MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2911644503 · doi:10.1182/blood-2018-99-112557

The Impact of Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation on Survival: An Exploratory Analysis of a Phase 3 Study of CPX-351 Versus 7+3 in Older Patients with Newly Diagnosed, High-Risk/Secondary AML

2018· article· en· W2911644503 on OpenAlexaff
Tara L. Lin, 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, Daniel H. Ryan, Robert J. Ryan, Michael Chiarella, Arthur C. Louie, Geoffrey L. Uy

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Myeloid Leukemia Research
Canadian institutionsLeukemia & Lymphoma Society of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInternal medicineCytarabineClinical endpointTransplantationRegimenChemotherapy regimenPhases of clinical researchGastroenterologyDaunorubicinHematopoietic stem cell transplantationChemotherapySurgeryOncologyRandomized controlled trial

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: Outcomes for the treatment of AML with conventional induction chemotherapy (eg, 7+3 cytarabine/daunorubicin regimen) are poor for older adults and those with high-risk/secondary AML. CPX-351 (Vyxeos®), a dual-drug liposomal encapsulation of cytarabine and daunorubicin in a synergistic ratio, was approved by the US FDA in 2017 for the treatment of adults with newly diagnosed, therapy-related AML or AML with myelodysplasia-related changes and is currently under review by the EMA. A large randomized, open-label, multicenter, phase 3 study (ClinicalTrials.gov #NCT01696084) evaluated the efficacy and safety of CPX-351 versus conventional 7+3 chemotherapy in adults aged 60-75 y with newly diagnosed, high-risk/secondary AML (Lancet JE, et al. J Clin Oncol. 2018). In this study, CPX-351 significantly improved median overall survival (OS; primary endpoint) versus 7+3 (9.56 vs 5.95 mo; HR = 0.69 [95% CI: 0.52-0.90]; 1-sided P = 0.003), as well as event-free survival (EFS; 2.53 vs 1.31 mo; HR = 0.74 [95% CI: 0.58-0.96]; 2-sided P = 0.021). CPX-351 was also associated with higher rates of complete remission (CR; 37.3% vs 25.6%; 2-sided P = 0.040) and CR or CR with incomplete platelet or neutrophil recovery (CR+CRi; 47.7% vs 33.3%; 2-sided P = 0.016) versus 7+3, which likely contributed to the higher rate of patients undergoing hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) with CPX-351 (34.0% vs 25.0%; 2-sided P = 0.098). HCT is a potentially curative therapy, and the higher rate of HCT observed in the CPX-351 arm could therefore have an impact on long-term survival outcomes. To better understand the contribution of HCT and treatment with CPX-351 versus 7+3 to survival, exploratory analyses using a time-dependent proportional hazards model were performed to evaluate survival in patients who underwent HCT and assess the impact of treatment with CPX-351 versus 7+3 on survival independent of HCT status. Methods: Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive up to 2 induction cycles 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/d continuously for 7 d [2nd induction: 5 d] + daunorubicin 60 mg/m2 on Days 1-3 [2nd induction: Days 1-2]). Patients achieving CR or 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). Patients could receive HCT at the discretion of the treating physician. Results: A total of 309 patients were enrolled in the study (CPX-351: n = 153; 7+3: n = 156), and baseline characteristics were balanced between arms. A total of 52 (34.0%) patients in the CPX-351 arm and 39 (25.0%) in the 7+3 arm underwent HCT; most were 60-69 y of age (CPX-351: 69.2%; 7+3: 84.6%), had ECOG performance status ≤1 (CPX-351: 92.3%; 7+3: 94.9%), and were in CR (CPX-351: 57.7%; 7+3: 48.7%) or CRi (CPX-351: 19.2%; 7+3: 12.8%). Median time to HCT from first study dose was similar with CPX-351 (114.5 d) and 7+3 (113.0 d). Similar to the primary endpoint analysis, median OS landmarked from the time of HCT was significantly improved with CPX-351 versus 7+3 (not reached vs 10.25 mo; HR = 0.46 [95% CI: 0.24-0.89]). Further, in the current exploratory analyses in which HCT was treated as a time-dependent covariate, the HRs remained strongly in favor of CPX-351 versus 7+3 for OS (HR = 0.71) and EFS (HR = 0.74), with the upper bounds of the 95% CIs below 1.0 (Table). These results suggest CPX-351 may be associated with prolonged OS and EFS that is independent of HCT. The adverse event profile of CPX-351 was generally consistent with the known safety profile of conventional 7+3. Grade 3-5 adverse events reported in ≥10% of patients in the CPX-351 or 7+3 cohorts included febrile neutropenia (68.0% vs 70.9%), pneumonia (19.6% vs 14.6%), and hypoxia (13.1% vs 15.2%). Early mortality rates with CPX-351 and 7+3, respectively, were 5.9% and 10.6% at Day 30 and 13.7% and 21.2% at Day 60. Conclusions: Treatment with CPX-351 was associated with significantly longer median OS and EFS, as well as a higher proportion of patients achieving remission and undergoing HCT, compared with conventional 7+3 chemotherapy in this population of older patients with newly diagnosed, high-risk/secondary AML. Further, while it is expected that HCT had a positive impact on survival in this study, exploratory analyses suggest that CPX-351 produced positive OS and EFS outcomes independent of HCT. Disclosures Lin: Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria. Cortes:Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Research Funding; Astellas Pharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding; Arog: Research Funding. Ritchie:NS Pharma: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; ARIAD Pharmaceuticals: Speakers Bureau; Astellas Pharma: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding. 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: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; Sunesis Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Research Funding. 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:Leadiant: Research Funding; Reata Pharmaceuticals: Equity Ownership; Merck: Research Funding; Shire: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Ryan:University of Rochester: Patents & Royalties; AbbVie: Equity Ownership. Ryan:Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Employment, Other: Stock and stock options. Chiarella:Celator/Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Employment, Equity Ownership. Louie:Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Employment, Equity Ownership, Patents & Royalties. Uy:GlycoMimetics: Consultancy; Curis: Consultancy.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.004
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.294 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNon-randomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBloodSame topicAcute Myeloid Leukemia ResearchFrench-language works237,207