MétaCan
Menu
← Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4405042792 · doi:10.1182/blood-2024-209097

Efficacy and Safety of Uproleselan Combined with Chemotherapy Vs. Chemotherapy Alone in Relapsed/Refractory Acute Myeloid Leukemia: Findings from an International Phase 3 Trial

2024· article· en· W4405042792 sur OpenAlexaff
Daniel J. DeAngelo, Andre C. Schuh, Brian A. Jonas, Pamela S. Becker, Anjali S. Advani, Geoffrey L. Uy, Janusz Krawczyk, Harry P. Erba, Gabriel N. Mannis, Chun Yew Fong, Florian Kuchenbauer, Mary‐Elizabeth M. Percival, Jane L. Liesveld, William Blum, Brenda Cooper, Alice S. Mims, Francesco Lanza, Jeroen J. W. M. Janssen, Juan Bergua, Tibor Kovacsovics, Norbert Vey, Martina V Hemmer, Gaetano Bonifacio, Edwin P. Rock, Pau Montesinos

Notice bibliographique

RevueBlood · 2024
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueAcute Myeloid Leukemia Research
Établissements canadiensBC Cancer AgencyUniversity Health Network
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMedicineChemotherapyChemotherapy regimenMyeloid leukemiaInternal medicineRefractory (planetary science)OncologyPhases of clinical researchBiology

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Introduction: Uproleselan (GMI-1271) is an E-selectin antagonist that disrupts AML cell survival pathways, overcomes chemotherapy resistance, and potentially deepens chemotherapy response. Phase 2 data demonstrated uproleselan efficacy in patients with relapsed/refractory (R/R) and in >60 yrs newly diagnosed (ND) acute myeloid leukemia (AML) (DeAngelo et al., Blood 2022). This Phase 3 international, randomized, double-blind, placebo (PBO)-controlled trial assessed uproleselan with chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone in R/R AML (NCT03616470). An NCTN sponsored trial (NCT03701308) in the ND population is ongoing. Methods: Eligibility included patients age 18-75 yrs, R/R patients with AML in first or second untreated relapse and fit for chemotherapy. Randomization was 1:1, stratified by age, disease status (primary refractory/early relapse ≤6 months, late relapse >6 months), and FAI or MEC chemotherapy. Uproleselan or PBO was given during induction and up to 3 consolidation cycles. The primary endpoint was overall survival. Key secondary endpoints included severe oral mucositis during induction, complete remission (CR), and remission (CR/CRh) rates. Overall, 388 patients were enrolled (N=385 dosed) in the trial at 59 sites in North America, Europe, and Australia. Due to fewer than expected death events, we report results of a time-based primary analysis (31March2024) with a median follow-up time of 37.9 months. Results: Treatment arms were well-balanced: median age, 58.0 (range 20-75); median number of prior lines of therapy, 1.0 (range 1-4); primary refractory cases, 33%; European LeukemiaNet 2017 (ELN) adverse risk, 41.5%. Median OS (mOS) was 13.0 months for uproleselan and 12.3 months for PBO (p=0.39; HR=0.89, 95% CI 0.69-1.15), with survival probabilities at 48 months for uproleselan and PBO of 34.1% and 25.5%, respectively. Rates of severe (Grade ≥3) oral mucositis during induction were equal across arms (7.2%) while CR and CR/CRh rates trended in favor of uproleselan (36.1% vs 33.5% [p=0.62] and 46.4% vs 41.2% [p=0.24]). Of patients achieving CR, a greater proportion receiving uproleselan achieved MRD negativity (67.1% vs 61.5 %). Post-treatment allogeneic stem cell transplant (allo-SCT) rates were comparable between arms (N=101, 52.1% vs N=99, 51.0%). In patients achieving allo-SCT, mOS was Not Reached (NR) on uproleselan vs 24.8 months in PBO arm (HR=0.59, 95% CI 0.38 - 0.91). Patients with primary refractory AML (N=128, 33%), a pre-specified subgroup, had mOS of 31.2 months on uproleselan (N=62) versus 10.1 months on PBO (N= 66) (HR=0.58; 95% CI 0.37-0.91). Survival in the PBO group is consistent with historical outcomes in this setting (Ferguson, 2016). Uproleselan survival benefit in primary refractory disease was agnostic to backbone chemotherapy (MEC= HR 0.68, 95% CI 0.34-1.38; FAI= HR 0.53, 95% CI 0.30-0.93). Complete response rates for primary refractory disease trended in favor of uproleselan over PBO (32.3% vs 27.3%). However, responses to uproleselan may potentially be deeper, as indicated by median duration of response (DoR) not being reached for primary refractory patients treated with uproleselan, compared to a median DoR of 12.7 months in the PBO arm (HR 0.26, 95% CI 0.09 - 0.75). Clinically meaningful activity was also seen in primary refractory patients who achieved MRD- status [uproleselan, N=22 (35.5%) vs. PBO, N=16 (24.2%)] (mOS: NR vs. 14.7 months, HR 0.07, 95% CI 0.02 - 0.35) or achieved allo-SCT [uproleselan, N=37 (59.7%) vs PBO, N=34 (51.5%)] (mOS: NR vs. 19.7 months, HR 0.34, 95% CI 0.17 - 0.69). Of patients transplanted, survival probabilities at 60 months for uproleselan and PBO were 57.5% vs 27.7%, respectively. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), Serious Adverse Events (SAEs), grade 3 or higher TEAEs were similar across study arms in both Intent to Treat (ITT) and primary refractory populations. There was no discernible added toxicity with uproleselan treatment over chemotherapy alone. Conclusions: Although this Phase 3 trial did not meet its primary OS endpoint for the ITT population, these clinical data provide compelling evidence of uproleselan efficacy in patients with primary refractory AML without additional toxicity. In primary refractory AML, a mOS of 31.2 months highlights the potential of uproleselan to significantly improve treatment outcomes in this high unmet medical need population.

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)0,003
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,002
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 enseignants0,005
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,016

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0030,002
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0020,002
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,001
Communication savante0,0010,001
Science ouverte0,0010,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,003
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0050,001

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 Opus0,012
Tête enseignante GPT0,305
Écart entre enseignants0,292 · 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

Citations2
Publié2024
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueBlood→Même sujetAcute Myeloid Leukemia Research→Travaux en français237 207→