Therapeutic strategies in high-risk acute myeloid leukaemia eligible for intensive chemotherapy

INTRODUCTION

Standard of care for acute myeloid leukaemia is still intensive chemotherapy (IC) followed by allogeneic stem cell transplantation depending on the cytogenetic and molecular profiles of the disease. Nevertheless, a hypomethylating agent in combination with venetoclax (VEN) could be an option in patients not eligible for intensive chemotherapy and/or in patients with adverse risk based on the ELN classification. The definition of high-risk leukaemia is not well standardised but usually, we define this subgroup of patients as adverse risk based on the ELN classification. Recently, ELN classification evolved to include new molecular abnormalities such as TP53 mutation, myelodysplasia-related gene mutations, and myelodysplasia-related cytogenetic abnormalities.¹ Complete remission (CR) rate obtained after induction chemotherapy was 67.5% with DAC (daunorubicin, fludarabine, cladribine)², 74% with MDACC FIA (fludarabine, cytarabine, idarubicin)³, 82% with FLAI + GO (fludarabine, cytarabine, idarubicin, gemtuzumab ozogamycin)⁴ and 84% with FLAG-IDA (fludarabine, cytarabine, idarubicin, G-CSF).⁵ Overall survival (OS) reported with DAC was 45% at 3 years, with MDACC FIA was 57% at 2 years, with FLAI + GO was 63% at 2 years and with FLAG-IDA was 44% at 8 years. The goals of improving IC in AML are efficacy in improving CR rates and irradicating measurable residual disease (MRD); safety in reducing early mortality and durability in preventing relapse and transitioning to alloHSCT if indicated. The primary goal is to decrease relapse and increase cure rates.

VENETOCLAX IN COMBINATION WITH INTENSIVE CHEMOTHERAPY

Some studies combined VEN with intensive chemotherapy (IC). Twenty-nine patients were treated with FLAG-IDA + VEN⁶ showing 90% of composite CR (cCR), 96% of negative MRD and 1-year OS at 94%. Fifty patients were treated with CLIA + VEN⁷ showing 94% cCR, 82% negative MRD and 1-year OS at 85%. Fifty-one patients were treated with « 5+2 » + VEN⁸ showing 72% cCR, and a median OS at 11.2 months. A retrospective study which compared IC vs IC + VEN in 279 patients was performed.⁹ No significant difference was observed in terms of overall response rate (ORR) 86% vs 95% or in terms of cCR 86% vs 91%. Nevertheless, we observed significantly more CR MRD- in IC + VEN 86% vs 61% (p=0.0028). Moreover, CR MRD- was significantly higher in ELN adverse 87% vs 48% (p=0.0059). More patients could undergo alloSCT after IC + VEN 72% vs 58% (p=0.012), and 82% vs 46% (p<0.0001) in ELN adverse AML. We observed a significant improvement with median event-free survival (EFS) not reached vs 12 months (p=0.002) and a median OS not reached vs 21 months (p=0.03) in IC + VEN and IC subgroups, respectively.

CPX-351

CPX-351 is a dual-drug liposomal encapsulation of cytarabine and daunorubicin that delivers a synergistic 5:1 drug ratio into leukaemia cells to a greater extent than normal bone marrow cells. CPX-351 is approved in newly diagnosed AML-MRC (myelodysplasia-related changes) and therapy-related AML patients. In the phase 3 clinical trial, CPX-351 was associated with a higher ORR (CR/CRi) (47.7% vs 33.3%) and a higher rate of subsequent allo-SCT (34% vs 25%) vs « 3+7 ».¹⁰ We observed an increase of median OS in the global cohort 9.33 months vs 5.95 months, more pronounced in allotransplanted patients not reached vs 10.25 months in CPX-351 vs « 3+7 », respectively.¹¹ These results were confirmed in the real-life experience from several countries. In France, 103 patients were reported from 12 centres. ORR was 59% and 57% of patients obtained MRD <10-3. Median OS was 16.1 months and was not reached in allotransplanted patients.¹² In Italy, 71 patients were reported from 31 centres. ORR was 65% and 62.5% of patients obtained MRD <10-3. Median OS was not reached in the global cohort and in allotransplanted patients.¹³

EXTENSION OF CPX-351 INDICATION IN ALL HIGH-RISK AML DEFINED BY ELN 2022

We designed a new study to extend CPX-351 indication to treatment-naive patients ≥50 years of age with de novo AML except t-AML or secondary AML eligible for intensive therapy. We stratified by genomic the population based on the presence of SRSF2, SF3B1, U2AF1, ZRSR2, ASXL1, EZH2, BCOR, STAG2 or RUNX1 mutation. Patients are randomized 1:1 between CPX-351 vs “3+7”. We estimated that 48% of patients achieve MRD using leukaemia-associated immunophenotype (LAIP) <10-3 with one cycle of conventional 7+3 and the primary objective is to demonstrate a 20% increase in MRD LAIP<10-3 with CPX-351 to 68% after the first course. We plan to include 210 patients to answer to this question. This clinical trial is currently enrolling (NCT05260528).

FOCUS ON TP53-MUTATED AML ELIGIBLE FOR IC

TP53 mutated AML are very poor disease with a low rate of CR/CRi and a short median duration of response and OS. Any treatment compared to AZA alone or usual IC as “3+7” showed an improvement in this setting. For patients eligible for IC, we observed 29% of CR using CPX-351 and 40% using « 3+7 », with a median OS at 4.5 months using CPX-351 and 5.1 months using « 3+7 ».¹⁴ For patients not eligible for IC, even if we observed a higher rate of CR using VEN in combination with hypomethylaling agents (CR/CRi rate: 17%, 41% and 57% for AZA alone, AZA + VEN or decitabine + VEN, respectively), we didn’t find an improvement in term of OS (median OS: 4.9, 5.2 and 5.2 months for AZA alone, AZA + VEN or decitabine + VEN, respectively).^15-17 Magrolimab, an anti-CD47 antibody targeting the « don’t eat me » signal interacting with macrophages showed promising results in combination with AZA alone with a CR/CRi rate at 42% and a median OS at 10.8 months¹⁸; and in combination with AZA + VEN showing CR/CRi rate at 64% and a median OS at 10.4 months.¹⁹ Two randomized phase clinical trials evaluating AZA + magrolimab (ENHANCE-2, NCT04778397) and AZA + VEN + magrolimab (ENHANCE-3, NCT04435691) were designed and enrolled some patients but FDA halted them following negative results of ENHANCE (NCT04313881) clinical trial in myelodysplastic syndromes and about safety concerns.

CONCLUSIONS

To summarize, IC needs to be improved in high-risk AML. Venetocax seems to be a good partner to IC. CPX-351 showed a better response, OS and better safety and should be a backbone for the development of new combinations in this setting. Molecular high-risk AML defined by ELN 2022 could be considered in future clinical trials as ALFA 2101. MRD could guide therapy including allogeneic stem cell transplantation as part of the strategy for intensively treated patients. Unfortunately, treatment of TP53-mutated AML remains a challenge.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

The author declares a conflict of interest with Jazz Pharma, Abbvie, BMS/Celgene and Gilead.

FUNDING

None

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The author (TC) wrote the manuscript and agreed on the final version. The author acknowledges EuroLeuk conference and Alessandro Isidori for the organization.

REFERENCES

1. Döhner H, Wei AH, Appelbaum FR, Craddock C, DiNardo CD, Dombret H, et al. Diagnosis and management of AML in adults: 2022 recommendations from an international expert panel on behalf of the ELN. Blood. 22 sept 2022;140(12):1345‑77. doi: 10.1182/blood.2022016867
2. Holowiecki J, Grosicki S, Giebel S, Robak T, Kyrcz-Krzemien S, Kuliczkowski K, et al. Cladribine, but not fludarabine, added to daunorubicin and cytarabine during induction prolongs survival of patients with acute myeloid leukemia: a multicenter, randomized phase III study. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30(20):2441‑8. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2011.37.1286
3. Jabbour E, Short NJ, Ravandi F, Huang X, Xiao L, Garcia-Manero G, et al. A randomized phase 2 study of idarubicin and cytarabine with clofarabine or fludarabine in patients with newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia. Cancer. 2017;123(22):4430‑9. doi: 10.1002/cncr.30883
4. Candoni A, Papayannidis C, Martinelli G, Simeone E, Gottardi M, Iacobucci I, et al. Flai (fludarabine, cytarabine, idarubicin) plus low-dose Gemtuzumab Ozogamicin as induction therapy in CD33-positive AML: Final results and long term outcome of a phase II multicenter clinical trial. Am J Hematol. mai 2018;93(5):655‑63. doi: 10.1002/ajh.25057
5. Burnett AK, Hills RK, Milligan D, Kjeldsen L, Kell J, Russell NH, et al. Identification of patients with acute myeloblastic leukemia who benefit from the addition of gemtuzumab ozogamicin: results of the MRC AML15 trial. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29(4):369‑77. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2010.31.4310
6. DiNardo CD, Lachowiez CA, Takahashi K, Loghavi S, Xiao L, Kadia T, et al. Venetoclax Combined With FLAG-IDA Induction and Consolidation in Newly Diagnosed and Relapsed or Refractory Acute Myeloid Leukemia. J Clin Oncol. 2021;39(25):2768‑78. doi: 10.1200/JCO.20.03736
7. Kadia TM, Reville PK, Borthakur G, Yilmaz M, Kornblau S, Alvarado Y, et al. Venetoclax plus intensive chemotherapy with cladribine, idarubicin, and cytarabine in patients with newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukaemia or high-risk myelodysplastic syndrome: a cohort from a single-centre, single-arm, phase 2 trial. Lancet Haematol. 2021;8(8):e552‑61. doi: 10.1016/S2352-3026(21)00192-7
8. Chua CC, Roberts AW, Reynolds J, Fong CY, Ting SB, Salmon JM, et al. Chemotherapy and Venetoclax in Elderly Acute Myeloid Leukemia Trial (CAVEAT): A Phase Ib Dose-Escalation Study of Venetoclax Combined With Modified Intensive Chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol. 2020;38(30):3506‑17. doi: 10.1200/JCO.20.00572
9. Lachowiez CA, Reville PK, Kantarjian H, Jabbour E, Borthakur G, Daver N, et al. Venetoclax combined with induction chemotherapy in patients with newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukaemia: a post-hoc, propensity score-matched, cohort study. Lancet Haematol. 2022;9(5):e350‑60. doi: 10.1016/S2352-3026(22)00076-X
10. Lancet JE, Uy GL, Cortes JE, Newell LF, Lin TL, Ritchie EK, et al. CPX-351 (cytarabine and daunorubicin) Liposome for Injection Versus Conventional Cytarabine Plus Daunorubicin in Older Patients With Newly Diagnosed Secondary Acute Myeloid Leukemia. J Clin Oncol. 2018;36(26):2684‑92. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2017.77.6112
11. Lancet JE, Uy GL, Newell LF, Lin TL, Ritchie EK, Stuart RK, et al. CPX-351 versus 7+3 cytarabine and daunorubicin chemotherapy in older adults with newly diagnosed high-risk or secondary acute myeloid leukaemia: 5-year results of a randomised, open-label, multicentre, phase 3 trial. Lancet Haematol. 2021;8(7):e481‑91. doi: 10.1016/S2352-3026(21)00134-4
12. Chiche E, Rahmé R, Bertoli S, Dumas PY, Micol JB, Hicheri Y, et al. Real-life experience with CPX-351 and impact on the outcome of high-risk AML patients: a multicentric French cohort. Blood Adv. 2021;5(1):176‑84. doi: 10.1182/bloodadvances.2020003159
13. Guolo F, Fianchi L, Minetto P, Clavio M, Gottardi M, Galimberti S, et al. CPX-351 treatment in secondary acute myeloblastic leukemia is effective and improves the feasibility of allogeneic stem cell transplantation: results of the Italian compassionate use program. Blood Cancer J. 2020;10(10):96. doi: 10.1038/s41408-020-00361-8
14. Lindsley RC, Gibson CJ, Murdock HM, Stone RM, Cortes JE, Uy GL, et al. Genetic Characteristics and Outcomes By Mutation Status in a Phase 3 Study of CPX-351 Versus 7+3 in Older Adults with Newly Diagnosed, High-Risk/Secondary Acute Myeloid Leukemia (AML). Blood. 2019;134(Supplement_1):15‑15.
15. Daver NG, Iqbal S, Renard C, Chan RJ, Hasegawa K, Hu H, et al. Treatment outcomes for newly diagnosed, treatment-naïve TP53-mutated acute myeloid leukemia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Hematol Oncol. 2023;16(1):19. doi: 10.1186/s13045-023-01417-5
16. Kim K, Maiti A, Loghavi S, Pourebrahim R, Kadia TM, Rausch CR, et al. Outcomes of TP53-mutant acute myeloid leukemia with decitabine and venetoclax. Cancer. 2021;127(20):3772‑81. doi: 10.1002/cncr.33689
17. Pollyea DA, Pratz KW, Wei AH, Pullarkat V, Jonas BA, Recher C, et al. Outcomes in Patients with Poor-Risk Cytogenetics with or without TP53 Mutations Treated with Venetoclax and Azacitidine. Clin Cancer Res. 2022;28(24):5272‑9. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-22-1183.
18. Daver NG, Vyas P, Kambhampati S, Al Malki MM, Larson RA, Asch AS, et al. Tolerability and Efficacy of the Anticluster of Differentiation 47 Antibody Magrolimab Combined With Azacitidine in Patients With Previously Untreated AML: Phase Ib Results. J Clin Oncol. 2023;41(31):4893‑904. doi: 10.1200/JCO.22.02604
19. Daver N, Senapati J, Maiti A, Loghavi S, Kadia TM, DiNardo CD, et al. Phase I/II Study of Azacitidine (AZA) with Venetoclax (VEN) and Magrolimab (Magro) in Patients (pts) with Newly Diagnosed (ND) Older/Unfit or High-Risk Acute Myeloid Leukemia (AML) and Relapsed/Refractory (R/R) AML. Blood. 2022;140(Supplement 1):141‑4.

 

©2024 the author(s). Published with license by Medicom Medical Publishers.
This an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons attribution-non Commercial license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Posted on 30 April 202412 September 2024