MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389258981 · doi:10.1182/blood-2023-178722

Real-World Evaluation of Treatment Patterns and Clinical Outcomes Among Patients with Chronic Myeloid Leukemia in Chronic Phase (CML-CP) Treated with Asciminib in US Clinical Practice

2023· article· en· W4389258981 on OpenAlexaff
Ehab Atallah, David Wei, Dominick Latrémouille-Viau, Carmine Rossi, Andrea Damon, Germano Ferreira, Annie Guérin, Kejal Jadhav

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChronic Myeloid Leukemia Treatments
Canadian institutionsGroup for Research in Decision Analysis
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDiscontinuationDasatinibInternal medicineImatinib mesylateBosutinibPonatinibOncologyMyeloid leukemiaClinical trialPhiladelphia chromosomeImatinibChromosomal translocationBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) are the mainstay of treatment for CML-CP. Asciminib, a first-in-class inhibitor to Specifically Target the ABL Myristoyl Pocket (STAMP), was FDA-approved on 10/29/2021 for the treatment of adult patients with Philadelphia chromosome-positive (Ph+) CML-CP, previously treated with two or more TKIs or Ph+ CML-CP with the T315I mutation. This study described treatment patterns and real-world clinical outcomes of asciminib in the US. Methods: Data through 11/30/2022 from adult patients with Ph+ CML-CP who initiated asciminib were obtained from the Flatiron Health oncology electronic health record (EHR)-derived de-identified database. Patients who initiated asciminib after ≥2 previous TKIs, without a stem-cell transplant prior to asciminib, and without the T315I mutation, were included in the overall cohort. Time-to-treatment discontinuation and molecular response (MR; time-to-BCR::ABL1 ≤0.1% and time-to-BCR::ABL1 ≤1%, separately) were evaluated from asciminib initiation (index date) using Kaplan-Meier analyses overall, and by the number of TKIs used pre-index (2 previous TKIs, and ≥3 previous TKIs). Patients were required to have ≥1 MR test post-index to be included in the MR assessment; a sensitivity analysis was conducted excluding patients with BCR::ABL1 ≤0.1% or better (≤1% or better) for time-to-BCR::ABL1 ≤0.1% (time-to-BCR:ABL1 ≤1%), as evaluated in the ASCEMBL trial. Results: Overall,97 patients with Ph+ CML-CP initiated asciminib (median age: 63 years, 50.5% female, 64.9% White, 84.8% ECOG 0-1, 61.9% from community-based practices, median follow-up of 6 months post-index). Other malignancies (19.6%), chronic pulmonary disease (18.6%), renal disease (18.6%), and congestive heart failure (16.5%) were the most prevalent pre-index comorbidities. The distribution of last MR in the 3 months pre-index was: 24.7% BCR::ABL1 >10%, 18.6% BCR::ABL1 ≤10% and >1%, 12.4% BCR::ABL1 ≤1% and >0.1%, 12.4% BCR::ABL1 ≤0.1% and >0.01%, and 8.2% BCR::ABL1 ≤0.01% (23.7% not tested/documented). Forty-six patients (47.4%) initiated asciminib after 2 previous TKIs, 24 (24.7%) after 3 TKIs, and the remainder after ≥4 previous TKIs (27.8%). Most patients (78.4%) were prescribed 80 mg (40.2% once daily, 38.1% 40 mg twice a day) at treatment initiation. Use of TKIs prior to asciminib included dasatinib (85.6%), imatinib (63.9%), bosutinib (61.9%), nilotinib (53.6%), and ponatinib (15.5%). Treatment sequences among patients who initiated asciminib after 2 previous TKIs (n=46) are presented in Figure 1. Overall (n=97), persistence rates were 85.7% by 12-weeks (2 previous TKIs: 89.8%; ≥3 previous TKIs: 82.5%) and 78.1% by 24-weeks (2 previous TKIs: 81.8%; ≥3 previous TKIs: 75.3%) post-index. Among patients with ≥1 MR test post-index (n=70), 31.3% (2 previous TKIs: 43.3%; ≥3 previous TKIs: 21.6%) and 49.7% (2 previous TKIs: 71.5%; ≥3 previous TKIs: 33.4%) achieved or maintained BCR::ABL1 ≤0.1% by 12- and 24-weeks, respectively. In addition, 51.3% (2 previous TKIs: 68.7%; ≥3 previous TKIs: 37.2%) and 64.2% (2 previous TKIs: 79.7%; ≥3 previous TKIs: 51.4%) achieved or maintained BCR::ABL1 ≤1% by 12- and 24-weeks, respectively. For patients without BCR::ABL1 ≤0.1% prior to asciminib (n=52; Figure 2), 14.6% (2 previous TKIs: 20.6%; ≥3 previous TKIs: 10.4%) and 32.9% (2 previous TKIs: 56.7%; ≥3 previous TKIs: 17.9%) achieved BCR::ABL1 ≤0.1% by 12- and 24-weeks, respectively, with a median time of 30.7 weeks (2 previous TKIs: 23.0 weeks; ≥3 previous TKIs: 38.1 weeks). For patients without BCR::ABL1 ≤1% prior to asciminib (n=43), 35.6% (2 previous TKIs: 61.9%; ≥3 previous TKIs: 21.9%) and 46.3% (2 previous TKIs: 61.9%; ≥3 previous TKIs: 37.2%) achieved BCR::ABL1 ≤1% by 12- and 24-weeks, respectively, with a median time of 24.6 weeks (2 previous TKIs: 11.3 weeks; ≥3 previous TKIs: 26.9 weeks). Conclusion: This is the first real-world study describing treatment patterns and clinical outcomes among patients with Ph+ CML-CP treated with asciminib in the US. The findings of real-world treatment efficacy based on achieving BCR::ABL1 ≤0.1% were consistent with the ASCEMBL trial. Patients who initiated asciminib after 2 previous TKIs had higher persistence and treatment response rates than those initiated on asciminib after ≥3 previous TKIs. Further studies are warranted to continuously demonstrate the effectiveness of asciminib in a real-world setting.

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)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.398
Teacher spread0.345 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBloodSame topicChronic Myeloid Leukemia TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207