Search

Recommendations for dyslipidemia management aimed at reducing arterial occlusive events (AOEs) have been recently published. So far, no data have been reported on the management of dyslipidemia in chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) patients treated with nilotinib. We investigated 369 CML adult patients, stratified according to the new Systematic Coronary Risk Evaluation (SCORE) scoring system. Plasma levels of cholesterol, HDL, LDL, and triglycerides were measured prior to the start of nilotinib and after 3, 6, and 12months. The 5-year cumulative incidence of AOEs was 15.9%. Patients with cholesterol levels > 200mg/dL and LDL > 70mg/dL 3months after treatment showed a significantly higher incidence of AOEs (21.9 ± 4.6% vs 6.2 ± 2.5, P= 0.003). Patients belonging to the high and very high SCORE risk group showed a significant increase of AOEs (34.4 ± 6% vs 10 ± 2.1%, P< 0.001). In multivariate analysis, both high cholesterol and LDL levels and a high and very high SCORE risk remained significantly associated with the risk of AOEs (P= 0.008; HR = 3.5; 95% CI = 1.4–8.7 and P < 0.001; HR = 4.4; 95% CI = 2–9.8, respectively). Overall, 78 patients (21.1%) presented dyslipidemia at the time of CML diagnosis and 88 (23.3%) after starting nilotinib, but only 26 of them (29.5%) were treated with statins. Low LDL and cholesterol plasma levels are associated with a significant lower risk of AOEs in CML patients treated with nilotinib in the real life.

Hypertension is a commonly reported comorbidity in patients diagnosed with chronic myeloid leukemia (CML), and its management represents a challenge in patients treated with 2nd- or 3rd-generation tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs), considering their additional cardiovascular (CV) toxicity. The renin angiotensin system (RAS) contributes to hypertension genesis and plays an important role in atherosclerosis development, proliferation, and differentiation of myeloid hematopoietic cells. We analyzed a cohort of 192 patients with hypertension at CML diagnosis, who were treated with 2nd- or 3rd-generation TKIs, and evaluated the efficacy of RAS inhibitors (angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi) and angiotensin-II receptor blockers (ARBs)) in the prevention of arterial occlusive events (AOEs), as compared with other drug classes. The 5-year cumulative incidence of AOEs was 32.7 ± 4.2%. Patients with SCORE ≥ 5% (high-very-high) showed a significantly higher incidence of AOEs (33.7 ± 7.6% vs 13.6 ± 4.8%, p = 0.006). The AOE incidence was significantly lower in patients treated with RAS inhibitors (14.8 ± 4.2% vs 44 ± 1%, p < 0.001, HR = 0.283). The difference in the low and intermediate Sokal risk group was confirmed but not in the high-risk group, where a lower RAS expression has been reported. Our data suggest that RAS inhibitors may represent an optimal treatment in patients with hypertension and CML, treated with 2nd or 3rdG TKIs.

No abstract available.

Not available.

Introduction. New guidelines for the management of dyslipidemia and lipid modification in order to reduce the risk of cardiovascular (CV) events have been recently published by the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and the European Atherosclerosis Society (EAS). New recommendations regarding the target value of plasma lipids in very high and high CV risk patients have been provided, in addition to an estimate of the CV risk with a new Systematic Coronary Risk Evaluation (SCORE) chart. Few data have been reported on the management of dyslipidemia in chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) patients treated with nilotinib, and the association with arterial occlusive events (AOEs). We therefore analyzed a large real-life cohort of Italian patients with CML treated with nilotinib outside of clinical trials and evaluated the association between AOEs and plasma lipoproteins levels; moreover, we estimated the prognostic value of the new SCORE chart to predict AOEs. The secondary endpoint was to report the management of dyslipidemia in the clinical practice. Methods. We identified 233 adult patients with CML who were treated in 20 Italian centers with nilotinib. All patients were stratified into low to moderate (SCORE ≤ 5%) or high to very high (SCORE risk >5%) CV risk, according to the new version of the SCORE 2019. We recorded concentration levels of cholesterol, high-density lipoproteins (HDL), low-density lipoproteins (LDL) and triglycerides at diagnosis of CML, before starting ponatinib and therefore after 3, 6 and 12 months of treatment. All AOEs (cerebrovascular, peripheral vascular and CV events excluding hypertension) were considered. Results. The median age was 50 years (range 20-88) and the Sokal score was intermediate-high in 45.5% of patients. The median follow-up was 5 years (range 3.4-10.5). Nilotinib was administered as first line of therapy in (72%) of cases or second or subsequent lines of treatment for inefficacy (20.9%) or intolerance (7.1%). At baseline, nilotinib was administered at the following doses: 800 mg/day in 9.3% of patients, 600 mg/day in 87% of patients, 400 mg/day in 3.1% of patients and 300mg in 0.6% of patients, respectively. The median time of drug exposure was 60 months (range 2-155). The 48-month cumulative incidence rate of AOEs was 14.1±2.7%. Patients with cholesterol plasma levels > 200 mg/dL and LDL >70 mg/dL at baseline and 3 months after starting nilotinib, showed a significantly higher incidence of AOEs (24.5±7.3% vs 11±2.7%, P=0.02 and 22.3±4.9% vs 5.9±2.6, P=0.003, respectively) Figure 1. Patients with triglycerides levels > 200 mg/dL 3 months after starting nilotinib, showed a significantly higher incidence of AOEs (56±20.5% vs 13.3±2.7%, P=0.011) Patients belonging to the high and very high SCORE risk group showed a significant increase of AOEs (32.8.1±9% vs. 9±1%±2.6%, p=0.001). In multivariate analysis, statistical significance of cholesterol plasma levels > 200 mg/dL and LDL >70 mg/dL after 3 months and high-very-high SCORE was maintained (P=0.018, HR=3.4, 95% CI=1.2-9.4 and P=0.004, HR=3.5, 95% CI=1.5-8.2, respectively). Overall, 46 patients (20.5%) presented dyslipidemia at CML diagnosis and 65 (29%) at the start of treatment with nilotinib. Despite dyslipidemia, only 6 patients were taking statins during the treatment with nilotinib and only 5 started it after 3 months of nilotinib: 3 patients were treated with rosuvastatin and 2 with pravastatin. Conclusions. Our findings suggest that a proper control of dyslipidemia, keeping cholesterol and triglycerides plasma levels ≤ 200 mg/dL and LDL ≤70 mg/dL is associated with reduced risk of AOEs in CML patients treated with nilotinib. An under estimation of the clinical importance of elevated plasma lipids as a risk factor for AOEs events represents a possible issue in the real-life. Figure 1 Disclosures Abruzzese: Pfizer: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Incyte: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bms: Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Galimberti:Incyte: Honoraria; Novartis: Speakers Bureau. Castagnetti:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Incyte: Consultancy, Honoraria; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria. Pregno:Incyte-Italy,: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: conference reports; Novartis-Italy: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: conference reports; Pfizer-Italy: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: conference reports. Bocchia:CELGENE: Honoraria; Incyte: Honoraria. Gugliotta:Novartis: Honoraria; Incyte: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria. Foà:Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Speakers Bureau; Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Incyte: Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Background Limited information is available regarding the rate of long-term cardiovascular (CV) mortality in chronic myeloid leukaemia (CML) patients treated with second- and third-generation tyrosine kinase inhibitors (2ndG/3rdG TKIs) in the real-life practice. Methods We identified 656 consecutive CML patients treated with nilotinib, dasatinib, bosutinib and ponatinib. Results The 15-year CV-mortality free survival was 93 ± 2.8%. Age ≥65 years (p = 0.005) and a positive history of CV disease (p = 0.04) were significantly associated with a lower CV-mortality free survival. CV disease accounted for 16.5% and 5% of potential years of life lost (PYLL) in male and female patients, respectively. The standard mortality ratio (SMR) following ischemic heart disease (IHD) was 3.9 in males and 3.8 in female patients, meaning an excess of IHD deaths observed, in comparison with the population of control. Conclusion. Prevention strategies based on CV risk factors, in particular in those patients with a previous history of CV disease, should be considered.

Arterial occlusive events (AOEs) represent emerging complications in chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) patients treated with ponatinib. We identified 85 consecutive CML adult patients who were treated with ponatinib in 17 Italian centers. Patients were stratified according to the Systematic Coronary Risk Evaluation (SCORE) assessment, based on sex, age, smoking habits, systolic blood pressure, and total cholesterol levels. The 60-month cumulative incidence rate of AOEs excluding hypertension was 25.7%. Hypertension was reported in 14.1% of patients. The median time of exposure to ponatinib was 28months (range, 3-69months). Patients with a high to very high SCORE risk showed a significantly higher incidence rate of AOEs (74.3% vs 15.2%, P&nbsp

NA

Abstract 1124 Poster Board I-146 Background Dasatinib (BMS-354825) is a multi-targeted kinase inhibitor of BCR-ABL and SRC with significant activity in patients with CML resistant or intolerant to front-line Imatinib (IM). However, the information so far available are to great extent limited to controlled clinical trials, which usually recruited patients with acceptable performance status, and no major organ dysfunction. Noteworthy, this fact, although essential for ethical reasons in clinical trials, may somehow determine an overestimation of the clinical benefit of new compounds. Thus, further studies based on non selected populations are indeed opportune. Patients and Methods A total of 124 patients (61 male and 63 females) with CML resistant or intolerant to IM received Dasatinib as second line therapy outside from clinical trials. 91 patients had a resistant disease, 19 were intolerant to IM and 14 patients were both resistant and intolerant to IM. Median age at switching to Dasatinib was 56.5 years (range 21-82). 62/124 patients escalated IM before switching from 400 to 600 mg/day and 26/62 patients received an additional dose escalation from 600 to 800 mg/day. Median time on IM prior to the switch to Dasatinib was 36 months (range 2-99), whereas median time on IM after dose escalation was 9 months (range: 1-43). Dasatinib was given at 100 mg once daily in 54/124 patients (43%), at 70 mg twice daily in 43/124 patients (35%) and at 50 mg once daily in the remaining patients (22%). Response (hematologic, cytogenetic and molecular), toxicities according to NCI-CTC, discontinuation/dose reduction of Dasatinib, event-free survival (EFS) and overall survival (OS) were evaluated. Results With a median follow-up of 12 months, 94% of patients attained a complete hematological response (CHR), whereas 69% and 51% achieved a major (MCyR) or a complete cytogenetic response and 32% attained a major molecular response (MMR). Cumulative EFS and OS at 12 months were 91 and 93% respectively. These data are in line with those of clinical trials, but the population of the present study was not selected. The commonest grade III/IV adverse events were thrombocytopenia and neutropenia, occurring in around half of patients. Only 3% of the patients suffered from a grade III-IV pleural effusion or dyspnea. The achievement of CHR, MCyR, CCyR and MMR significantly influenced EFS (p=0.006; 0.04; 0.008 and 0.003 respectively) and OS (p=0.002; 0.02; 0.004 and 0.001 respectively) both in univariate and in multivariate analysis. Intriguingly, neither the dose nor the duration of prior IM affected the response to Dasatinib, neither before switching to Dasatinib (p= 0.9 and p=0.4) nor after it (p=0.4 and 0.7). Moreover, dose escalation to IM 600 or 800 mg/day did not influence negatively the subsequent response to Dasatinib (p=0.8). In addition, we did not observe any difference in the response rate (CHR, MCyR, CCyR, MMR) between patients who received prior IM for more than 3 years with respect to those patients who received it for less than 3 years (p=0.9). Regarding Dasatinib therapy, we observed a statistically significant better outcome in term of both DFS and OS for those patients receiving lower doses continuously without interruption (p=0.05 and p=0.04) with respect to patients who received higher doses but were forced to stop the treatment due to grade III-IV toxicity. This observation clearly indicate the necessity of administer dasatinib continuously to patients in order to override possible mechanisms of resistance due to the reduction of the plasma level of the drug. Conclusions We confirm the safety and efficacy of Dasatinib as second line therapy for unselected patients with CML either resistant or refractory to IM even outside from clinical trials. Neither the dose nor the duration of Imatinib affects the response to Dasatinib. As well, patients receiving continuously Dasatinib, even at low doses, perform better. In conclusion, these findings show an increase possibility of cure for unselected patients resistant or intolerant to Imatinib submitted to second line therapy with Dasatinib in everyday clinical practice. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Abstract 4446 Life expectancy of CML patients has greatly improved in tyrosine-kynase inhibitor (TKI) era, but still some questions remain about the management of suboptimal responders (SR) to imatinib standard dose. This group of patients appears to be heterogeneous, with significant differences in terms of event-free survival between cytogenetic SR and molecular SR (Alvarado et al, Cancer 2009) European Leukemia Net (ELN) recommendations did not clarify those differences and there isn't a clear agreement on SR: maintaining imatinib at standard or higher dose or switching to another TKI are all considered acceptable options (Baccarani et al, JCO 2009). We retrospectively analyzed 63 CML patients, diagnosed in chronic phase between 1988 and 2011, SR to imatinib 400 mg/d, treated according to the 3 different ELN options. Fifty-two patients received imatinib front line and 11 had been previously treated with an interferon based therapy. Sokal score, evaluable in 44 patients, was high in 7, intermediate in 24 and low in 12, respectively. Twenty-five patients were cytogenetic SR and 38 molecular SR. The median follow-up from diagnosis was 76 months (range 10–292). At suboptimal response detection 47 patients (74%) continued imatinib 400 mg/d (30 of them afterword switched to high dose imatinib or new TKI), 12 patients (19%) increased imatinib dose to 600 mg/d (7) or 800 mg/d (5) (8 of them later changed TKI) and only 4 patients switched immediately to new TKI. Twenty-three percent of the 47 patients who continued imatinib 400 mg/d obtained a stable complete cytogenetic response (CCyR) and major molecolar response (MMR) while 27% underwent to a failure. Globally thirty-tree SR patients increased imatinib dose, 36% at suboptimal response detection and 64% after a median of further 12 months of standard dose treatment (range 3–50): 48% of them obtained a durable CCyR and MMR. Twenty-six evaluable patients switched to new TKI (9 to nilotinib and 17 to dasatinib), 13 after high dose imatinib: 62% of the patients achieved a stable CCgR and MMR. Both high dose imatinib and new TKI were significantly more effective in achieving CCyR and MMR than maintaining imatinib 400 mg/d (p Considering separately the subgroup of cytogenetic SR patients, a stable CcyR has been reached by 35% of patients continuing imatinib standard dose, by 50% of the patients who increased imatinib dose and by the totality of the patients treated with new TKI (option significantly superior to the other two, p Among molecular SR, 26% of the patients obtained a stable MMR with imatinib 400 mg/d, 52% with imatinib 600 or 800 mg/d and 63% switching to new TKI. The difference was statistically significant between new TKI and imatinib 400 standard dose only (p Cytogenetic SR maintained at imatinib 400 mg/d had a higher risk of event (defined as loss of hematologic or cytogenetic response or death) compared to molecular SR (40% vs 5%, p Two patients progressed to accelerated phase (clonal evolution) but then obtained an optimal response after switching to new TKI; 2 patients died of unrelated disease. Among the 61 living patients, 71% was in MMR, 26% in CCyR only and 3% didn't reach CCyR (for these patients the efficacy of the therapeutic change is not evaluable yet). In our casistics cytogenetic SR had a higher risk of negative events than molecular SR, as reported in literature, although they obtained similar responses after changing therapeutic strategy. No clear advantage in maintaining imatinib 400 mg/d after suboptimal response was observed, since it led to a few optimal responses and was associated with a significant risk of treatment failure. Imatinib dose increment might represent a more reasonable option, at least for molecular SR. Considering the global casistic no significant difference in response rates were found between new TKI and high dose imatinib even if dasatinib and nilotinib showed a trend towards a superior efficacy in patients mostly unresponsive to the last option, suggesting that an earlier switch to new TKI might further increase the proportion of optimal responders. For cytogenetic SR the switch to new TKI brought better results than those obtained with high dose imatinib: therefore it seems to be the best choice in this subgroup of patients. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.