BACKGROUND: Although many patients with chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) respond well to imatinib therapy, a significant proportion loses their initial response. Loss of response on imatinib is often because of BCR-ABL mutations. Dasatinib is a 325-fold more potent inhibitor of Bcr-Abl than imatinib and has been associated with high rates of durable responses in patients with CML in chronic phase (CP) after imatinib failure. METHODS: To determine the optimal time for initiating dasatinib after loss of response on imatinib, data from dasatinib trials in CML-CP were analyzed. Patients were grouped according to whether they received early intervention with dasatinib (ie, after cytogenetic recurrence on imatinib), rather than after both cytogenetic and hematologic recurrence. RESULTS: Overall, 72% of patients who received dasatinib after loss of a major cytogenetic response (MCyR) on imatinib achieved a complete cytogenetic response (CCyR) compared with 42% of patients who were treated after loss of both MCyR and complete hematologic response (CHR). Event-free survival (EFS) also was higher after earlier dasatinib treatment (24-month EFS rates: 89% after loss of MCyR on imatinib vs 29% after loss of both MCyR and CHR). Among patients who were treated after loss of CHR on imatinib with no prior MCyR, 26% achieved a CCyR with dasatinib, and the 24-month EFS rate was 64%. In all 3 groups, CCyR rates were similar in patients with or without pre-existing BCR-ABL mutations. CONCLUSIONS: The results of the current study suggested that optimal outcomes are achieved when dasatinib is administered early after imatinib resistance.
BACKGROUND: Although many patients with chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) respond well to imatinib therapy, a significant proportion loses their initial response. Loss of response on imatinib is often because of BCR-ABL mutations. Dasatinib is a 325-fold more potent inhibitor of Bcr-Abl than imatinib and has been associated with high rates of durable responses in patients with CML in chronic phase (CP) after imatinib failure. METHODS: To determine the optimal time for initiating dasatinib after loss of response on imatinib, data from dasatinib trials in CML-CP were analyzed. Patients were grouped according to whether they received early intervention with dasatinib (ie, after cytogenetic recurrence on imatinib), rather than after both cytogenetic and hematologic recurrence. RESULTS: Overall, 72% of patients who received dasatinib after loss of a major cytogenetic response (MCyR) on imatinib achieved a complete cytogenetic response (CCyR) compared with 42% of patients who were treated after loss of both MCyR and complete hematologic response (CHR). Event-free survival (EFS) also was higher after earlier dasatinib treatment (24-month EFS rates: 89% after loss of MCyR on imatinib vs 29% after loss of both MCyR and CHR). Among patients who were treated after loss of CHR on imatinib with no prior MCyR, 26% achieved a CCyR with dasatinib, and the 24-month EFS rate was 64%. In all 3 groups, CCyR rates were similar in patients with or without pre-existing BCR-ABL mutations. CONCLUSIONS: The results of the current study suggested that optimal outcomes are achieved when dasatinib is administered early after imatinib resistance.
Authors: Susan Branford; Zbigniew Rudzki; Sonya Walsh; Ian Parkinson; Andrew Grigg; Jeff Szer; Kerry Taylor; Richard Herrmann; John F Seymour; Chris Arthur; David Joske; Kevin Lynch; Tim Hughes Journal: Blood Date: 2003-03-06 Impact factor: 22.113
Authors: Hagop Kantarjian; Charles Sawyers; Andreas Hochhaus; Francois Guilhot; Charles Schiffer; Carlo Gambacorti-Passerini; Dietger Niederwieser; Debra Resta; Renaud Capdeville; Ulrike Zoellner; Moshe Talpaz; Brian Druker; John Goldman; Stephen G O'Brien; Nigel Russell; Thomas Fischer; Oliver Ottmann; Pascale Cony-Makhoul; Thierry Facon; Richard Stone; Carole Miller; Martin Tallman; Randy Brown; Michael Schuster; Thomas Loughran; Alois Gratwohl; Franco Mandelli; Giuseppe Saglio; Mario Lazzarino; Domenico Russo; Michele Baccarani; Enrica Morra Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2002-02-28 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Neil P Shah; John M Nicoll; Bhushan Nagar; Mercedes E Gorre; Ronald L Paquette; John Kuriyan; Charles L Sawyers Journal: Cancer Cell Date: 2002-08 Impact factor: 31.743
Authors: A Hochhaus; M Baccarani; M Deininger; J F Apperley; J H Lipton; S L Goldberg; S Corm; N P Shah; F Cervantes; R T Silver; D Niederwieser; R M Stone; H Dombret; R A Larson; L Roy; T Hughes; M C Müller; R Ezzeddine; A M Countouriotis; H M Kantarjian Journal: Leukemia Date: 2008-04-10 Impact factor: 11.528
Authors: Thomas Ernst; Philipp Erben; Martin C Müller; Peter Paschka; Thomas Schenk; Jana Hoffmann; Sebastian Kreil; Paul La Rosée; Rüdiger Hehlmann; Andreas Hochhaus Journal: Haematologica Date: 2008-01-26 Impact factor: 9.941
Authors: A Hochhaus; S Kreil; A S Corbin; P La Rosée; M C Müller; T Lahaye; B Hanfstein; C Schoch; N C P Cross; U Berger; H Gschaidmeier; B J Druker; R Hehlmann Journal: Leukemia Date: 2002-11 Impact factor: 11.528
Authors: Jamshid S Khorashad; Hugues de Lavallade; Jane F Apperley; Dragana Milojkovic; Alistair G Reid; Marco Bua; Richard Szydlo; Eduardo Olavarria; Jaspal Kaeda; John M Goldman; David Marin Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2008-07-21 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Hagop M Kantarjian; Richard A Larson; Jorge E Cortés; Kathleen L Deering; Michael J Mauro Journal: Clin Lymphoma Myeloma Leuk Date: 2012-10-25