MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3211442768 · doi:10.1182/blood-2021-147593

Outcomes for Patients with Late-Stage Mutant-<i>IDH2</i> (m <i>IDH2</i>) Relapsed/Refractory Acute Myeloid Leukemia (R/R AML) Treated with Enasidenib Vs Other Lower-Intensity Therapies in the Randomized, Phase 3 IDHentify Trial

2021· article· en· W3211442768 on OpenAlexaff
Courtney D. DiNardo, Pau Montesinos, Andre C. Schuh, Cristina Papayannidis, Paresh Vyas, Andrew H. Wei, Amer M. Zeidan, Iryna Bluemmert, Xin Yu, Maroof Hasan, Patricia Martin‐Regueira, Stéphane de Botton

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicProtein Degradation and Inhibitors
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIDH2Myeloid leukemiaRefractory (planetary science)MedicineStage (stratigraphy)Internal medicineOncologyLeukemiaMutantCancer researchIDH1BiologyGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: Prognosis is dismal for older patients (pts) with R/R AML, especially if multiple lines of AML treatment (Tx) have failed. Attaining response is more difficult after each Tx failure, and many pts cannot tolerate high-intensity salvage chemotherapy regimens. IDH2 mutations occur in ~8-19% of pts with AML. ENA is an oral IDH2 inhibitor approved for Tx of adult pts with m IDH2 R/R AML. The phase 3, randomized IDHentify trial compared ENA monotherapy vs. conventional care regimens (CCR)-intermediate-dose cytarabine (IDAC), low-dose cytarabine (LDAC), azacitidine (AZA), or best supportive care (BSC) only-in older pts with late-stage m IDH2 R/R AML who had received multiple prior AML Tx. Reported here are clinical outcomes for pts in IDHentify who were preselected to one of the lower-intensity CCR options (LDAC, AZA, or BSC only) before randomization to ENA or CCR. Methods: This international, multicenter, open-label trial enrolled pts aged ≥60 yrs with ECOG PS ≤2 and m IDH2 AML R/R to 2-3 prior AML Tx. Before randomization, pts were preselected to AZA 75 mg/m 2/day (d) ×7d, IDAC 0.5-1.5 g/m 2 ×3-6d, LDAC 20 mg BID ×10d, or BSC only. Pts were then randomized 1:1 to receive ENA (100 mg QD) or CCR in repeated 28d Tx cycles; pts randomized to CCR received their preselected Tx. All pts could receive BSC. These post hoc analyses include pts preselected to lower-intensity AZA, LDAC, or BSC only. Endpoints included overall response rate (ORR: complete remission [CR], CR with incomplete recovery [CRi/CRp], partial response [PR], or morphologic leukemia-free state [MLFS], per IWG 2003 AML response criteria), rates of hematologic improvement (HI) and transfusion independence (TI) (IWG 2006 MDS criteria), overall survival (OS), event-free survival (EFS), and time to Tx failure (TTF). OS was assessed in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population and among efficacy-evaluable (E-E) pts who received ≥1 study drug dose and had ≥1 response evaluation on-Tx. Results: In all, 267 (84%) of 319 enrolled pts were preselected to a lower-intensity Tx regimen and then randomized 1:1 to receive ENA (n = 139) or their preselected CCR (n = 128: AZA 69, LDAC 37, BSC 22). At data cutoff (17-Mar 2020), 10 ENA pts and 4 CCR pts continued to receive their assigned Tx. Median Tx durations were 143d (range 3-1270) in the ENA arm and 49d (1-1166) in the CCR arm; 15 CCR pts (12%) and 1 ENA pt discontinued before receiving assigned Tx. After discontinuing Tx, 43 ENA pts (31%) and 52 CCR pts (41%) received subsequent AML Tx, including 12 CCR pts (9%) who received commercially available ENA. Baseline (BL) characteristics were generally similar between Tx arms. Median age overall was 72 yrs (range 60-86), 80% of pts had received 2 prior AML Tx, 61% had ELN adverse-risk AML, 41% had primary refractory AML (ie, never attained CR/CRi/CRp), and 63% and 51% of pts were RBC and platelet transfusion-dependent (TD), respectively. Among all pts preselected to a lower-intensity Tx (ITT), ORR was substantially greater with ENA vs CCR (41% vs 11%, respectively), as were rates of CR (26% vs 3%) and HI (41% vs 13%) (P &amp;lt; 0.001, all comparisons) (Table), and proportionally more pts in the ENA arm achieved or sustained RBC and platelet TI (Table). OS was prolonged with ENA vs CCR (HR 0.74 [95% CI 0.56, 0.97]; P = 0.029), with a late separation of the curves after median OS had been reached (median OS 6.8 vs 6.2 mo, respectively), and 1-yr survival rates were 41% vs 26% (∆15.0% [3.4%, 26.6%]). Among E-E pts (ENA, n = 133; CCR, n = 110), OS was improved with ENA (HR 0.70 [0.53, 0.93]; P = 0.013): median OS was 6.9 mo, vs 5.7 mo with CCR. EFS and TTF in the ITT population were also prolonged with ENA vs CCR (Table). The safety of ENA in this pt subgroup was similar to that for all ENA-randomized pts and consistent with previous findings (Stein 2019). ENA-related differentiation syndrome occurred in 13% of pts and hyperbilirubinemia in 26% of pts. Conclusions: In pts with late-stage m IDH2 R/R AML, ENA was associated with clinically meaningful improvements in morphologic response, HI, RBC and platelet TI, and survival compared with conventional lower-intensity Tx options. OS outcomes were potentially confounded by the substantial number of pts randomized to CCR who did not receive Tx or discontinued Tx early, and by extensive use of subsequent Tx (including ENA) during follow-up. These clinical benefits support use of ENA as an appropriate oral outpatient Tx for pts with m IDH2 R/R AML who are not candidates for intensive therapies. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures DiNardo: Forma: Honoraria, Research Funding; ImmuneOnc: Honoraria, Research Funding; Notable Labs: Current holder of stock options in a privately-held company, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Foghorn: Honoraria, Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Research Funding; GlaxoSmithKline: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; AbbVie: Consultancy, Research Funding; Agios/Servier: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene, a Bristol Myers Squibb company: Honoraria, Research Funding. Montesinos: Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Sanofi: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Agios: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Karyopharm: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Tolero Pharmaceutical: Consultancy; Stemline/Menarini: Consultancy; Forma Therapeutics: Consultancy; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Teva: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Glycomimetics: Consultancy; AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Astellas Pharma, Inc.: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Advisory board, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Schuh: Kite/Gilead: Research Funding; GlycoMimetics: Research Funding; Servier: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Agios: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Pfizer: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Astellas: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; AbbVie: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Jazz: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Teva: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Papayannidis: AbbVie: Honoraria; Astellas: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria. Vyas: AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; Daiichi Sankyo: Honoraria; Jazz: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria; Astellas: Consultancy, Honoraria; Gilead: Honoraria; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria. Wei: Novartis, Celgene, AbbVie, Servier, AstraZeneca, and Amgen: Research Funding; Novartis, Janssen, Amgen, Roche, Pfizer, Abbvie, Servier, BMS, Macrogenics, Agios, Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Astellas: Honoraria. Zeidan: Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy; Epizyme: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy, Other: Clinical Trial Committees; Kura: Consultancy, Other: Clinical Trial Committees; AbbVie: Consultancy, Other: Clinical Trial Committees, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Other: Clinical Trial Committees, Research Funding; Geron: Other: Clinical Trial Committees; ADC Therapeutics: Research Funding; Acceleron: Consultancy, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Boehringer Ingelheim: Consultancy, Research Funding; BioCryst: Other: Clinical Trial Committees; Novartis: Consultancy, Other: Clinical Trial Committees, Travel support, Research Funding; Cardiff Oncology: Consultancy, Other: Travel support, Research Funding; BeyondSpring: Consultancy; Pfizer: Other: Travel support, Research Funding; Agios: Consultancy; Jazz: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Ionis: Consultancy; Aprea: Consultancy, Research Funding; Astellas: Consultancy; Loxo Oncology: Consultancy, Other: Clinical Trial Committees; Jasper: Consultancy; Astex: Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy, Research Funding. Bluemmert: Bristol Myers Squibb: Current Employment. Yu: Bristol Myers Squibb: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Hasan: Bristol Myers Squibb: Cu

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.179
Threshold uncertainty score0.875

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.231 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized 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

Citations10
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBloodSame topicProtein Degradation and InhibitorsFrench-language works237,207