Literature DB >> 34171279

CPX-351 versus 7+3 cytarabine and daunorubicin chemotherapy in older adults with newly diagnosed high-risk or secondary acute myeloid leukaemia: 5-year results of a randomised, open-label, multicentre, phase 3 trial.

Jeffrey E Lancet1, Geoffrey L Uy2, Laura F Newell3, Tara L Lin4, Ellen K Ritchie5, Robert K Stuart6, Stephen A Strickland7, Donna Hogge8, Scott R Solomon9, Dale L Bixby10, Jonathan E Kolitz11, Gary J Schiller12, Matthew J Wieduwilt13, Daniel H Ryan14, Stefan Faderl15, Jorge E Cortes16.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Daunorubicin and cytarabine are used as standard induction chemotherapy for patients with acute myeloid leukaemia. CPX-351 is a dual-drug liposomal encapsulation of daunorubicin and cytarabine in a synergistic 1:5 molar ratio. Primary analysis of the phase 3 trial in adults aged 60-75 years with newly diagnosed high-risk or secondary acute myeloid leukaemia provided support for approval of CPX-351 by the US Food and Drug Administration and European Medicines Agency. We describe the prospectively planned final 5-year follow-up results.
METHODS: This randomised, open-label, multicentre, phase 3 trial was done across 39 academic and regional cancer centres in the USA and Canada. Eligible patients were aged 60-75 years and had a pathological diagnosis of acute myeloid leukaemia according to WHO 2008 criteria, no previous induction therapy for acute myeloid leukaemia, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2. Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 (stratified by age and acute myeloid leukaemia subtype) to receive up to two induction cycles of CPX-351 (100 units/m2 administered as a 90-min intravenous infusion on days 1, 3, and 5; on days 1 and 3 for the second induction) or standard chemotherapy (cytarabine 100 mg/m2 per day continuous intravenous infusion for 7 days plus intravenous daunorubicin 60 mg/m2 on days 1, 2, and 3 [7+3]; cytarabine for 5 days and daunorubicin on days 1 and 2 for the second induction [5+2]). Patients with complete remission or complete remission with incomplete neutrophil or platelet recovery could receive up to tw cycles of consolidation therapy with CPX-351 (65 units/m2 90-min infusion on days 1 and 3) or chemotherapy (5+2, same dosage as in the second induction cycle). The primary outcome was overall survival analysed in all randomly assigned patients. No additional adverse events were collected with long-term follow-up, except data for deaths. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01696084, and is complete.
FINDINGS: Between Dec 20, 2012, and Nov 11, 2014, 309 patients with newly diagnosed high-risk or secondary acute myeloid leukaemia were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive CPX-351 (153 patients) or 7+3 (156 patients). At a median follow-up of 60·91 months (IQR 60·06-62·98) in the CPX-351 group and 59·93 months (59·73-60·50) in the 7+3 group, median overall survival was 9·33 months (95% CI 6·37-11·86) with CPX-351 and 5·95 months (4·99-7·75) with 7+3 (HR 0·70, 95% CI 0·55-0·91). 5-year overall survival was 18% (95% CI 12-25%) in the CPX-351 group and 8% (4-13%) in the 7+3 group. The most common cause of death in both groups was progressive leukaemia (70 [56%] of 124 deaths in the CPX-351 group and 74 [53%] of 140 deaths in the 7+3 group). Six (5%) of 124 deaths in the CPX-351 group and seven (5%) of 140 deaths in the 7+3 group were considered related to study treatment.
INTERPRETATION: After 5 years of follow-up, the improved overall survival with CPX-351 versus 7+3 was maintained, which supports the previous evidence that CPX-351 can contribute to long-term remission and improved overall survival in patients aged 60-75 years with newly diagnosed high-risk or secondary acute myeloid leukaemia. FUNDING: Jazz Pharmaceuticals.
Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2021        PMID: 34171279     DOI: 10.1016/S2352-3026(21)00134-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Lancet Haematol        ISSN: 2352-3026            Impact factor:   18.959


  10 in total

Review 1.  Older Patients with Acute Myeloid Leukemia Deserve Individualized Treatment.

Authors:  David C de Leeuw; Gert J Ossenkoppele; Jeroen J W M Janssen
Journal:  Curr Oncol Rep       Date:  2022-06-02       Impact factor: 5.075

2.  Cost-effectiveness of liposomal cytarabine/daunorubicin in patients with newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia.

Authors:  Jan Philipp Bewersdorf; Kishan K Patel; George Goshua; Rory M Shallis; Nikolai A Podoltsev; Scott F Huntington; Amer M Zeidan
Journal:  Blood       Date:  2022-03-17       Impact factor: 22.113

Review 3.  Harnessing the benefits of available targeted therapies in acute myeloid leukaemia.

Authors:  Hagop Kantarjian; Nicholas J Short; Courtney DiNardo; Eytan M Stein; Naval Daver; Alexander E Perl; Eunice S Wang; Andrew Wei; Martin Tallman
Journal:  Lancet Haematol       Date:  2021-10-20       Impact factor: 18.959

Review 4.  Precision Medicine in Myeloid Malignancies: Hype or Hope?

Authors:  Shristi Upadhyay Banskota; Nabin Khanal; Rosalyn I Marar; Prajwal Dhakal; Vijaya Raj Bhatt
Journal:  Curr Hematol Malig Rep       Date:  2022-08-16       Impact factor: 4.213

Review 5.  How Genetics Can Drive Initial Therapy Choices for Older Patients with Acute Myeloid Leukemia.

Authors:  Jozal W Moore; Nancy Torres; Michael Superdock; Jason H Mendler; Kah Poh Loh
Journal:  Curr Treat Options Oncol       Date:  2022-06-10

Review 6.  Targeted Drug Delivery and Theranostic Strategies in Malignant Lymphomas.

Authors:  Tomas Etrych; Alena Braunova; David Zogala; Lukas Lambert; Nicol Renesova; Pavel Klener
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2022-01-26       Impact factor: 6.639

Review 7.  Measurable Residual Disease in High-Risk Acute Myeloid Leukemia.

Authors:  Thomas Cluzeau; Roberto M Lemoli; James McCloskey; Todd Cooper
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2022-03-01       Impact factor: 6.639

Review 8.  CPX-351: An Old Scheme with a New Formulation in the Treatment of High-Risk AML.

Authors:  Matteo Molica; Salvatore Perrone; Carla Mazzone; Laura Cesini; Martina Canichella; Paolo de Fabritiis
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2022-06-08       Impact factor: 6.575

Review 9.  Management of Acute Myeloid Leukemia: A Review for General Practitioners in Oncology.

Authors:  Ryan J Stubbins; Annabel Francis; Florian Kuchenbauer; David Sanford
Journal:  Curr Oncol       Date:  2022-08-30       Impact factor: 3.109

Review 10.  Nanoparticle-assisted, image-guided laser interstitial thermal therapy for cancer treatment.

Authors:  Sumiao Pang; Anshika Kapur; Keri Zhou; Pavlos Anastasiadis; Nicholas Ballirano; Anthony J Kim; Jeffrey A Winkles; Graeme F Woodworth; Huang-Chiao Huang
Journal:  Wiley Interdiscip Rev Nanomed Nanobiotechnol       Date:  2022-06-23
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.