MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2983230949 · doi:10.1182/blood-2019-124552

Efficacy and Safety of CPX-351 Versus 7+3 in a Phase 3 Exploratory Analysis in Patients with High-Risk/Secondary Acute Myeloid Leukemia (AML) with Prior Hypomethylating Agent Exposure Who Achieved Remission

2019· article· en· W2983230949 on OpenAlexaff
Tara L. Lin, Daniel H. Ryan, Ellen K. Ritchie, Stephen A. Strickland, Donna E. Hogge, Scott R. Solomon, Jonathan E. Kolitz, Gary J. Schiller, Matthew J. Wieduwilt, Robert J. Ryan, Stefan Faderl, Jörge E. Cortes

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Myeloid Leukemia Research
Canadian institutionsLeukemia & Lymphoma Society of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHypomethylating agentMedicineAzacitidineMyeloid leukemiaOncologyInternal medicineDecitabineLeukemiaPhases of clinical researchClinical trialBiologyDNA methylation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Patients (pts) with newly diagnosed, secondary AML (sAML) may have previously received hypomethylating agent (HMA) therapy for an antecedent hematologic malignancy (eg, myelodysplastic syndrome [MDS]). Outcomes for pts with MDS who progress following HMA therapy are typically poor, with remission rates <30% and median overall survival (OS) of ~6 months (Prébet T, et al. J ClinOncol. 2011; Jabbour E, et al. Cancer 2010). CPX-351 (Vyxeos®; daunorubicin and cytarabine liposome for injection), a dual-drug liposomal encapsulation of cytarabine [C] and daunorubicin [D] at a synergistic 5:1 molar ratio, is approved by the US FDA and the EMA for the treatment of adults with newly diagnosed therapy-related AML or AML with myelodysplasia-related changes. In a large randomized, open-label, multicenter, phase 3 study (NCT01696084) in older pts with newly diagnosed, high-risk/sAML, induction followed by consolidation with CPX-351 significantly improved OS (9.56 vs 5.95 months; hazard ratio [HR] = 0.69; 1-sided P = 0.003) versus conventional 7+3, with a safety profile comparable to that of 7+3. An exploratory subgroup analysis of the phase 3 study was performed to compare outcomes in pts with any prior HMA exposure who achieved complete remission (CR) or CR with incomplete neutrophil or platelet recovery (CRi) with CPX-351 versus 7+3. Methods: Pts were randomized 1:1 to receive 1-2 induction cycles with CPX-351 (100 units/m2 [C 100 mg/m2 + D 44 mg/m2] as a 90-minute infusion on Days 1, 3, and 5 [2nd induction: Days 1 and 3]) or 7+3 (C 100 mg/m2/day continuously for 7 days [2nd induction: 5 days] + D 60 mg/m2 on Days 1-3 [2nd induction: Days 1-2]). Pts achieving CR+CRi could receive up to 2 consolidation cycles with CPX-351 (65 units/m2 [C 65 mg/m2 + D 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 the treating physician. This exploratory subgroup analysis included pts with any prior HMA exposure who achieved CR+CRi to study treatment. Results: A total of 309 pts were enrolled in the study, including 133 (43%) pts who had received prior HMA therapy. Among pts with any prior HMA exposure, 23/62 (37%) receiving CPX-351 and 20/71 (28%) receiving 7+3 (odds ratio [OR] = 1.50 [95% CI: 0.73-3.12]) achieved CR+CRi and were included in this analysis. Baseline characteristics for these pts were generally balanced between treatment arms; 9% and 5% of pts in the CPX-351 and 7+3 arms, respectively, were classified as having therapy-related AML, 78% and 90% had antecedent MDS, and 13% and 5% had antecedent chronic myelomonocytic leukemia. In pts with any prior HMA exposure who achieved CR+CRi to CPX-351 or 7+3, median OS was longer with CPX-351 (14.72 vs 10.17 months; HR = 0.55 [95% CI: 0.26-1.15]; Figure 1). More of the pts with prior HMA exposure who achieved CR+CRi and received CPX-351 underwent HCT versus those who received 7+3 (57% vs 35%; relative risk = 1.39 [95% CI: 0.73-2.67]), and OS landmarked from the HCT date was longer with CPX-351 versus 7+3 (not reached vs 14.09 months; HR = 0.43 [95% CI: 0.12-1.51]; Figure 2). In pts without prior HMA exposure, 50/91 (55%) receiving CPX-351 and 32/85 (38%) receiving 7+3 (OR = 2.02 [95% CI: 1.11-3.69]) achieved CR+CRi; among those who achieved CR+CRi to CPX-351 versus 7+3, median OS was also longer with CPX-351 (26.32 vs 10.43 months). The most common treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) in pts with any prior HMA exposure who achieved CR+CRi were febrile neutropenia (CPX-351: 83%; 7+3: 75%), nausea (48%; 55%), fatigue (48%; 45%), diarrhea (43%; 70%), constipation (43%; 50%), peripheral edema (39%; 65%), and dizziness (13%; 50%). The most common grade ≥3 TEAEs were febrile neutropenia (CPX-351: 83%; 7+3: 75%) and fatigue (22%; 0%). The most common serious TEAEs were febrile neutropenia (CPX-351: 13%; 7+3: 10%), ejection fraction decreased (9%; 10%), and subdural hemorrhage (0%; 10%). There was no early mortality by Day 60 in either arm. Conclusions: Pts with prior HMA exposure for an antecedent hematologic malignancy typically have poor outcomes and are a challenging subgroup of AML. Among pts in this study who had any prior HMA exposure and achieved CR+CRi, CPX-351 increased median OS, the rate of HCT, and median OS landmarked from the HCT date versus 7+3. The safety profile for CPX-351 in this subgroup was consistent with the overall study population and the known safety profile of 7+3. Disclosures Lin: Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria; Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Ryan:University of Rochester: Patents & Royalties; AbbVie: Equity Ownership. Ritchie:Ariad, Celgene, Incyte, Novartis: Speakers Bureau; AStella, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Novartis, NS Pharma, Pfizer: Research Funding; Celgene, Novartis: Other: travel support; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Genentech: Other: Advisory board; Tolero: Other: Advisory board; agios: Other: Advisory board; Pfizer: Other: Advisory board, travel support; Celgene: Other: Advisory board; Celgene, Incyte, Novartis, Pfizer: Consultancy. Strickland:Astellas Pharma: Consultancy; Sunesis Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy; Jazz: Consultancy; Kite: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy. Kolitz:Astellas: Research Funding; Boeringer-Ingelheim: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding. Schiller:Astellas: Research Funding; Amgen: Other, Research Funding; Genzyme: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; J&J: Research Funding; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Research Funding; Karyopharm: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Onconova: Research Funding; Pfizer Pharmaceuticals: Equity Ownership, Research Funding; Sangamo Therapeutics: Research Funding; FujiFilm: Research Funding; Eli Lilly and Company: Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Research Funding; Constellation Pharmaceutical: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Agios: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Biomed Valley Discoveries: Research Funding; Bristol Myer Squibb: Research Funding. Wieduwilt:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Daiichi Sankyo: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Reata Pharmaceuticals: Equity Ownership; Amgen, Leadiant, Merck, Servier: Research Funding. Ryan:Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Employment, Equity Ownership. Faderl:Jazz Pharmaceutics: Employment, Equity Ownership. Cortes:Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; Forma Therapeutics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Immunogen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Merus: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Astellas Pharma: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; BiolineRx: Consultancy; Sun Pharma: Research Funding; Biopath Holdings: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.247 · 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

Citations3
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBloodSame topicAcute Myeloid Leukemia ResearchFrench-language works237,207