MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2989899656 · doi:10.1182/blood-2019-129557

Sorafenib in Combination with Standard Chemotherapy for Children with High Allelic Ratio FLT3/ITD+ AML Improves Event-Free Survival and Reduces Relapse Risk: A Report from the Children's Oncology Group Protocol AAML1031

2019· article· en· W2989899656 sur OpenAlexaff
Jessica A. Pollard, Todd A. Alonzo, Patrick A. Brown, Robert B. Gerbing, Elizabeth Fox, John Choi, Brian T. Fisher, Betsy Hirsch, Samir B. Kahwash, John E. Levine, Michael R. Loken, Susana C. Raimondi, Katherine Tarlock, Andrew Wood, Lillian Sung, Anders Kolb, Alan S. Gamis, Soheil Meshinchi, Richard Aplenc

Notice bibliographique

RevueBlood · 2019
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueAcute Myeloid Leukemia Research
Établissements canadiensSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick Children
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésSorafenibMedicineInternal medicineOncologyCohortFms-Like Tyrosine Kinase 3Induction chemotherapyChemotherapyChemotherapy regimenInterim analysisClinical trialBiologyHepatocellular carcinomaMutation

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION Sorafenib, a multi-kinase tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) targets FLT3 internal tandem duplication (FLT3/ITD) mutations and has efficacy in adult FLT3/ITD+ AML. High allelic ratio (HAR) FLT3/ITD mutations (allelic ratio of > 0.4, referred to as FLT3/ITD+) confer poor prognosis in de novo pediatric AML. COG AAML1031 Arm C studied the feasibility and efficacy of adding sorafenib to standard chemotherapy and as a single agent maintenance therapy in pediatric HAR FLT3/ITD+ patients. METHODS The AAML1031 primary randomization (Arm A vs. B) has been previously reported (Aplenc et al. Blood 2016;128:899). Patients with FLT3/ITD+ AML were offered secondary enrollment on Arm C and toxicities were monitored on respective treatment arms. An initial safety phase (Cohort 1, C1; N=12) defined the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of sorafenib when added to induction II chemotherapy and subsequent courses. Following completion, the study was amended (Cohort 2; C2) to start sorafenib on day 11 of induction I and concomitantly with chemotherapy in subsequent cycles. A year of sorafenib maintenance was also added. Due to concerns for cardiac toxicity on interim analyses, the study was amended (Cohort 3; C3) to initiate sorafenib after chemotherapy completion in all courses. Sorafenib pharmacokinetics (PK) and plasma inhibitory activity (PIA) were measured in a subset of patients. Clinical outcome analysis was limited to cohorts 2/3 given lack of induction I sorafenib exposure in C1. Arm C results were compared to N=34 HAR FLT3/ITD+ AML patients on the control arm of COG AAML0531 (Arm A), a group that received comparable chemotherapy without sorafenib. Complete remission (CR), event-free survival (EFS), overall survival (OS) and relapse risk (RR) of patients with HAR FLT3/ITD AML enrolled on the 2 trials were compared to assess the impact of sorafenib use. Cox proportional hazards were used for multivariable analyses. RESULTS In the dose finding phase (C1), 12 patient were enrolled and the MTD of sorafenib defined as 200 mg/m2; dose limiting toxicities included rash (N=2; 1 grade III, 1 grade II), grade II hand foot syndrome and grade III fever. For the evaluation of efficacy, 80 C2/C3 (C2: N=33, C3: N=47) patients were enrolled. 30/80 (37.5%) received at least 1 maintenance cycle; 20/80 (25%) completed all courses. As outcomes were compared to N=34 HAR FLT3/ITD+ AML patients enrolled on the preceding trial AAML0531 Arm A as a historical comparison, clinical characteristics were described for the 2 groups (Table 1). For AAML1031 C2/C3, rates of induction I CR were 73% vs. 56% for AAML0531 Arm A (p=0.078). Following induction II, CR rates were 91% and 70% respectively (p=0.007). 3 year EFS from study entry was 57.5% for Arm C vs. 34.3% for AAML0531 Arm A; (p=0.007) whereas 3 year OS from study entry was not significantly different (63.9% vs. 54.1%, p=0.375, Figure 1A). RR from CR was reduced with sorafenib treatment (Arm C 18.2% vs. historical 52.5%, p=0.006, Figure 1B). The improvement in EFS and RR observed with sorafenib was retained in those with wild-type nucleophosmin (NPM-) FLT3/ITD+ AML but lacked statistical significance compared to historical in NPM+ FLT3/ITD+ disease (Figure 2A/2B). As 21/34 (62%) patients in the historical control did not undergo HSCT there was concern that the improved outcome observed for Arm C reflected increased use of HSCT in AAML1031. Multivariable analysis that adjusted for HSCT resulted in significantly lower EFS and higher RR for FLT3/ITD+ patients on AAML0531, suggesting that increased use of HSCT on Arm C did not explain the improved outcomes observed (EFS: HR 2.04, CI 1.18 - 3.53; p=0.01, RR: HR 3.09, CI 1.28 - 7.49; p=0.012). While dose modifications were more frequent for FLT3/ITD+ patients on Arm C versus arms A/B of AAML1031, targeted toxicity rates were otherwise no higher (Table 2). PIA assays demonstrated median trough FLT3 inhibition of 92% (n=29, 95% CI 79-94%), 91% (n=84, 95% CI 87-94%) and 81% (n=70, 95% CI 76-90%) for induction I, induction II and intensification I, respectively. CONCLUSION Addition of sorafenib to Arm C of AAML1031 was safe and resulted in potent FLT3 inhibition, particularly early in therapy. Sorafenib improved rates of induction II CR as well as 3 year EFS and reduced RR from CR compared to historical controls. These data support use of sorafenib in pediatric patients with HAR FLT3/ITD+ AML. Disclosures Fisher: Pfizer: Research Funding; Astellas: Other: Data Safety Monitoring Board Chair for an antifungal study; Merck: Research Funding. Levine:Viracor: Patents & Royalties: biomarker patent; Biogen: Other: non-financial support; Ironwood: Consultancy; Bluebird Bio: Consultancy; National Cancer Institute: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy; Incyte: Consultancy, Research Funding; Kamada: Research Funding. Loken:Hematologics, Inc: Employment, Equity Ownership. OffLabel Disclosure: sorafenib for high allelic ratio FLT3/ITD+ AML

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 distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,078
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,779

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

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

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 Opus0,007
Tête enseignante GPT0,276
Écart entre enseignants0,268 · 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 tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
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

Citations29
Publié2019
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueBloodMême sujetAcute Myeloid Leukemia ResearchTravaux en français237 207