MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405039612 · doi:10.1182/blood-2024-193201

Treatment with Asciminib As a Second Line after One Prior Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitor (TKI) in Patients with Chronic-Phase Chronic Myeloid Leukemia (CML-CP) - a Chart Review Study in the United States

2024· review· en· W4405039612 on OpenAlexaff
Ehab Atallah, Islam Sadek, David Wei, Dominick Latrémouille-Viau, Carmine Rossi, Andrea Damon, Daisy Yang, Remi Bellefleur, Annie Guérin, Kejal Jadhav

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChronic Myeloid Leukemia Treatments
Canadian institutionsGroup for Research in Decision Analysis
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMyeloid leukemiaDasatinibMedicineNilotinibTyrosine-kinase inhibitorBosutinibInternal medicineImatinibOncologyCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: In CML-CP, first-line treatment switching due to intolerance or resistance is frequent with ATP-competitive TKIs and patients typically experience poor response rates in second-line and beyond. Treatments that optimize tolerability and efficacy are needed to allow patients to stay on therapy and achieve treatment goals. Asciminib, an ABL/BCR::ABL1 TKI targeting the ABL myristoyl pocket is approved for patients with CML-CP previously treated with ≥2 TKIs or with the T315I mutation, recently demonstrated positive phase 3 study results in newly diagnosed CML (ASC4FIRST), and is being assessed in clinical trial of patients previously treated with one TKI (ASC2ESCALATE). Here we describe real-world clinical outcomes of patients treated with asciminib after one prior TKI in the US. Methods: In this retrospective panel-based chart review study, eligible oncologists/hematologists from the US with experience treating patients with CML reported de-identified data via an online case report form from February to April 2024. Eligible adult patients with CML-CP did not have the T315I mutation and initiated asciminib (index) between January 2022 and June 2023 after one prior TKI. Time to treatment discontinuation, and time to BCR::ABL1 ≤0.1% (MR3 or better; major molecular response) and BCR::ABL1 ≤1% (MR2 or better) were measured using Kaplan-Meier analyses. BCR::ABL ≤0.01% (MR4 or better, including undetectable; deep molecular response) as best response, progression to accelerated phase/blast crisis (AP/BC), and adverse events (AEs; any grades) were also assessed. Subgroup analyses were conducted in patients who discontinued the first TKI due to resistance/suboptimal response, and by first- or second-generation (1G/2G) TKI as first TKI. Results: A total of 149 eligible patient charts reported by 51 physicians (49.0% community, 51.0% academic; 82.4% ≥10 years of practice) were reviewed. The 149 patients had median age 63.0 years and were 45.0% female, 56.4% White, 24.2% Black/African American, and 15.4% Hispanic/Latino. At CML diagnosis, 65.8% had an intermediate-risk and 12.8% a high-risk Sokal score, and 11.4% had ECOG performance score ≥2. Patients received imatinib (48.3%), dasatinib (38.9%), nilotinib (9.4%), or bosutinib (3.4%) as first TKI, with a median treatment duration of 52.1 weeks. The primary reason for first TKI discontinuation included resistance (43.6%), suboptimal response (34.9%), and intolerance/management of adverse events (4.7%). Asciminib was initiated at 40 mg twice daily by 42.3% and 80 mg once daily by 43.6% of patients. By 48 weeks post index, 93.3% of patients remained on asciminib (resistance/suboptimal response to first TKI: 93.7%; 1G TKI as first TKI: 92.9%; 2G TKI as first TKI: 93.7%). Median time to MR3 or better was 35.0 weeks and the median time to MR2 or better was 21.4 weeks. By 48 weeks post index, 68.2% of patients achieved or maintained MR3 or better (resistance/suboptimal response to first TKI: 70.2%; 1G TKI as first TKI: 61.6%; 2G TKI as first TKI: 73.1%) and 87.8% of patients achieved or maintained MR2 or better (resistance/suboptimal response to first TKI: 92.6%; 1G TKI as first TKI: 86.0%; 2G TKI as first TKI: 88.9%). Over a median follow-up of 50.8 weeks, MR4 or better was achieved by 45.0% of patients as best response on asciminib (resistance/suboptimal response to first TKI: 49.5%; 1G TKI as first TKI: 40.3%; 2G TKI as first TKI: 49.4%), and no patients were observed to progress to AP/BC post index. Constitutional AEs including fatigue (8.7%), headache (4.7%), rash (3.4%) and abdominal pain (2.0%); gastrointestinal AEs including nausea (8.7%), diarrhea (5.4%) and vomiting (5.4%); and cytopenia (4.0%) were observed post index. Conclusions: This real-world study of asciminib demonstrated that over two-thirds of patients achieved or maintained MR3, and nine out of ten patients reached the key response milestone goal of MR2 by 48 weeks, despite inclusion of a majority with resistance/suboptimal response to a prior TKI. Deep molecular response was reported as the best response for nearly half of patients during the first year of treatment with asciminib. Low discontinuation rates, regardless of type of prior TKI used, and low frequency of AEs were observed post asciminib initiation. These results suggest that asciminib is well-tolerated and rapidly effective among patients with CML who received one prior TKI in the US clinical practice.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.290 · 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
GenreReview

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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBloodSame topicChronic Myeloid Leukemia TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207