Search

Precise and reliable predictive parameters to accurately identify chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) patients who can successfully discontinue their tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) treatment are lacking. One promising parameter is depth of molecular response measured by BCR::ABL1 digital PCR (dPCR). The aim of this study was to validate a previously described prediction cutoff of 0.0023%IS and to assess the value of dPCR for treatment‐free remission (TFR) prediction in relation to other clinical parameters. A droplet‐based dPCR assay assessed BCR::ABL1 %IS prior to TKI discontinuation. The primary endpoint was molecular recurrence (MolR) by 36 months. A total of 186 patients from Canada, Germany, and the Netherlands were included. In patients with a first TKI discontinuation attempt (n = 163), a BCR::ABL1 dPCR < and ≥0.0023%IS had a MolR probability of 33% and 70%, respectively. Patients treated less than 6 years with a BCR::ABL1 dPCR <0.0023%IS had a MolR probability of 31%. After correction for treatment duration, both high dPCR value and the use of imatinib (vs. second‐generation TKI) were significantly associated with a higher risk of MolR (HR of 3.66, 95%CI 2.06–6.51, p < .001; and 2.85, 95%CI 1.25–6.46, p = .013, respectively). BCR::ABL1 dPCR was not associated with TFR outcome after second TKI discontinuation, however, with the limitation of a small number of patients analyzed (n = 23). In conclusion, BCR::ABL1 digital PCR based on the cutoff of 0.0023%IS is a valuable predictive tool to identify CML patients with a high probability of TFR success after first TKI discontinuation, including patients treated for less than 6 years. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Importance: The use of real-world data (RWD) external control arms in prospective studies is increasing. The advantages, including the immediate availability of a control population, must be balanced with the requirements of meeting evidentiary standards., Objective: To address the question of whether and to what extent the methods of RWD studies compare to standard methods used in randomized clinical trials., Evidence Review: A systematic search across 4 electronic databases and Google Scholar was conducted from January 1, 2000, to October 23, 2023. Studies were included in the systematic review if they compared an intervention arm in a clinical trial to an RWD control arm in patients with hematological cancers and if they were published between 2000 and 2023., Findings: Thirty-two prospective intervention studies incorporating external control data from RWD sources of patients with hematological cancers were identified. A total of 4306 patients from intervention arms and 10 594 from RWD control arms were included across all studies. Only 2 studies (6%) included prospectively collected RWD. The complete trial inclusion criteria were applied to the RWD cohort in 7 studies (22%). Four studies (13%) published the statistical analysis plan and prespecified use of RWD. A total of 23 studies (72%) applied matching algorithms for trial and RWD cohorts, including matching for demographic, disease, and/or therapy-related characteristics. The end point criteria were the same as the trial in 8 studies (25%). In contrast, 12 studies (38%) used different end points, and 12 (38%) did not provide an end point definition for the RWD. Twelve studies (38%) had a median follow-up difference of less than a year between arms. Eight studies (25%) reported toxic effect data for the trial arm, of which 5 studies reported toxic effect data for the RWD arm., Conclusions and Relevance: In this systematic review, limitations were observed in the application of clinical trial eligibility criteria to RWD, statistical rigor and application of matching methods, the definition of end points, follow-up, and reporting of adverse events, which may challenge the conclusions reported in studies using RWD.