Begna, Kebede

AbstractThe current study was approached with the assumption that response to induction chemotherapy, in acute myeloid leukemia (AML), overshadows pre‐treatment risk variables in predicting survival and therefore be used as an anchor for a simplified risk model. We considered 759 intensively‐treated patients with AML, not promyelocytic: median age 60 years; primary 66%, secondary 25%, and therapy‐related 9%; European LeukemiaNet cytogenetic risk category favorable 8%, intermediate 61%, and adverse 31%. Complete remission with (CR) or without (CRi) count recovery was achieved in 608 (80%) patients. After a median follow‐up of 22 months, 503 deaths, 272 relapses, and 257 allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplants (AHSCTs) were recorded. Multivariable analysis identified failure to achieve CR/CRi (HR 3.8, 95% CI 3.1–4.8), adverse karyotype (2.2, 1.8–2.8), and age >55 years (2.1, 1.6–2.7) as main risk factors for survival. HR‐weighted scoring resulted in four‐tiered risk stratification: low (0 points; N = 183), intermediate‐1 (1 point; N = 331), intermediate‐2 (2 points; N = 117), and high (≥3 points; N = 128), with respective median survival (5‐year rate) not reached (68%), 34 (37%), 13 (20%), and 5 (5%) months (p < .001). FLT3‐ITD mutation was associated with inferior survival in intermediate‐1 (p = .004) and TP53 in intermediate‐2 (p = .06) and high (p = .02) risk disease; the latter was fully accounted for by the close association between TP53 mutation and complex/monosomal karyotype while the observations regarding FLT3‐ITD were not affected by treatment with midostaurin. AHSCT had a favorable impact on survival, most apparent in intermediate‐1 (p < .001), intermediate‐2 (p = .03), and high (p = .01) risk disease. The proposed 3‐factor survival model offers a novel prototype that is amenable to further enhancement by molecular information and was validated in an external cohort of 1032 intensively‐treated AML patients.

AbstractTherapy‐related myeloid neoplasms (t‐MN) are aggressive malignancies in need of effective therapies. The BCL‐2 inhibitor venetoclax represents a paradigm shift in the treatment of acute myeloid leukemia. However, the effectiveness of venetoclax has not been studied in a large cohort of t‐MN. We retrospectively analyzed 378 t‐MN patients, of which 96 (25.4%, 47 therapy‐related acute myeloid leukemia, 1 therapy‐related chronic myelomonocytic leukemia, 48 therapy‐related myelodysplastic syndrome) received venetoclax. Median interval from t‐MN to venetoclax initiation was 2.9 (Interquartile range [IQR] 0.7–12) months, and patients received a median of 3 (IQR 1–4) cycles. The composite complete remission (CRc) rate, median progression‐free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) were 39.1%, 4.9 months, and 7 months, respectively. The upfront use of venetoclax and achieving CRc were associated with improved survival, whereas the presence of Chromosome 7 abnormalities was associated with an inferior survival. Neither the TP53‐status nor the percent bone marrow blast predicted the likelihood of CRc or survival. Paired genetic analysis performed at venetoclax initiation and failure did not show the evidence of the selection of the TP53‐mutated clone. In a propensity‐matched analysis, the use of venetoclax‐based regimen as the first‐line therapy was associated with a superior survival compared to hypomethylating agent (HMA)‐based first‐line therapy (9.4 vs. 6.1 months, p = .01). We conclude that the upfront use of venetoclax with HMA improved survival, though PFS and OS remain poor. As the phenotype at diagnosis or the percent blasts did not predict outcomes, venetoclax should be studied in all t‐MN phenotypes.

AbstractThe progress with intensive chemotherapy and supportive care measures has improved survival in patients with newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia (AML). Given the recent development of effective low intensity therapies, an optimal decision on the therapy intensity may improve survival through the avoidance of early mortality. We reviewed the outcome of 3728 patients with newly diagnosed AML who received intensive chemotherapy between August 1980 and May 2020. Intensive chemotherapy was defined as a cumulative cytarabine dose ≥ 700 mg/m2 during induction therapy. We divided the whole cohort into a training and validation group at a 3:1 ratio. The population was divided into a training (2790 patients) and a validation cohort (938 patients). The median age was 55 years (range, 15‐99). Among them, 442 patients (12%) had core‐binding factor AML. Binary logistic regression identified older age, worse performance status, hyperbilirubinemia, elevated creatinine, hyperuricemia, cytogenetic abnormalities other than CBF and ‐Y, and pneumonia as adverse prognostic factors for an early 4‐week mortality. This risk classification for early mortality was verified in the validation cohort of patients. In the validation cohort of more recently treated patients from 2000 to 2017, the 4‐week mortality rates with intensive chemotherapy were 2%, 14%, and 50% in the low‐, high‐, and very high‐risk group, respectively. The mortality rates with low intensity therapies were 3%, 9%, and 20%, respectively. The risk classification guides treatment intensity by the assessment of age, frailty, organ dysfunction, cytogenetic abnormality, and infection to avoid early mortality.

Abstract Venetoclax (Ven) combined with a hypomethylating agent (HMA) has now emerged as an effective treatment regimen for acute myeloid leukemia, in both de novo and relapsed/refractory setting. The current multicenter study retrospectively examined Ven + HMA treatment outcome among 32 patients (median age 69 years; 59% males) with blast‐phase myeloproliferative neoplasm (MPN‐BP). Pre‐leukemic phenotype included essential thrombocythemia (ET)/post‐ET myelofibrosis (34%), polycythemia vera (PV)/post‐PV myelofibrosis (38%) and primary myelofibrosis (28%). Twenty‐nine study patients were fully annotated cytogenetically and molecularly (NGS): 69% harbored complex karyotype and/or mutations, including TP53 (41%), IDH1/2 (21%), ASXL1 (21%), N/KRAS (14%), SRSF2 (10%), EZH2 (10%) and U2AF1 (7%). All patients received Ven combined with either azacitidine ( n = 12) or decitabine ( n = 20); either up front ( n = 23) or after failing another induction therapy ( n = 9). Complete remission with (CR) or without (CRi) count recovery was achieved in 14 (44%) patients and was more likely to occur in the absence of pre‐leukemic PV/post‐PV myelofibrosis phenotype ( p < .01), complex karyotype ( p < .01) or K/NRAS ( p = .03) mutations; seven of eight patients (88%) without vs four of 21 (19%) with complex karyotype or K/NRAS mutation achieved CR/CRi ( p < .01); all 11 informative patients with pre‐leukemic PV/post‐PV myelofibrosis phenotype displayed complex karyotype ( p < .01). In contrast, neither TP53 ( p = .45) nor IDH1/2 ( p = .63) mutations affected response. Compared to historical controls treated with HMA alone ( n = 26), the CR/CRi rate (44% vs 4%) and median survival (8 vs 5.5 months) were more favorable with Ven + HMA, but without significant difference in overall survival. Importantly, six patients with CR/CRi subsequently received allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant (AHSCT). Note, Ven + HMA produces robust CR/CRi rates in MPN‐BP, especially in the absence of RAS mutations and complex karyotype, thus enabling AHSCT, in some patients.