| Literature DB >> 31648312 |
Amanda C Winters1, Jonathan A Gutman2, Enkhtsetseg Purev2, Molly Nakic3, Jennifer Tobin4, Stephanie Chase4, Jeff Kaiser4, Lindsey Lyle2, Chelsey Boggs2, Keri Halsema2, Jeffrey T Schowinsky5, Julie Rosser5, Mark D Ewalt5, Bradford Siegele5, Vishal Rana6, Steven Schuster7, Diana Abbott8, Brett M Stevens2, Craig T Jordan2, Clayton Smith2, Daniel A Pollyea2.
Abstract
Venetoclax is approved for older untreated acute myeloid leukemia (AML) patients. Venetoclax was available prior to approval off-label. We assessed our single-institution off-label experience with venetoclax/azacitidine, comparing outcomes with a clinical trial cohort that administered this regimen at the same institution. Thirty-three untreated AML patients unfit or unwilling to receive induction chemotherapy and prescribed venetoclax/azacitidine off-trial were retrospectively analyzed and compared with 33 patients who received the same therapy on trial. Outcomes were compared, and comparisons were made to a theoretical scenario in which off-trial patients received induction. Digital droplet polymerase chain reaction evaluated measurable residual disease (MRD). Off-trial venetoclax was attainable in nearly all patients for whom this was desired. The complete remission (CR)/CR with incomplete blood count recovery rate was 63.3% for off-trial patients who received treatment and 84.9% for trial patients (P = .081). The median overall survival for off-trial patients who received treatment was 381 days (95% confidence interval [CI], 174, not reached) vs 880 days (95% CI, 384, not reached) for trial patients (P = .041). Prior exposure to hypomethylating agents was associated with worse outcomes. Response rates with venetoclax/azacitidine were not inferior to a theoretical scenario in which patients received induction, and early death rates were less than expected with induction. MRD negativity was achievable. Newly diagnosed AML patients treated in a "real-world" scenario with off-trial venetoclax/azacitidine had inferior outcomes compared with patients treated in the setting of a clinical trial. Additionally, this therapy may be as effective, and less toxic, when compared with induction chemotherapy.Entities:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31648312 PMCID: PMC6849960 DOI: 10.1182/bloodadvances.2019000243
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Blood Adv ISSN: 2473-9529