MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4405041412 · doi:10.1182/blood-2024-202069

Intensive Chemotherapy Vs. Azacitidine + Venetoclax for AML with Secondary Mutations

2024· article· en· W4405041412 on OpenAlexaff
Elliot Smith, Akhil Rajendra Kurup, Eshetu G. Atenafu, Aniket Bankar, Steven M. Chan, Marta Davidson, Vikas Gupta, Mark D. Minden, Guillaume Richard‐Carpentier, Aaron D. Schimmer, Andre C. Schuh, Hassan Sibai, Karen Yee, Dawn Maze

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Myeloid Leukemia Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health NetworkPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVenetoclaxAzacitidineChemotherapy regimenMedicineInternal medicineChemotherapyOncologyLeukemiaGeneticsBiologyChronic lymphocytic leukemiaDNA methylationGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction In AML, secondary mutations (sMut) represent a group of mutations with a strong association with clinically-defined secondary AML (sAML). AML with sMut have been associated with inferior survival outcomes and have been incorporated into the updated ELN 2022 guidelines to reflect high-risk disease as AML with myelodysplasia-related gene mutations (AML-MR). Prior studies have demonstrated improved survival outcomes within AML-MR with the utilization of hypomethylating agents and venetoclax (HMA+Ven) versus hypomethylating agent monotherapy. At present, treatment-specific outcomes, including the benefit of using intensive chemotherapy (IC) versus venetoclax-based regimens, within this cohort remain understudied. Methods This study included patients diagnosed with AML harbouring sMut, first seen at PMCC from 1st Jan 2015 to April 2023. Patients were excluded from the analysis if the NGS data was unavailable or if it was performed >6 months from time of diagnosis. sMut included mutations within one or more of the following genes: SRSF2, SF3B1, U2AF1, ZRSR2, ASXL1, EZH2, BCOR, or STAG2. Non-intensive therapy included patients treated with HMA monotherapy and venetoclax-based regimens in the first line setting. The primary objective was to compare IC with with venetoclax-based regimens within AML with sMut. A key secondary objective was to evaluate the role of allogeneic hematopoetic stem cell transplant (HSCT) in patients with AML with sMut. OS was calculated from date of AML diagnosis to date of last known follow up or date of death. Kaplan-Meier survival curves were generated for OS, and differences were tested using the log-rank test. Results A total of 665 patients were eligible for inclusion in this study with, a median follow-up of 12.39 (0.03, 108.3) months. 418 (63%) patients had de novo AML, 186 (30%) patients had an antecedent hematologic malignancy, and 51 (8%) AML had a history of cytotoxic therapy. Of the total study population, 364 (68%) patients received IC,168 (32%) patients received non-intensive chemotherapy of which 87 (17%) received HMA+Ven. Patients treated with HMA+Ven were significantly older (76.1 vs 62.7, p=<0.0001) and were less likely to have an NPM1 mutation (14% vs 17%, p=0.047). There was no significant difference in cytogenetic risk (p=0.45), TP53 status (p=0.56), or FLT3-ITD status (p=0.05). Patients with de novo AML had improved OS compared to patients with sAML and tAML with sMut (3-year OS 39.5% vs 19.9% vs 23.2%, p= <0.0001). The primary analysis of IC vs. HMA-Ven was restricted to patients 70 years old and younger to minimize bias by including only patients who would theoretically be eligible for treatment with curative intent. When comparing these patients with newly diagnosed AML with sMut who were 70 years old at diagnosis or younger, there was no significant difference in OS between those who received upfront IC vs. HMA-Ven (3-year OS 52.8% vs 48.9%, p=0.25).Among patients less than 70 years old at diagnosis who received IC, patients who underwent HSCT had significantly improved OS compared to those who did not undergo HSCT (p= <0.0001). There was no statistically significant difference in OS between patients who received IC versus HMA+Ven prior to transplant (p=0.0756). In multivariable analysis (MVA), NPM1 mutation was associated with improved OS (aHR 0.63 [0.43, 0.92]). Patients who did not undergo HSCT (aHR 3.13 [2.35, 4.18]), had sAML (aHR 1.32, [1.01, 1.73]), tAML (aHR 1.52 [1.01, 2.30]), or high-risk cytogenetics (aHR 3.03, [1.29, 7.13]) had inferior OS in MVA. There was no significant difference in OS in patients receiving IC versus HMA+Ven (p=0.055) after adjustment for confounding variables. Conclusions AML-MR represents a novel, high-risk entity with recent introduction into ICC and WHO guidelines and has been associated with inferior survival outcomes emphasizing the importance of investigating treatment-specific outcomes. When comparing IC to HMA+Ven in patients with AML and sMut up to the age of 70 years, there was no significant improvement in OS. We also found that patients with AML and sMUT who received HSCT had improved OS compared to those treated with IC alone. A limitation of this study includes potential bias from clinical factors including comorbidities and frailty that may have influenced treatment candidacy and will be addressed in future studies including matched-cohort analyses.

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)0.001
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 score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.280 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBlood→Same topicAcute Myeloid Leukemia Research→French-language works237,207→