Citations

SummaryVenetoclax (VEN) is an FDA‐approved selective inhibitor of B‐cell leukaemia/lymphoma‐2 (BCL‐2), used for treating elderly or unfit acute myeloid leukaemia (AML) patients unable to undergo intensive chemotherapy. Combining VEN with hypomethylating agents (HMAs) has shown impressive response rates in high‐risk myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) and relapsed/refractory AML. However, the efficacy of VEN and HMAs in treating DDX41‐mutated (mDDX41) MDS/AML patients remains uncertain. Despite the favourable prognostic nature of mDDX41 MDS/AML patients, there is a lack of clinical experience regarding their response to different treatment regimens, leading to an unknown optimal therapeutic approach.

Abstract Graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) of the gastrointestinal (GI) tract is the main cause of nonrelapse mortality (NRM) after allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation. Ann Arbor (AA) scores derived from serum biomarkers at onset of GVHD quantify GI crypt damage; AA2/3 scores correlate with resistance to treatment and higher NRM. We conducted a multicenter, phase 2 study using natalizumab, a humanized monoclonal antibody that blocks T-cell trafficking to the GI tract through the α4 subunit of α4β7 integrin, combined with corticosteroids as primary treatment for patients with new onset AA2/3 GVHD. Seventy-five patients who were evaluable were enrolled and treated; 81% received natalizumab within 2 days of starting corticosteroids. Therapy was well tolerated with no treatment emergent adverse events in >10% of patients. Outcomes for patients treated with natalizumab plus corticosteroids were compared with 150 well-matched controls from the MAGIC database whose primary treatment was corticosteroids alone. There were no significant differences in overall or complete response between patients treated with natalizumab plus corticosteroids and those treated with corticosteroids alone (60% vs 58%; P = .67% and 48% vs 48%; P = 1.0, respectively) including relevant subgroups. There were also no significant differences in NRM or overall survival at 12 months in patients treated with natalizumab plus corticosteroids compared with controls treated with corticosteroids alone (38% vs 39%; P = .80% and 46% vs 54%; P = .48, respectively). In this multicenter biomarker–based phase 2 study, natalizumab combined with corticosteroids failed to improve outcome of patients with newly diagnosed high-risk GVHD. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as # NCT02133924.

Abstract We surveyed the performance of ponatinib, as salvage therapy, in a real-world setting of chronic phase chronic myeloid leukemia (CML-CP). Among 55 consecutive patients (median age 49 years) with relapsed/refractory CML-CP, 35 (64%) had failed ≥ 3 tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs), 35 (64%) were pre-treated with nilotinib, and 14 (28%) harbored ABL1T315I. At start of ponatinib (median dose 30 mg/day), 40 patients were already in complete hematologic (CHR), 4 in complete cytogenetic (CCyR), 3 in major molecular (MMR) remission, while 8 had not achieved CHR (NR). Ponatinib improved the depth of response in 13 (33%), 3 (75%), 2 (66%), and 4 (50%) patients with CHR, CCyR, MMR, and NR, respectively (p = 0.02). At a median follow-up of 42 months, 13 (23%) deaths, 5 (9%) blast transformations, and 25 (45%) allogeneic transplants were recorded. Five/10-year post-ponatinib survival was 77%/58% with no significant difference when patients were stratified by allogeneic transplant (p = 0.94), ponatinib-induced deeper response (p = 0.28), or a post-ponatinib ≥ CCyR vs CHR remission state (p = 0.25). ABL1T315I was detrimental to survival (p = 0.04) but did not appear to affect response. Prior exposure to nilotinib was associated with higher risk of arterial occlusive events (AOEs; 11% vs 0%; age-adjusted p = 0.04). Ponatinib starting/maintenance dose (45 vs 15 mg/day) did not influence either treatment response or AOEs. Our observations support the use of a lower starting/maintenance dose for ponatinib in relapsed/refractory CML-CP but a survival advantage for deeper responses was not apparent and treatment might not overcome the detrimental impact of ABL1T315I on survival. The association between prior exposure to nilotinib and a higher risk of post-ponatinib AOEs requires further validation.