the higher dose arm; p=0.81; Figure 1). Conclusions: Randomization of medically unfit patients to lower- vs. higher-intensity therapy was not feasible, and physicians rarely chose higher intensity therapy in this patient group. Acknowledging the limitation of short follow-up time and small sample size, our trial did not identify significant differences in outcomes between intensive and non-intensive chemotherapy. Analysis of differences in QOL and healthcare resource utilization between groups is ongoing. Disclosures Halpern: Pfizer Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Bayer Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding. Othus:Celgene: Other: Data Safety and Monitoring Committee. Gardner:Abbvie: Speakers Bureau. Percival:Genentech: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer Inc.: Research Funding; Nohla Therapeutics: Research Funding. Scott:Incyte: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Agios: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy. Becker:AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Glycomimetics, Invivoscribe, JW Pharmaceuticals, Novartis, Trovagene: Research Funding; Accordant Health Services/Caremark: Consultancy; The France Foundation: Honoraria. Oehler:Pfizer Inc.: Research Funding; Blueprint Medicines: Consultancy. Walter:BioLineRx: Consultancy; Astellas: Consultancy; Argenx BVBA: Consultancy; BiVictriX: Consultancy; Agios: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Amphivena Therapeutics: Consultancy, Equity Ownership; Boehringer Ingelheim: Consultancy; Boston Biomedical: Consultancy; Covagen: Consultancy; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Race Oncology: Consultancy; Aptevo Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Kite Pharma: Consultancy; New Link Genetics: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding. OffLabel Disclosure: Cladribine is FDA-approved for Hairy Cell Leukemia. Here we describe its use for AML, where is is also widely used with prior publications supporting its use

Download Full-text

Clinical Outcomes Following Treatment with Gilteritinib or Quizartinib in Patients with Relapsed/Refractory FLT3-ITD+ Acute Myeloid Leukemia

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2020-136118 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 42-43

Author(s):

Alexander E. Perl ◽

Qiaoyang Lu ◽

Alan Fan ◽

Nahla Hasabou ◽

Erhan Berrak ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Acute Myeloid Leukemia ◽

Complete Remission ◽

Myeloid Leukemia ◽

Research Funding ◽

Phase 3 ◽

Hematopoietic Stem ◽

Travel Costs ◽

Baseline Characteristics ◽

Acute Myeloid

Background: Gilteritinib is approved for patients (pts) with relapsed/refractory (R/R) FLT3-mutated acute myeloid leukemia (AML), based on findings from the phase 3 ADMIRAL trial (Perl AE, et al. N Engl J Med. 2019). A phase 3 trial, QuANTUM-R, demonstrated the benefit of quizartinib in pts with R/R AML with FLT3 internal tandem duplication (FLT3-ITD) mutations (Cortes JE, et al. Lancet Oncol. 2019). Although eligibility criteria across both studies were similar, QuANTUM-R was more stringent as to prior therapy intensity and remission duration, which potentially enriched for higher-risk pts. We sought to describe outcomes from ADMIRAL among pts who otherwise met eligibility for QuANTUM-R. Methods: In this post-hoc analysis, a subset of pts from ADMIRAL were matched with R/R FLT3-ITD+ AML pts from QuANTUM-R on the basis of baseline characteristics and prior treatment criteria. Matched pts were either refractory to initial anthracycline-based chemotherapy or had relapsed ≤6 mos after achieving composite complete remission (CRc) with an anthracycline-based regimen. Results: Overall, 218 pts with R/R FLT3-ITD+ AML in the ADMIRAL trial (gilteritinib, n=140; salvage chemotherapy [SC], n=78) were matched with the QuANTUM-R intention-to treat (ITT) population (N=367; quizartinib, n=245; SC, n=122). Proportions of pts preselected for high-intensity SC were 66% (n=143/218) in the matched ADMIRAL ITT population and 77% (n=281/367) in the QuANTUM-R ITT populations. Demographic and baseline characteristics of the matched ADMIRAL ITT population and QuANTUM-R ITT population were similar. Median durations of exposure to gilteritinib and quizartinib were 3.8 mos and 3.2 mos, respectively, and median number of treatment cycles received were five and four, respectively. Rates of hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) were similar in pts treated with gilteritinib (35%; n=49/140) or quizartinib (32%; n=78/245), as were the proportions of pts who resumed gilteritinib (23%; n=32/140) or quizartinib (20%; n=48/245) therapy post-HSCT. Median overall survival (OS) in pts treated with gilteritinib or quizartinib was longer than that observed with SC. After a median follow-up of 17.4 mos, median OS was 10.2 mos with gilteritinib versus 5.6 mos with SC (hazard ratio [HR]=0.573 [95% CI: 0.403, 0.814]; one-sided nominal P=0.0008). After a median follow-up of 23.5 mos, median OS with quizartinib was 6.2 mos versus 4.7 mos with SC (HR=0.76 [95% CI: 0.58-0.98]; one-sided P=0.02). After censoring for HSCT, median OS was 9.3 mos with gilteritinib versus 5.5 mos with SC (HR=0.525 [95% CI: 0.356-0.775]; nominal one-sided P=0.0005), and 5.7 mos versus 4.6 mos with quizartinib versus SC, respectively (HR=0.79 [95% CI: 0.59, 1.05]; one-sided P=0.05). In both QuANTUM-R and matched ADMIRAL populations, the survival benefits of quizartinib and gilteritinib compared with SC were maintained across multiple subgroups, including high FLT3-ITD allelic ratio subsets. Compared with SC, high CRc rates were observed in pts treated with either gilteritinib (57%; n=80/140) or quizartinib (48%; n=118/245). The complete remission (CR) rate with gilteritinib was 23% (n=32/140), whereas the CR rate with quizartinib was 4% (n=10/245) (Table). Median time to achieve CRc was 1.8 mos with gilteritinib and 1.1 mos with quizartinib, median duration of CRc was 5.5 mos with gilteritinib and 2.8 mos with quizartinib. The safety profiles of gilteritinib and quizartinib were generally similar, though aspartate or alanine aminotransferase elevations (any grade) were more frequent with gilteritinib (41-44%) than quizartinib (≤13%), whereas neutropenia (14% vs 34%, respectively), fatigue (24% vs 39%, respectively), and prolonged QT intervals (9% vs 27%, respectively) were more frequent with quizartinib. Conclusions: In pts with R/R FLT3-ITD+ AML and similar baseline characteristics, both gilteritinib and quizartinib were generally well tolerated and associated with improved survival and treatment response compared with SC. Responses to gilteritinib and quizartinib, as measured by CRc, were similar; blood count recovery varied between the two FLT3 inhibitors. Although cross-study comparisons have substantial limitations, the findings suggest that while remission is achieved faster with quizartinib, response may be more durable and survival potentially longer with gilteritinib. Disclosures Perl: Syndax: Consultancy, Honoraria; Leukemia & Lymphoma Society, Beat AML: Consultancy; Novartis: Honoraria, Other, Research Funding; Agios: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other; Jazz: Honoraria, Other; FORMA Therapeutics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Writing/editorial support, travel costs for meetings, Research Funding; FUJIFILM Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc: Research Funding; New Link Genetics: Honoraria, Other; Arog Pharmaceuticals Inc: Other: uncompensated consulting, travel costs for meetings; Actinium Pharmaceuticals Inc: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Biomed Valley Discoveries: Research Funding; Astellas: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: writing/editorial support, travel costs for meeting presentations related to study, Research Funding; Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; AbbVie Inc: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other, Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria, Other: Travel costs for meeting; Loxo Oncology Inc, a wholly owned subsidiary of Eli Lilly & Company: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other. Lu:Astellas: Current Employment. Fan:Astellas Pharma: Current Employment. Hasabou:Astellas Pharma: Current Employment. Berrak:Astellas: Current Employment. Tiu:Eli Lilly & Company: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Ended employment in the past 24 months; Astellas Pharma Global Development: Current Employment.

Download Full-text