Search

Representative Individual Concentration versus Time Pharmacokinetic Profiles for Total or Unbound Flavopiridol Using Bolus (A) or Hybrid (B) Dosing Schemes.

Supplementary methods, three supplementary tables and 16 supplementary figures

PDF file, 105K, This file contains Supplemental Table 1 (Description of Patients Providing Samples for Assessment of Chk1 phosphorylation ), Supplemental Table 2 (Quantitative Effects of Cytarabine, SCH 900776 and the Combination on Samples from Patients in Cohort 2) and Supplemental Figure 1 (effects of SCH 900776 on cytarabine-induced killing in additional myeloid cell lines).

Conditional Weighted Residuals versus Time or Predicted Concentration: Total Flavopiridol (A and C), Unbound Flavopiridol (B and D).

Although inhibitors of the kinases CHK1, ATR, and WEE1 are undergoing clinical testing, it remains unclear how these three classes of agents kill susceptible cells and whether they utilize the same cytotoxic mechanism. Here we observed that CHK1 inhibition induces apoptosis in a subset of acute leukemia cell lines in vitro, including TP53-null acute myeloid leukemia (AML) and BCR/ABL–positive acute lymphoid leukemia (ALL), and inhibits leukemic colony formation in clinical AML samples ex vivo. In further studies, downregulation or inhibition of CHK1 triggered signaling in sensitive human acute leukemia cell lines that involved CDK2 activation followed by AP1-dependent TNF transactivation, TNFα production, and engagement of a TNFR1- and BID-dependent apoptotic pathway. AML lines that were intrinsically resistant to CHK1 inhibition exhibited high CHK1 expression and were sensitized by CHK1 downregulation. Signaling through this same CDK2–AP1–TNF cytotoxic pathway was also initiated by ATR or WEE1 inhibitors in vitro and during CHK1 inhibitor treatment of AML xenografts in vivo. Collectively, these observations not only identify new contributors to the antileukemic cell action of CHK1, ATR, and WEE1 inhibitors, but also delineate a previously undescribed pathway leading from aberrant CDK2 activation to death ligand–induced killing that can potentially be exploited for acute leukemia treatment.Significance:This study demonstrates that replication checkpoint inhibitors can kill AML cells through a pathway involving AP1-mediated TNF gene activation and subsequent TP53-independent, TNFα-induced apoptosis, which can potentially be exploited clinically.

Relationship between veliparib exposure-% CFB in PAR levels in PBMC (A) and �B in PAR levels-ORR (B)

Supplemental Tables 1-5 and upplemental Figure Legends

Purpose: A phase I trial of veliparib in combination with topotecan plus carboplatin (T+C) demonstrated a 33% objective response rate in patients with hematological malignancies. The objective is to perform exposure–response analysis to inform the phase II trial design.Experimental Design: Pharmacokinetic, efficacy, and safety data from 95 patients, who were administered 10 to 100 mg b.i.d. doses of veliparib for either 8, 14, or 21 days with T+C, were utilized for exposure–efficacy (objective response and overall survival) and exposure–safety (≥grade 3 mucositis) analysis. Multivariate cox proportional hazards and logistic regression analyses were conducted. The covariates evaluated were disease status, duration of treatment, and number of prior therapies.Results: The odds of having objective response were 1.08-fold with 1,000 ng/hr/mL increase in AUC, 1.8-fold with >8 days treatment, 2.8-fold in patients with myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPN), and 0.5-fold with ≥2 prior therapies. Based on analysis of overall survival, hazard of death decreased by 1.5% for 1,000 ng/hr/mL increase in AUC, 39% with >8 days treatment, 44% in patients with MPN, while increased by 19% with ≥2 prior therapies. The odds of having ≥grade 3 mucositis increased by 29% with 1,000 ng.h/mL increase in AUC.Conclusions: Despite shallow exposure–efficacy relationship, doses lower than 80 mg do not exceed veliparib single agent preclinical IC50. Shallow exposure–mucositis relationship also supports the 80-mg dose. Based on benefit/risk assessment, veliparib at a dose of 80 mg b.i.d. for at least 14 days in combination with T+C is recommended to be studied in MPN patients. Clin Cancer Res; 23(21); 6421–9. ©2017 AACR.

Supplemental Figure S1. A, pretreatment bone marrow samples were treated diluent (-) with 10 μM melphalan (+) for 6 h and analyzed by immmunoblotting for FANCD2, ubiquitinated FANCD2 (Ub-FANCD2) and, as a loading control, heat shock protein 90 (HSP90). Supplemental Figure S2. A, Aliquots of whole cell lysates containing 5 x 106 pretreatment marrow mononuclear cells from the indicated patients were subjected to SDS-PAGE and blotting for the indicated antigens (lanes 5-12). Supplemental Figure S3. A, PAR suppression in PBMCs at various veliparib dose levels as a function of times during therapy. B, PAR suppression in PBMCs at 2 hours post dosing on day 1 and its relationship to clinical response. C, PAR suppression as assessed in bone marrow aspirates. Supplemental Table S1. MPN-Associated Leukemia Characteristics Supplemental Table S2 Accumulation of γH2AX in Viable Peripheral Blood CD34+ Cells Following Veliparib Administration at 80 mg Twice Daily Relative to Pretreatment (Day 0) Levels of DNA Damage

Purpose: In preclinical studies, the PARP inhibitor veliparib enhanced the antileukemic action of temozolomide through potentiation of DNA damage. Accordingly, we conducted a phase 1 study of temozolomide with escalating doses of veliparib in patients with relapsed, refractory acute myeloid leukemia (AML) or AML arising from aggressive myeloid malignancies.Experimental Design: Patients received veliparib [20–200 mg once a day on day 1 and twice daily on days 4–12 in cycle 1 (days 1–8 in cycle ≥2)] and temozolomide [150–200 mg/m2 daily on days 3–9 in cycle 1 (days 1–5 in cycle ≥2)] every 28 to 56 days. Veliparib pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics [ability to inhibit poly(ADP-ribose) polymer (PAR) formation and induce H2AX phosphorylation] were assessed. Pretreatment levels of MGMT and PARP1 protein, methylation of the MGMT promoter, and integrity of the Fanconi anemia pathway were also examined.Results: Forty-eight patients were treated at seven dose levels. Dose-limiting toxicities were oral mucositis and esophagitis lasting >7 days. The MTD was veliparib 150 mg twice daily with temozolomide 200 mg/m2 daily. The complete response (CR) rate was 17% (8/48 patients). Veliparib exposure as well as inhibition of PAR polymer formation increased dose proportionately. A veliparib-induced increase in H2AX phosphorylation in CD34+ cells was observed in responders. Three of 4 patients with MGMT promoter methylation achieved CR.Conclusions: Veliparib plus temozolomide is well tolerated, with activity in advanced AML. Further evaluation of this regimen and of treatment-induced phosphorylation of H2AX and MGMT methylation as potential response predictors appears warranted. Clin Cancer Res; 23(3); 697–706. ©2016 AACR.

Correlation between objective response rate (ORR) and overall survival (OS)

Observed versus Predicted Flavopiridol Concentrations: Total Individual (A), Unbound Individual (B), Total Population (C), or Unbound Population (D).

Purpose: Previous studies have shown that the replication checkpoint, which involves the kinases ataxia telangiectasia mutated and Rad3 related (ATR) and Chk1, contributes to cytarabine resistance in cell lines. In the present study, we examined whether this checkpoint is activated in clinical acute myelogenous leukemia (AML) during cytarabine infusion in vivo and then assessed the impact of combining cytarabine with the recently described Chk1 inhibitor SCH 900776 in vitro.Experimental design: AML marrow aspirates harvested before and during cytarabine infusion were examined by immunoblotting. Human AML lines treated with cytarabine in the absence or presence of SCH 900776 were assayed for checkpoint activation by immunoblotting, nucleotide incorporation into DNA, and flow cytometry. Long-term effects in AML lines, clinical AML isolates, and normal myeloid progenitors were assayed using clonogenic assays.Results: Immunoblotting revealed increased Chk1 phosphorylation, a marker of checkpoint activation, in more than half of Chk1-containing AMLs after 48 hours of cytarabine infusion. In human AML lines, SCH 900776 not only disrupted cytarabine-induced Chk1 activation and S-phase arrest but also markedly increased cytarabine-induced apoptosis. Clonogenic assays demonstrated that SCH 900776 enhanced the antiproliferative effects of cytarabine in AML cell lines and clinical AML samples at concentrations that had negligible impact on normal myeloid progenitors.Conclusions: These results not only provide evidence for cytarabine-induced S-phase checkpoint activation in AML in the clinical setting, but also show that a selective Chk1 inhibitor can overcome the S-phase checkpoint and enhance the cytotoxicity of cytarabine. Accordingly, further investigation of the cytarabine/SCH 900776 combination in AML appears warranted. Clin Cancer Res; 18(19); 5364–73. ©2012 AACR.

7 tables and 3 figure legends

Relationship between AUC and Cmax after single dose (A)

Purpose: To elucidate any differences in the exposure–response of alvocidib (flavopiridol) given by 1-hour bolus or a hybrid schedule (30-minute bolus followed by a 4-hour infusion) using a flavopiridol/cytosine arabinoside/mitoxantrone sequential protocol (FLAM) in patients with acute leukemia. The hybrid schedule was devised to be pharmacologically superior in chronic leukemia based on unbound exposure.Experimental Design: Data from 129 patients in three FLAM studies were used for pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic modeling. Newly diagnosed (62%) or relapsed/refractory (38%) patients were treated by bolus (43%) or hybrid schedule (57%). Total and unbound flavopiridol concentrations were fit using nonlinear mixed-effect population pharmacokinetic methodologies. Exposure–response relationships using unbound flavopiridol AUC were explored using recursive partitioning.Results: Flavopiridol pharmacokinetic parameters were estimated using a two-compartment model. No pharmacokinetic covariates were identified. Flavopiridol fraction unbound was 10.9% and not different between schedules. Partitioning found no association between dosing schedule and clinical response. Clinical response was associated with AUC ≥ 780 h*ng/mL for newly diagnosed patients and AUC ≥ 1,690 h*ng/mL for relapsed/refractory patients. Higher exposures were not associated with increases in severe adverse events (≥ grade 3).Conclusions: Pharmacokinetic modeling showed no difference in flavopiridol plasma protein binding for bolus versus hybrid dosing. Further trials in newly diagnosed patients with acute leukemia should utilize the bolus FLAM regimen at the MTD of 50 mg/m2/day. Trials in relapsed/refractory patients should use the hybrid dosing schedule at the MTD (30/60 mg/m2/day) to achieve the higher exposures required for maximal efficacy in this population. Clin Cancer Res; 23(14); 3592–600. ©2017 AACR.

Purpose: The PARP inhibitor veliparib delays DNA repair and potentiates cytotoxicity of multiple classes of chemotherapy drugs, including topoisomerase I inhibitors and platinating agents. This study evaluated veliparib incorporation into leukemia induction therapy using a previously described topotecan/carboplatin backbone.Experimental Design: Employing a 3+3 trial design, we administered escalating doses of veliparib combined with topotecan + carboplatin in relapsed or refractory acute leukemias, aggressive myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPN), and chronic myelomonocytic leukemia (CMML).Results: A total of 99 patients received veliparib 10–100 mg orally twice daily on days 1–8, 1–14, or 1–21 along with continuous infusion topotecan 1.0–1.2 mg/m2/d + carboplatin 120–150 mg/m2/d on days 3–7. The MTD was veliparib 80 mg twice daily for up to 21 days with topotecan 1.2 mg/m2/d + carboplatin 150 mg/m2/d. Mucositis was dose limiting and correlated with high veliparib concentrations. The response rate was 33% overall (33/99: 14 CR, 11 CRi, 8 PR) but was 64% (14/22) for patients with antecedent or associated aggressive MPNs or CMML. Leukemias with baseline DNA repair defects, as evidenced by impaired DNA damage–induced FANCD2 monoubiquitination, had improved survival [HR = 0.56 (95% confidence interval, 0.27–0.92)]. A single 80-mg dose of veliparib, as well as veliparib in combination with topotecan + carboplatin, induced DNA damage as manifested by histone H2AX phosphorylation in CD34+ leukemia cells, with greater phosphorylation in cells from responders.Conclusions: The veliparib/topotecan/carboplatin combination warrants further investigation, particularly in patients with aggressive MPNs, CMML, and MPN- or CMML-related acute leukemias. Clin Cancer Res; 23(4); 899–907. ©2016 AACR.

Table S1: Primers for Methylation Analysis. Figure S1: Sensitivity of erythroid and myeloid progenitors to veliparib. Figure S2: Reproducibility of colony forming assays. Figure S3: Veliparib IC50 as a function of BRCA1 Promotor Methylation.

Table S1. Changes in Proportion (%) of γH2AX-Positive Cells in Peripheral Blood upon Veliparib and Veliparib/Temozolomide Treatment Figure S1. FANCD2 monoubiquitination following ex vivo melphalan treatment of patient bone marrow cells Figure S2.Pretreatment levels of PARP1 and MGMT Figure S3.Pretreatment MGMT promoter methylation in patient peripheral blood (PB) or bone marrow (BM) AML cells Figure S4. PARP inhibition in peripheral blood cells

Purpose: DNA repair defects have been previously reported in myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPN). Inhibitors of PARP have shown activity in solid tumors with defects in homologous recombination (HR). This study was performed to assess MPN sensitivity to PARP inhibitors ex vivo.Experimental Design: HR pathway integrity in circulating myeloid cells was evaluated by assessing the formation of RAD51 foci after treatment with ionizing radiation or PARP inhibitors. Sensitivity of MPN erythroid and myeloid progenitors to PARP inhibitors was evaluated using colony formation assays.Results: Six of 14 MPN primary samples had reduced formation of RAD51 foci after exposure to ionizing radiation, suggesting impaired HR. This phenotype was not associated with a specific MPN subtype, JAK2 mutation status, or karyotype. MPN samples showed increased sensitivity to the PARP inhibitors veliparib and olaparib compared with normal myeloid progenitors. This hypersensitivity, which was most pronounced in samples deficient in DNA damage–induced RAD51 foci, was observed predominantly in samples from patients with diagnoses of chronic myelogenous leukemia, chronic myelomonocytic leukemia, or unspecified myelodysplastic/MPN overlap syndromes.Conclusions: Like other neoplasms with HR defects, MPNs exhibit PARP inhibitor hypersensitivity compared with normal marrow. These results suggest that further preclinical and possibly clinical study of PARP inhibitors in MPNs is warranted. Clin Cancer Res; 22(15); 3894–902. ©2016 AACR.

Supplemental Figure 4. Visual Predictive Check (VPC) for Total or Unbound Flavopiridol Using Bolus or Hybrid Dosing Schemes.

Supplementary Table 1 from Progressive Chromatin Repression and Promoter Methylation of CTNNA1 Associated with Advanced Myeloid Malignancies

Supplementary Table 1 from Expression of Insulin Receptor Isoform A and Insulin-like Growth Factor-1 Receptor in Human Acute Myelogenous Leukemia: Effect of the Dual-Receptor Inhibitor BMS-536924 In vitro

Supplementary Figure 2 from Progressive Chromatin Repression and Promoter Methylation of CTNNA1 Associated with Advanced Myeloid Malignancies

Supplementary Figure and Table Legends 1-2 from Progressive Chromatin Repression and Promoter Methylation of CTNNA1 Associated with Advanced Myeloid Malignancies

Complete loss or deletion of the long arm of chromosome 5 is frequent in myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) and acute myelogenous leukemia (AML). The putative gene(s) deleted and responsible for the pathogenesis of these poor prognosis hematologic disorders remain controversial. This study is a comprehensive analysis of previously implicated and novel genes for epigenetic inactivation in AML and MDS. In 146 AML cases, methylation of CTNNA1 was frequent, and more common in AML patients with 5q deletion (31%) than those without 5q deletion (14%), whereas no methylation of other 5q genes was observed. In 31 MDS cases, CTNNA1 methylation was only found in high-risk MDS (≥RAEB2), but not in low-risk MDS (CTNNA1 methylation might be important in the transformation of MDS to AML. CTNNA1 expression was lowest in AML/MDS patients with CTNNA1 methylation, although reduced expression was found in some patients without promoter methylation. Repressive chromatin marks (H3K27me3) at the promoter were identified in CTNNA1-repressed AML cell lines and primary leukemias, with the most repressive state correlating with DNA methylation. These results suggest progressive, acquired epigenetic inactivation at CTNNA1, including histone modifications and promoter CpG methylation, as a component of leukemia progression in patients with both 5q− and non-5q– myeloid malignancies. [Cancer Res 2009;69(21):8482–90]

Supplementary Table 2 from Progressive Chromatin Repression and Promoter Methylation of CTNNA1 Associated with Advanced Myeloid Malignancies

The natural history of patients with myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) is dependent upon the presence and magnitude of diverse genetic and molecular aberrations. The International Prognostic Scoring System (IPSS) and revised IPSS (IPSS-R) are the most widely used classification and prognostic systems; however, somatic mutations are not currently incorporated into these systems, despite evidence of their independent impact on prognosis. Our manuscript reviews prognostic information for TP53, EZH2, DNMT3A, ASXL1, RUNX1, SRSF2, CBL, IDH 1/2, TET2, BCOR, ETV6, GATA2, U2AF1, ZRSR2, RAS, STAG2, and SF3B1. Mutations in TP53, EZH2, ASXL1, DNMT3A, RUNX1, SRSF2, and CBL have extensive evidence for their negative impact on survival, whereas SF3B1 is the lone mutation carrying a favorable prognosis. We use the existing literature to propose the incorporation of somatic mutations into the IPSS-R. More data are needed to define the broad spectrum of other genetic lesions, as well as the impact of variant allele frequencies, class of mutation, and impact of multiple interactive genomic lesions. We postulate that the incorporation of these data into MDS prognostication systems will not only enhance our therapeutic decision making but lead to targeted treatment in an attempt to improve outcomes in this formidable disease.

Allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) is an important therapeutic modality for patients with acute myelogenous leukemia (AML) with poor risk features. Nonetheless, roughly 30% of such patients have leukemia recurrence and up to 2% of these are donor-derived leukemias, in which malignancy develops in the donor's transplanted cells, despite extremely low rates of leukemia in the donors themselves. Notably, over 20% of these malignancies carry chromosome 7 abnormalities nearly all of which are monosomies. Recent advances in whole exome and genome sequencing have allowed for detection of candidate genes that likely contribute to the development of AML in donor cells (donor leukemia, DCL). These genes include CEBPA, GATA2, JAK2, RUNX1, DDX41, EZH2, IDH1/2, DNMT3A, ASXL1, XPD, XRCC3, and CHEK1. The potential roles of variants in these genes are evaluated based on familial clustering of MDS/AML and corresponding animal studies demonstrating their leukemogenic nature. This review describes the spectrum of genetic aberrations detected in DCL cases in the literature with regard to the character of the individual cases, existing family cohorts that carry individual genes, and functional studies that support etiologic roles in AML development. DCL presents a unique opportunity to examine genetic variants in the donors and recipients with regards to progression to malignancy.

Although inhibitors of the kinases CHK1, ATR, and WEE1 are undergoing clinical testing, it remains unclear how these three classes of agents kill susceptible cells and whether they utilize the same cytotoxic mechanism. Here we observed that CHK1 inhibition induces apoptosis in a subset of acute leukemia cell lines in vitro, including TP53-null acute myeloid leukemia (AML) and BCR/ABL–positive acute lymphoid leukemia (ALL), and inhibits leukemic colony formation in clinical AML samples ex vivo. In further studies, downregulation or inhibition of CHK1 triggered signaling in sensitive human acute leukemia cell lines that involved CDK2 activation followed by AP1-dependent TNF transactivation, TNFα production, and engagement of a TNFR1- and BID-dependent apoptotic pathway. AML lines that were intrinsically resistant to CHK1 inhibition exhibited high CHK1 expression and were sensitized by CHK1 downregulation. Signaling through this same CDK2–AP1–TNF cytotoxic pathway was also initiated by ATR or WEE1 inhibitors in vitro and during CHK1 inhibitor treatment of AML xenografts in vivo. Collectively, these observations not only identify new contributors to the antileukemic cell action of CHK1, ATR, and WEE1 inhibitors, but also delineate a previously undescribed pathway leading from aberrant CDK2 activation to death ligand–induced killing that can potentially be exploited for acute leukemia treatment. Significance: This study demonstrates that replication checkpoint inhibitors can kill AML cells through a pathway involving AP1-mediated TNF gene activation and subsequent TP53-independent, TNFα-induced apoptosis, which can potentially be exploited clinically.

Since 2017 the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved glasdegib, venetoclax, ivosidenib, midostaurin, CPX- 351, and gemtuzumab ozogamicin (GO) to treat persons with newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia. The European Medicines Agency (EMA) has done likewise for midostaurin, CPX-351, and GO. While increasing options for persons, particularly older ones, for whom current therapy is unsatisfactory, or simply not given, these approvals raise several concerns. Although the venetoclax and glasdegib approvals were for persons considered “unfit” for intensive induction, the criteria for fitness were not well defined (age ≥75 per se being insufficient) and are frequently subjective, making it likely that many subjects in the venetoclax and glasdegib registration trials were fit for intensive induction; for example, none had performance status 3–4. Fitness must be assessed together with the potential efficacy of a proposed therapy. We note the modest complete remission rates and durations in the venetoclax + hypomethylating agent trial. Although these formed the basis for FDA approval, it is unclear that better results might not have obtained with more intense induction, as several studies, with considerably longer-follow up, have suggested. Hence, we question the venetoclax (and glasdegib) approvals absent randomized comparisons with intense induction. Given the uncertain relation in older individuals between survival and complete remission (CR), much less responses less than CR, we are skeptical of the sole use of these responses in the ivosidenib and venetoclax approvals; we also question the use of survival, without event-free survival, in the glasdegib approval. Noting the midostaurin and CPX-351 approvals included populations not participating in the registration studies we suggest means to address this issue as well as those involving fitness, randomization, and endpoints.

An immunosuppressive microenvironment promoting leukemia cell immune escape plays an important role in the pathogenesis of AML. Through its interaction with cereblon, a substrate receptor for the E3 ubiquitin ligase complex, pomalidomide leads to selective ubiquitination of transcription factors Aiolos and Ikaros thereby promoting immune modulation. In this phase I trial, 51 newly diagnosed non-favorable risk AML and high-risk MDS patients were enrolled and treated with AcDVP16 (cytarabine 667 mg/m(2)/day IV continuous infusion days 1–3, daunorubicin 45 mg/m(2) IV days 1–3, etoposide 400 mg/m(2) IV days 8–10) induction therapy followed by dose- and duration-escalation pomalidomide beginning at early lymphocyte recovery. Forty-three patients (AML: n = 39, MDS: n = 4) received pomalidomide. The maximum tolerated dose of pomalidomide was 4 mg for 21 consecutive days. The overall complete remission (CR + CRi) rate, median overall survival, and disease-free survival were 75%, 27.1 and 20.6 months, respectively. Subset analyses revealed 86% CR/CRi rate in AML patients with unfavorable-risk karyotype treated with pomalidomide. Pomalidomide significantly decreased Aiolos expression in both CD4(+) and CD8(+) peripheral blood and bone marrow T cells, promoted T cell differentiation, proliferation, and heightened their cytokine production. Finally, pomalidomide induced distinct gene expression changes in immune function-related ontologies in CD4(+) and CD8(+) T cells.

Acute myeloid leukemia (AML) is an aggressive malignancy characterized by clonal proliferation of neoplastic immature precursor cells. AML impacts older adults and has a poor prognosis. Despite recent advances in treatment, AML is complex, with both genetic and epigenetic aberrations in the malignant clone and elaborate interactions with its microenvironment. We are now able to stratify patients on the basis of specific clinical and molecular features in order to optimize individual treatment strategies. However, our understanding of the complex nature of these molecular abnormalities continues to expand the defining characteristics of high-risk mutations. In this review, we focus on genetic and microenvironmental factors in adverse risk AML that play critical roles in leukemogenesis, including those not described in an European LeukemiaNet adverse risk group, and describe therapies that are currently in the clinical arena, either approved or under development.

To improve the outcome of relapsed/refractory acute myeloid leukemia (AML), a randomized phase II trial of three novel regimens was conducted. Ninety patients were enrolled and were in first relapse or were refractory to induction/re-induction chemotherapy. They were randomized to the following regimens: carboplatin-topotecan (CT), each by continuous infusion for five days; alvocidib (formerly flavopiridol), cytarabine, and mitoxantrone (FLAM) in a timed sequential regimen; or sirolimus combined with mitoxantrone, etoposide, and cytarabine (S-MEC). The primary objective was attainment of a complete remission (CR). A Simon two-stage design was used for each of the three arms. The median age of the patients in the FLAM arm was older at 62 years compared to 55 years for the CT arm and the S-MEC arm. The overall response was 14% in the CT arm (5/35, 90% CI 7%−35%), 28% in the FLAM arm (10/36, 90% CI, 16%−43%), and 16% in the S-MEC arm (3/19, 90% CI, 4%−36%). There were nine treatment-related deaths, seven of which occurred in the FLAM arm with four of these in elderly patients. We conclude that the FLAM regimen had an encouraging response rate and should be considered for further clinical development but should be used with caution in elderly patients.

PURPOSE Despite advances in immunotherapies, the prognosis for adults with Philadelphia chromosome-negative, newly diagnosed (ND) or relapsed/refractory (R/R) acute lymphoblastic leukemia/acute biphenotypic leukemia (ALL/ABL) remains poor. The benzamide derivative entinostat inhibits histone deacetylase and induces histone hyperacetylation. The purine nucleoside analogue clofarabine is FDA-approved for R/R ALL in children 1−21 years of age. Low doses of clofarabine have been reported to induce DNA hypomethylation. We conducted a phase 1 study of low dose clofarabine with escalating doses of entinostat in adults with ND or R/R ALL/ABL. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN Adults ≥60 years with ND ALL/ABL or ≥21 years with R/R ALL/ABL received repeated cycles every 3 weeks of entinostat (4 mg, 6 mg or 8 mg orally days 1 and 8) and clofarabine (10 mg/m2/day IV for 5 days, days 3–7) (Arm A). Adults aged 40–59 years with ND ALL/ABL or age ≥21 years in first relapse received entinostat and clofarabine prior to traditional chemotherapy on day 11 (Arm B). Changes in DNA damage, global protein lysine acetylation, myeloid-derived suppressor cells and monocytes were measured in PBMCs before and during therapy. RESULTS Twenty-eight patients were treated at three entinostat dose levels with the maximum administered dose being entinostat 8 mg. The regimen was well tolerated with infectious and metabolic derangements more common in the older population versus the younger cohort. There was no severe hyperglycemia and no peripheral neuropathy in this small study. There were 2 deaths (1 sepsis, 1 intracranial bleed). Overall response rate was 32 %; it was 50 % for ND ALL/ABL. Entinostat increased global protein acetylation and inhibited immunosuppressive monocyte subpopulations, while clofarabine induced DNA damage in all cell subsets examined. CONCLUSION Entinostat plus clofarabine appears to be tolerable and active in older adults with ND ALL/ABL, but less active in R/R patients. Further evaluation of this regimen in ND ALL/ABL appears warranted.

Since 2017 the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved glasdegib, venetoclax, ivosidenib, midostaurin, CPX- 351, and gemtuzumab ozogamicin (GO) to treat persons with newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia. The European Medicines Agency (EMA) has done likewise for midostaurin, CPX-351, and GO. While increasing options for persons, particularly older ones, for whom current therapy is unsatisfactory, or simply not given, these approvals raise several concerns. Although the venetoclax and glasdegib approvals were for persons considered "unfit" for intensive induction, the criteria for fitness were not well defined (age ≥75 per se being insufficient) and are frequently subjective, making it likely that many subjects in the venetoclax and glasdegib registration trials were fit for intensive induction; for example, none had performance status 3-4. Fitness must be assessed together with the potential efficacy of a proposed therapy. We note the modest complete remission rates and durations in the venetoclax + hypomethylating agent trial. Although these formed the basis for FDA approval, it is unclear that better results might not have obtained with more intense induction, as several studies, with considerably longer-follow up, have suggested. Hence, we question the venetoclax (and glasdegib) approvals absent randomized comparisons with intense induction. Given the uncertain relation in older individuals between survival and complete remission (CR), much less responses less than CR, we are skeptical of the sole use of these responses in the ivosidenib and venetoclax approvals; we also question the use of survival, without event-free survival, in the glasdegib approval. Noting the midostaurin and CPX-351 approvals included populations not participating in the registration studies we suggest means to address this issue as well as those involving fitness, randomization, and endpoints.