MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405038834 · doi:10.1182/blood-2024-201022

ASC4REAL: Efficacy and Tolerability Comparison between Ascembl Study, a Phase 3 Randomized Clinical Trial (RCT), and Consolidated Real-World (RW) Evidence with Asciminib in CML Patients Beyond 2 TKIs

2024· article· en· W4405038834 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Anchit Khanna, Hannah Small, Dhamend Lutchman, Gabriel Marquez, Daisy Yang, Kejal Jadhav

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChronic Myeloid Leukemia Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRandomized controlled trialTolerabilityMedicineInternal medicineAdverse effect

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Despite advancements in managing chronic myeloid leukemia (CML), there are limited effective treatment options available in later lines of therapy. With each successive line of treatment, the rates of treatment failure increase, and sequential tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) therapy is linked to higher resistance. It is worth noting that most TKIs currently used in clinical practice target the ATP binding site, which may lead to off-target effects and long-term tolerability issues. ASCEMBL is a phase 3 randomized controlled trial (RCT) evaluating the efficacy of asciminib (ASC), a novel allosteric TKI that targets the myristoyl pocket, in CML patients who have received two prior TKIs. While there is emerging efficacy and safety data for ASC, the limited number of patients in individual ASC real-world (RW) studies hampers a robust comparison with larger phase 3 RCTs. The data presented here builds upon previous efforts to aggregate RW evidence from studies conducted in multiple countries (Italy, Spain, the Netherlands, Australia, Russia, the United Kingdom, and Canada). This analysis expands the dataset to include US RW evidence as well as additional patient accrual and longer follow-up times in several of the original studies to contextualize and generalize the results of the ASCEMBL study. Methods: A total of 10 RW studies were included in this analysis, with a total of 421 CML patients that received ASC after 2 or more prior TKIs. 9 of the RW studies were previously identified with a systematic literature search conducted in May 2023. In this previous search, data was extracted from published or publicly presented RW studies of patients that received ASC after 2 or more prior TKIs, and RW studies that had fewer than 10 patients were excluded. The 10th RW study (n=97), using US RW data, was presented following the previous search. Where updated data for the original 9 studies was published or publicly presented prior to July 2024, that updated data was used in this analysis. Data in the RW studies meeting the analysis criteria was generated during managed access programs or included from Flatiron Health's nationwide US electronic health record-derived de-identified database. The RW studies had a mean sample size of 42 patients, with a range of 20 to 97 patients. Key endpoints from the RW studies were compared to the ASCEMBL study (n=157), including major molecular response (MMR) rates, deep molecular response (DMR) rates, reason for ASC discontinuation, and adverse event occurrence. Data on patient MMR (n=393) and DMR (n=343) was available for a subset of the total RW patient population. DMR was operationalized as either MR4 (≤0.01% BCR::ABL1) or as MR4.5 (≤0.0032% BCR::ABL1) in the RW studies and as MR4 in the RCT. Results: The average age of CML patients was slightly higher in the RW studies (59 years) than in the RCT (52 years). Importantly, compared to the RCT, RW studies showed similar or higher efficacy based on MMR and DMR rates, achieved in shorter time. RW studies reported a mean of 52% of patients achieving MMR (range: 37-70%) at a median 13 months (range: ≤12-24 months), and RCT reported 38% of patients achieving MMR at 22 months. RW studies reported a mean of 32% of patients achieving DMR (range: 16-70%) at a median 13 months (range: ≤12-24 months), and RCT reported 17% of patients achieving DMR at 22 months. Rate of discontinuation of ASC was comparable or lower in the RW setting. For discontinuation due to intolerance, RW studies reported a mean of 9% (range: 0-16%), and RCT reported 8%. For discontinuation due to resistance, RW studies reported a mean of 12% (range: 6-23%), and RCT reported 24%. Similarly, some adverse events, specifically thrombocytopenia and arterial occlusive events, were less frequent in the RW settings, while some such as myalgia and muscle spasms were slightly higher in the RW setting when compared with the RCT. Conclusions: The aggregated RW evidence data across varied global contexts demonstrates asciminib is an effective and tolerable TKI for CML patients who have received two or more prior TKIs in the RW setting, supporting the results of the ASCEMBL RCT. Furthermore, the similarity of the RW results to the RCT results demonstrates the generalizability of the ASCEMBL RCT outcomes, indicating external validity despite the varying country and age contexts in the RW studies.

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)0.026
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.027
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.137

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0260.027
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.007
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0180.001

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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.430
Teacher spread0.351 · 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBloodSame topicChronic Myeloid Leukemia TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207