MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2909182124 · doi:10.1182/blood-2018-99-111514

Efficacy and Safety of CPX-351 Versus 7+3 in a Subgroup of Older Patients with Newly Diagnosed Acute Myeloid Leukemia with Myelodysplasia-Related Changes (AML-MRC) Enrolled in a Phase 3 Study

2018· article· en· W2909182124 sur OpenAlexaff
Daniel H. Ryan, Geoffrey L. Uy, Jörge E. Cortes, Laura F. Newell, Ellen K. Ritchie, Robert K. Stuart, Stephen A. Strickland, Donna E. Hogge, Scott R. Solomon, Richard M. Stone, Dale L. Bixby, Jonathan E. Kolitz, Gary J. Schiller, Matthew J. Wieduwilt, Robert J. Ryan, Michael Chiarella, Arthur C. Louie, Jeffrey E. Lancet

Notice bibliographique

RevueBlood · 2018
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueAcute Myeloid Leukemia Research
Établissements canadiensLeukemia & Lymphoma Society of Canada
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMedicineInternal medicineCytarabineChemotherapy regimenOncologyMyelodysplastic syndromesDecitabineRegimenGastroenterologyLeukemiaChemotherapyBone marrow

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Abstract Background: CPX-351 (Vyxeos®) is a dual-drug liposomal encapsulation of cytarabine and daunorubicin at a synergistic ratio. In a large randomized, open-label, multicenter, phase 3 study (NCT01696084) of CPX-351 versus conventional cytarabine/daunorubicin chemotherapy (7+3 regimen) in patients (pts) aged 60-75 years with newly diagnosed, high-risk/secondary AML, CPX-351 significantly improved overall survival (OS) and remission rates (Lancet JE, et al. J Clin Oncol. 2018). CPX-351 was approved by the US FDA in 2017 for the treatment of adults with newly diagnosed therapy-related AML or AML-MRC and is currently under review by the EMA. The WHO 2016 AML-MRC designation applies to AML pts who meet any of the following criteria: 1) a history of myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) or myelodysplastic/myeloproliferative neoplasm (MDS/MPN), 2) an MDS-related cytogenetic abnormality, or 3) multilineage dysplasia in >50% of ≥2 cell lineages in the absence of NPM1 or biallelic CEBPA mutations. Pts with AML-MRC typically face a poor prognosis, with inferior outcomes in response to standard induction chemotherapy. A subgroup analysis of the phase 3 study was performed to specifically compare the efficacy and safety of CPX-351 versus 7+3 in pts with AML-MRC. Methods: Pts enrolled in the phase 3 study who met the WHO 2008 AML-MRC classification were included in this subgroup analysis; however, pts with a history of MPN other than CMML or combined MDS/MPN and pts with only morphologic evidence of multilineage dysplasia were excluded from the phase 3 study. Pts were randomized 1:1 to receive up to 2 inductions with CPX-351 (100 units/m2 [cytarabine 100 mg/m2 + daunorubicin 44 mg/m2] on Days 1, 3, and 5 [2nd induction: Days 1 and 3]) or 7+3 (cytarabine 100 mg/m2/day continuously for 7 days [2nd induction: 5 days] + daunorubicin 60 mg/m2 on Days 1-3 [2nd induction: Days 1-2]). Pts achieving complete remission (CR) or CR with incomplete platelet or neutrophil recovery (CRi) could receive up to 2 consolidations with CPX-351 (65 units/m2 [cytarabine 65 mg/m2 + daunorubicin 29 mg/m2] on Days 1 and 3) or 5+2 (as in 2nd induction). Pts could receive hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) at the discretion of their treating physician. Results: The study enrolled 309 pts, 246 of whom met the criteria for AML-MRC (CPX-351: n = 123; 7+3: n = 123). Of these 246 pts, 59.0% had antecedent MDS, 9.3% had antecedent CMML, and 31.7% had de novo AML with MDS karyotype. Baseline characteristics were similar between treatment arms (median age 68 years; 64.6% male; 11.0% with ECOG status of 2). A second induction cycle was received by 33.3% of pts in the CPX-351 arm and 37.8% of pts in the 7+3 arm. Among pts with AML-MRC, CPX-351 was associated with a significant OS benefit versus 7+3 (median: 9.07 vs 5.95 months; HR = 0.70 [95% CI: 0.53-0.93]). CPX-351 was also associated with higher rates of CR+CRi (48.0% vs 32.5%; OR = 1.83 [95% CI: 1.09-3.09]), CR (37.4% vs 24.4%; OR = 1.80 [95% CI: 1.02-3.17]), and HCT (33.3% vs 24.4%; OR = 1.53 [95% CI: 0.86-2.74]). Among pts who received HCT, median OS was longer with CPX-351 versus 7+3 when calculated from the date of randomization (not reached vs 15.21 months; HR = 0.50 [95% CI: 0.26-0.99]) or date of HCT (not reached vs 10.68 months; HR = 0.48 [95% CI: 0.24-0.96]). Early mortality rates in the CPX-351 and 7+3 arms, respectively, were 4.9% and 8.9% at Day 30 and 13.8% and 20.3% at Day 60. The treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE) profile of CPX-351 in pts with AML-MRC was consistent with the overall study population and generally comparable between treatment arms (Table). Two pts treated with CPX-351 and 1 treated with 7+3 discontinued treatment due to a TEAE (cardiac failure [CPX-351], cardiomyopathy [CPX-351], and ejection fraction decreased [7+3]). Grade 5 TEAEs occurred in 8.9% and 14.3% of pts treated with CPX-351 and 7+3, respectively; those occurring in >1 pt in a treatment arm included sepsis (2.4% and 0.8%), disease progression (1.6% and 3.4%), multi-organ failure (0.8% and 1.7%), and respiratory failure (0.8% and 1.7%). Conclusions: In this subgroup analysis, CPX-351 improved OS and remission rates compared with 7+3 in older adults with AML-MRC, while maintaining a similar safety profile. Importantly, CPX-351 is the first agent to be associated with prolonged OS compared with standard-of-care chemotherapy (7+3 regimen) in adults with newly diagnosed AML-MRC, which supported FDA approval in this population. Disclosures Ryan: AbbVie: Equity Ownership; University of Rochester: Patents & Royalties. Uy:Curis: Consultancy; GlycoMimetics: Consultancy. Cortes:Astellas Pharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Research Funding; Arog: Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding. Ritchie:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; NS Pharma: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Astellas Pharma: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding; ARIAD Pharmaceuticals: Speakers Bureau. Stuart:Sunesis Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses, Research Funding; Agios: Research Funding; Astellas: Research Funding; Bayer AG: Research Funding; Celator/Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding. Strickland:Sunesis Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Research Funding; Tolero Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; CTI Biopharma: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Baxalta: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Boehringer Ingelheim: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Astellas Pharma: Consultancy. Bixby:GlycoMimetics: Research Funding. Kolitz:Magellan Health: Consultancy, Honoraria. Schiller:bluebird bio: Research Funding; Astellas Pharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Wieduwilt:Daiichi Sankyo: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Shire: Research Funding; Reata Pharmaceuticals: Equity Ownership; Leadiant: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding. Ryan:Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Employment, Other: Stock and stock options. Chiarella:Celator/Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Employment, Equity Ownership. Louie:Celator/Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Employment, Equity Ownership, Patents & Royalties.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Essai randomisé · Signal consensuel: Essai randomisé
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,002
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,007

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,002
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0010,001
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0020,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,011
Tête enseignante GPT0,276
Écart entre enseignants0,266 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeEssai randomisé
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations9
Publié2018
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueBloodMême sujetAcute Myeloid Leukemia ResearchTravaux en français237 207