Search

Supplementary Tables and Figure

Purpose:The Polo-like kinase 1 (PLK1) is a master regulator of mitosis and overexpressed in acute myeloid leukemia (AML). We conducted a phase Ib study of the PLK1 inhibitor, onvansertib, in combination with either low-dose cytarabine (LDAC) or decitabine in patients with relapsed or refractory (R/R) AML.Patients and Methods:Onvansertib was administered orally, in escalating doses, on days 1–5 in combination with either LDAC (20 mg/m2; days 1–10) or decitabine (20 mg/m2; days 1–5) in a 28-day cycle. The primary endpoint was to evaluate first-cycle dose-limiting toxicities and the MTD. Secondary and exploratory endpoints included safety, pharmacokinetics, antileukemic activity, and response biomarkers.Results:Forty patients were treated with onvansertib (12–90 mg/m2) in combination with LDAC (n = 17) or decitabine (n = 23). Onvansertib was well tolerated with most grades 3 and 4 adverse events related to myelosuppression. In the decitabine arm, the MTD was established at 60 mg/m2, and 5 (24%) of the 21 evaluable patients achieved complete remission with or without hematologic count recovery. Decrease in mutant circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) during the first cycle of therapy was associated with clinical response. Engagement of the PLK1 target, TCTP, was measured in circulating blasts and was associated with greater decrease in bone marrow blasts.Conclusions:The onvansertib and decitabine combination was well tolerated and had antileukemic activity particularly in patients with target engagement and decreased mutant ctDNA following treatment. This combination will be further investigated in the ongoing phase II trial.

Suppl Figures 1-3, Suppl Table 1 Supplemental Figure 1. Study schema. Supplemental Figure 2. Overall survival in patients treated with ENTO + 7+3. OS is censored on the date the patient was last known to be alive (if it was not known the patient had died by the end of study follow-up). Supplemental Figure 3. Heat map showing single patients (each column) by HOXA9 and MEIS1 categorization, cytogenetic or molecular risk and outcomes.

Detailed list of variants identified by targeted-NGS

Purpose:Spleen tyrosine kinase (SYK) signaling is a proposed target in acute myeloid leukemia (AML). Sensitivity to SYK inhibition has been linked to HOXA9 and MEIS1 overexpression in preclinical studies. This trial evaluated the safety and efficacy of entospletinib, a selective inhibitor of SYK, in combination with chemotherapy in untreated AML.Patients and Methods:This was an international multicenter phase Ib/II study, entospletinib dose escalation (standard 3+3 design between 200 and 400 mg twice daily) + 7+3 (cytarabine + daunorubicin) in phase Ib and entospletinib dose expansion (400 mg twice daily) + 7+3 in phase II.Results:Fifty-three patients (n = 12, phase Ib and n = 41, phase II) with previously untreated de novo (n = 39) or secondary (n = 14) AML were enrolled (58% male; median age, 60 years) in this study. The composite complete response with entospletinib + 7+3 was 70%. Patients with baseline HOXA9 and MEIS1 expression higher than the median had improved overall survival compared with patients with below median HOXA9 and MEIS1 expression. Common adverse events were cytopenias, febrile neutropenia, and infection. There were no dose-limiting toxicities. Entospletinib-related skin rash and hyperbilirubinemia were also observed.Conclusions:Entospletinib with intensive chemotherapy was well-tolerated in patients with AML. Improved survival was observed in patients with HOXA9/MEIS1 overexpression, contrasting published data demonstrating poor survival in such patients. A randomized study will be necessary to determine whether entospletinib was a mediator this observation.

Summary 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.

CPX-351, a dual-drug liposomal encapsulation of daunorubicin/cytarabine in a synergistic 1:5 molar ratio, is approved for the treatment of adults with newly diagnosed, therapy-related acute myeloid leukemia (t-AML) or AML with myelodysplasia-related changes (AML-MRC). In a pivotal phase 3 study, patients aged 60 to 75 years with newly diagnosed, high-risk/secondary AML were randomized to receive CPX-351 or conventional 7+3 chemotherapy. In the primary endpoint analysis, CPX-351 demonstrated significantly prolonged median overall survival (OS) vs 7+3. These exploratory post hoc subgroup analyses evaluated the impact of achieving complete remission (CR) or CR with incomplete neutrophil or platelet recovery (CRi) with CPX-351 (73/153 [48%]) vs conventional 7+3 (52/56 [33%]) on outcomes. CPX-351 improved median OS vs 7+3 in patients who achieved CR or CRi (25.43 vs 10.41 months; hazard ratio = 0.49; 95% confidence interval, 0.31, 0.77). Improved median OS was seen across AML subtypes (t-AML, AML-MRC), age subgroups (60 to 69 vs 70 to 75 years), patients with prior hypomethylating agent exposure, and patients who did not undergo transplantation. Patients who achieved CR or CRi with CPX-351 also had a higher rate of transplantation, a longer median OS landmarked from the date of transplantation (not reached vs 11.65 months; hazard ratio = 0.43; 95% confidence interval, 0.21, 0.89), and a safety profile that was consistent with the known safety profile of 7+3. These results suggest deeper remissions may be achieved with CPX-351, leading to improved OS. This study was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT01696084.

Introduction: Intensive induction chemotherapy followed by post-remission consolidation and/or allogeneic hematopoietic transplantation has been a standard-of-care therapy for acute myeloid leukemia (AML) for decades. In recent years, a plethora of new agents have been approved for AML treatment, dramatically changing the AML treatment landscape.Areas covered: This review provides an overview of the current role of intensive chemotherapy in the changing AML treatment landscape. PubMed-indexed publications (through 2020) and abstracts presented at major national and international conferences were reviewed for inclusion.Expert opinion: While intensive chemotherapy is standard-of-care therapy for younger patients with AML, older patients were historically viewed as universally ineligible for intensive chemotherapy; however, several studies suggest many older patients benefit from intensive chemotherapy with a curative intent, and a more holistic approach to determining eligibility for intensive treatment is recommended. Intensive strategies have also been expanded to include novel chemotherapy designs and chemotherapy in combination with targeted agents for patients with certain disease characteristics, which may permit more personalized treatment decisions. Intensive chemotherapy continues to play a pivotal role for the management of many AML patients and can offer the best chance of long-term remission, especially when followed by transplantation.

Purpose: The Polo-like kinase 1 (PLK1) is a master regulator of mitosis and overexpressed in acute myeloid leukemia (AML). We conducted a phase Ib study of the PLK1 inhibitor, onvansertib, in combination with either low-dose cytarabine (LDAC) or decitabine in patients with relapsed or refractory (R/R) AML. Patients and Methods: Onvansertib was administered orally, in escalating doses, on days 1–5 in combination with either LDAC (20 mg/m2; days 1–10) or decitabine (20 mg/m2; days 1–5) in a 28-day cycle. The primary endpoint was to evaluate first-cycle dose-limiting toxicities and the MTD. Secondary and exploratory endpoints included safety, pharmacokinetics, antileukemic activity, and response biomarkers. Results: Forty patients were treated with onvansertib (12–90 mg/m2) in combination with LDAC (n = 17) or decitabine (n = 23). Onvansertib was well tolerated with most grades 3 and 4 adverse events related to myelosuppression. In the decitabine arm, the MTD was established at 60 mg/m2, and 5 (24%) of the 21 evaluable patients achieved complete remission with or without hematologic count recovery. Decrease in mutant circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) during the first cycle of therapy was associated with clinical response. Engagement of the PLK1 target, TCTP, was measured in circulating blasts and was associated with greater decrease in bone marrow blasts. Conclusions: The onvansertib and decitabine combination was well tolerated and had antileukemic activity particularly in patients with target engagement and decreased mutant ctDNA following treatment. This combination will be further investigated in the ongoing phase II trial.

Purpose: Spleen tyrosine kinase (SYK) signaling is a proposed target in acute myeloid leukemia (AML). Sensitivity to SYK inhibition has been linked to HOXA9 and MEIS1 overexpression in preclinical studies. This trial evaluated the safety and efficacy of entospletinib, a selective inhibitor of SYK, in combination with chemotherapy in untreated AML. Patients and Methods: This was an international multicenter phase Ib/II study, entospletinib dose escalation (standard 3+3 design between 200 and 400 mg twice daily) + 7+3 (cytarabine + daunorubicin) in phase Ib and entospletinib dose expansion (400 mg twice daily) + 7+3 in phase II. Results: Fifty-three patients (n = 12, phase Ib and n = 41, phase II) with previously untreated de novo (n = 39) or secondary (n = 14) AML were enrolled (58% male; median age, 60 years) in this study. The composite complete response with entospletinib + 7+3 was 70%. Patients with baseline HOXA9 and MEIS1 expression higher than the median had improved overall survival compared with patients with below median HOXA9 and MEIS1 expression. Common adverse events were cytopenias, febrile neutropenia, and infection. There were no dose-limiting toxicities. Entospletinib-related skin rash and hyperbilirubinemia were also observed. Conclusions: Entospletinib with intensive chemotherapy was well-tolerated in patients with AML. Improved survival was observed in patients with HOXA9/MEIS1 overexpression, contrasting published data demonstrating poor survival in such patients. A randomized study will be necessary to determine whether entospletinib was a mediator this observation.

Background: ENA is an oral, selective inhibitor of IDH2 approved for the treatment (Tx) of patients (pts) with relapsed/refractory IDH2 mutated (IDH2m) AML. Here we report the results of a Phase 2 expansion and Phase 1b of the Beat AML Master Trial Phase 2/1b sub-study to assess the efficacy of Tx of newly diagnosed (ND) IDH2m AML pts ≥ 60 years of age with ENA monotherapy (ENAm) and subsequent response-driven addition of AZA Tx. (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03013998). Methods: The study initiated with a 3-outcome, 2-stage Phase 2 design, which enrolled patients on ENAm for up to 5 cycles. Pts without CR/CRi after 5 cycles of ENAm, or progression/intolerance prior to this time, were transferred to Phase 1b to receive ENA + AZA (Figure 1). Key eligibility included ND IDH2m AML pts with age ≥ 60 years and ECOG performance status 0-2. Pts received ENAm 100 mg/day in continuous 28-day cycles and ENA + AZA (75 mg/m2 days 1-7 every 28 days) for Phase 1b. Response was assessed using 2017 ELN AML criteria. The primary endpoint was CR/CRi rate. The 2-stage design required 24 pts and tested the null hypothesis (H0) that CR/CRi rate equaled 20% vs 50% and then expanded to test a revised H0 of 30% vs 50% in 60 pts (conditional alpha=0.025, power=77%). Expansion also allowed further assessment of safety of this treatment regimen. Results: At data cut off (06/18/2020), 60 pts enrolled, received ENAm, and were evaluable for the primary endpoint. Median age was 75 years and 52% were female (Table 1). Median time on ENAm was 4.7 months (mos). At data cut off, 12 pts were still on ENAm Tx. Most common reasons for discontinuing ENAm were Tx failure (defined as no response to treatment) (23 or 38%), disease progression (loss of response to treatment) (7 or 12%) and adverse events (AEs; 6 or 10%). Five pts (8%) went to transplant. CR/CRi was achieved in 28 pts (47%; adjusted 95% CI 28-59, unadjusted exact 95% CI 34-60) (Table 2). Responses were higher (p=0.04) among the 44 pts with IDH2 R140 (55%) as compared to the 16 with IDH2 R172 mutation (25%) further supporting distinct biology between these subsets. After a median follow up of 14.6 mos, the median overall survival (mOS) was 24.4 mos (95% CI 10.6-not reached). The median duration of response was not reached with 12 mos estimation of 57% (95% CI 34-75). Overall, 20 ENA-related serious adverse events (SAEs) occurred in 15 pts, the most common was differentiation syndrome (12 or 20%) and 1 had ENA-related SAE of tumor lysis syndrome (1.7%). One pt had ENA-related Grade 5 AE (renal failure/death). Most common AEs of any grade (in ≥20%) were nausea, anemia, and low potassium (Table 3). The 7-day/30-day/60-day deaths observed with ENAm were 2%/5%/11%, respectively. Phase 1b: Seventeen pts had inadequate response to ENAm and transferred to Phase 1b to receive ENA + AZA. Median time on Tx (including ENAm) was 6.2 mos and median time on Tx after pts started ENA + AZA was 2.1 mos (Table 2). Most common reasons for discontinuing ENA + AZA included Tx failure (5 or 29%), disease progression (2 or 12%), transplant, death and AEs (each 2 or 12%). CR/CRi was 41% (exact 95% CI 18-67). After a median follow up of 12.7 mos, the mOS from start of ENA + AZA combination Tx was 8.9 mos. Four ENA-related SAEs occurred in 3 pts on ENA + AZA Tx and the most common was differentiation syndrome (2 or 12.5%). One dose-limiting toxicity (Grade 3 nausea) related to both Txs was observed. Most common AEs (≥20%) of any grade were anemia, low albumin and vomiting (Table 3). One death occurred at day 13 of ENA + AZA. Conclusions: In newly diagnosed pts ≥60 years old with IDH2m AML, ENA had a low early death rate, high CR/CRi rate (47%, adjusted 95% CI 28-59), and yielded durable remissions. The most common unique toxicity with ENA was differentiation syndrome that occurred in 20% of patients. In pts who did not achieve CR/CRi with ENAm, a subset of patients achieved CR/CRi with addition of AZA. This combined approach of serial therapy with ENA monotherapy followed by AZA addition in pts with sub-optimal response resulted in a mOS exceeding 2 years for pts enrolled on study. Further focus on improving response among patients with IDH2 R172 mutations, identifying subsets of pts not responding to ENA monotherapy, and integrating new targeted agents into this treatment regimen are warranted. Figure 1 Disclosures Stein: Syndax: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Daiichi-Sankyo: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Astellas Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Agios Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bayer: Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Consultancy; Biotheryx: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; PTC Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Syros: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Consultancy. Borate:Genentech: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Daiichi Sankyo: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; AbbVie: Other: Investigator in AbbVie-funded clinical trials; Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Baer:Takeda: Other: Institutional research funding; AbbVie: Other: Institutional research funding; Astellas: Other: Institutional research funding; Forma: Other: Institutional research funding; Kite: Other: Institutional research funding; Oscotec: Other: Institutional research funding; Incyte: Other: Institutional research funding. Kovacsovics:Agios: Honoraria; Astella: Honoraria; Pfizer: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding; Jazz: Honoraria. Schiller:Astellas Pharma: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celator: Research Funding; Constellation: Research Funding; Abbvie: Research Funding; Actinium: Research Funding; Ariad: Research Funding; Stemline: Speakers Bureau; Cyclacel: Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Research Funding; Deciphera: Research Funding; DeltaFly: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Research Funding; Forma: Research Funding; FujiFilm: Research Funding; Gamida: Research Funding; Genentech-Roche: Research Funding; Geron: Research Funding; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Karyopharm: Research Funding; Kite Pharma: Research Funding; Mateon: Research Funding; MedImmune: Research Funding; Onconova: Research Funding; Pfizer: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Research Funding; Regimmune: Research Funding; Samus: Research Funding; Sangamo: Research Funding; Tolero: Research Funding; Trovagene: Research Funding; Kaiser Permanente: Consultancy; Johnson & Johnson: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Agios: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Incyte: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Ono Pharma: Consultancy; Celgene: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Sanofi: Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Speakers Bureau. Olin:Astellas: Other: Site PI; Genentech: Other: Site PI; Pfizer: Other: Site PI; Daiichi Sankyo: Other: Site PI; Genentech: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy. Foran:Trillium: Research Funding; Xencor: Research Funding; H3Biosciences: Research Funding; Agios: Honoraria, Research Funding; Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Research Funding; Boehringer Ingelheim: Research Funding; Actinium: Research Funding; Aprea: Research Funding; Aptose: Research Funding; Kura Oncology: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Revolution Medicine: Consultancy; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Servier: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Lin:Trovagene: Research Funding; Tolero Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Prescient Therapeutics: Research Funding; Abbvie: Research Funding; Bio-Path Holdings: Research Funding; Astellas Pharma: Research Funding; Aptevo: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Mateon Therapeutics: Research Funding; Ono Pharmaceutical: Research Funding; Jazz: Research Funding; Gilead Sciences: Research Funding; Genetech-Roche: Research Funding; Celyad: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Patel:DAVA Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Agios: Consultancy; France Foundation: Honoraria. Foster:Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy; Bellicum Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Macrogenics: Consultancy, Research Funding. Druker:Leukemia & Lymphoma Society: Research Funding; Henry Stewart Talks: Patents & Royalties; Iterion Therapeutics (formerly Beta Cat Pharmaceuticals): Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Vivid Biosciences: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; GRAIL: Consultancy, Current equity holder in private company, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Patient True Talks: Consultancy; The RUNX1 Research Program: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Third Coast Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; VB Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead Sciences: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Millipore (formerly Upstate Biotechnology): Patents & Royalties; MolecularMD (acquired by ICON): Consultancy, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Patents & Royalties, Research Funding; McGraw Hill: Patents & Royalties; Merck & Co: Patents & Royalties; Cepheid: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Dana-Farber Cancer Institute: Patents & Royalties; EnLiven: Consultancy, Research Funding; Aptose Therapeutics Inc. (formerly Lorus): Consultancy, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; ARIAD: Research Funding; Blueprint Medicines: Consultancy, Current equity holder in private company, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; ALLCRON: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Aileron Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Research Funding; Oregon Health & Science University: Patents & Royalties. Byrd:Acerta Pharma: Research Funding; Syndax: Research Funding; Vincera: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company, Janssen, Novartis, Gilead, TG Therapeutics: Other; Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company, Gilead, TG Therapeutics, Novartis, Janssen: Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Research Funding; Kartos Therapeutics: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Leukemia and Lymphoma Society: Other; Janssen: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company, Gilead, TG Therapeutics, BeiGene: Research Funding. Levine:Loxo: Current equity holder in private company, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; C4 Therapeutics: Current equity holder in private company, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Imago: Current equity holder in private company, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Qiagen: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Prelude Therapeutics: Research Funding; Amgen: Honoraria; Astellas: Consultancy; Morphosys: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Isoplexis: Current equity holder in private company, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Consultancy; Lilly: Consultancy, Honoraria; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Gilead: Honoraria. Mims:Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Kura Oncology: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Leukemia and Lymphoma Society: Other: Senior Medical Director for Beat AML Study; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Other: Data Safety Monitoring Board; Syndax Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Agios: Consultancy; Novartis: Speakers Bureau. OffLabel Disclosure: Enasidenib is not approved for the treatment of newly diagnosed AML.

PURPOSE: Patients with acute myeloid leukemia with high-risk cytogenetics in first complete remission (CR1) achieve better outcomes if they undergo allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) compared with consolidation chemotherapy alone. However, only approximately 40% of such patients typically proceed to HCT. METHODS: We used a prospective organized approach to rapidly identify donors to improve the allogeneic HCT rate in adults with high-risk acute myeloid leukemia in CR1. Newly diagnosed patients had cytogenetics obtained at enrollment, and those with high-risk cytogenetics underwent expedited HLA typing and were encouraged to be referred for consultation with a transplantation team with the goal of conducting an allogeneic HCT in CR1. RESULTS: Of 738 eligible patients (median age, 49 years; range, 18-60 years of age), 159 (22%) had high-risk cytogenetics and 107 of these patients (67%) achieved CR1. Seventy (65%) of the high-risk patients underwent transplantation in CR1 ( P < .001 compared with the historical rate of 40%). Median time to HCT from CR1 was 77 days (range, 20-356 days). In landmark analysis, overall survival (OS) among patients who underwent transplantation was significantly better compared with that of patients who did not undergo transplantation (2-year OS, 48% v 35%, respectively [ P = .031]). Median relapse-free survival after transplantation in the high-risk cohort who underwent transplantation in CR1 (n = 70) was 11.5 months (range, 4-47 months), and median OS after transplantation was 14 months (range, 4-44 months). CONCLUSION: Early cytogenetic testing with an organized effort to identify a suitable allogeneic HCT donor led to a CR1 transplantation rate of 65% in the high-risk group, which, in turn, led to an improvement in OS when compared with the OS of patients who did not undergo transplantation.

Leukaemia stem cells (LSCs) underlie cancer therapy resistance but targeting these cells remains difficult. The Wnt-β-catenin and PI3K-Akt pathways cooperate to promote tumorigenesis and resistance to therapy. In a mouse model in which both pathways are activated in stem and progenitor cells, LSCs expanded under chemotherapy-induced stress. Since Akt can activate β-catenin, inhibiting this interaction might target therapy-resistant LSCs. High-throughput screening identified doxorubicin (DXR) as an inhibitor of the Akt-β-catenin interaction at low doses. Here we repurposed DXR as a targeted inhibitor rather than a broadly cytotoxic chemotherapy. Targeted DXR reduced Akt-activated β-catenin levels in chemoresistant LSCs and reduced LSC tumorigenic activity. Mechanistically, β-catenin binds multiple immune-checkpoint gene loci, and targeted DXR treatment inhibited expression of multiple immune checkpoints specifically in LSCs, including PD-L1, TIM3 and CD24. Overall, LSCs exhibit distinct properties of immune resistance that are reduced by inhibiting Akt-activated β-catenin. These findings suggest a strategy for overcoming cancer therapy resistance and immune escape.

Simple Summary Cytokine release syndrome is a potentially life-threatening complication of therapy with T-cell engaging bispecific antibodies. Here we evaluated the risk, characteristics and biomarkers of treatment-emergent cytokine release syndrome in patients with relapsed/refractory acute myeloid leukemia or myelodysplastic syndrome who received weekly intravenous infusions of the CD3xCD123 bispecific antibody APVO436. Cytokine release syndrome was encountered in 10 of 46 patients (21.7%) treated with APVO436 with a cumulative Grade 3/4 cytokine release syndrome incidence of 8.7%. Cytokine profiling in patients who developed cytokine release syndrome after APVO436 infusion indicated that the predominant cytokine in this inflammatory cytokine response was IL-6. The findings from this research provide new insights regarding the biology and effective management of cytokine release syndrome in leukemia patients treated with T-cell redirecting bispecific antibodies. Abstract We evaluate the risk, characteristics and biomarkers of treatment-emergent cytokine release syndrome (CRS) in patients with relapsed/refractory acute myeloid leukemia (AML) or myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) who received APVO436 during the dose-escalation phase of a Phase 1B study (ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier: NCT03647800). Of four patients who developed Grade ≥ 3 CRS, two received steroid prophylaxis. The dose level, gender, race, obesity, or baseline hematologic parameters in peripheral blood did not predict the risk of CRS. Patients with a higher leukemia burden as determined by a higher total WBC, higher percentage of blasts in bone marrow, or higher percentage of blasts in peripheral blood (by hematopathology or immunophenotyping) did not have a higher incidence of CRS. There was an age difference between patients who did versus patients who did not develop CRS (72.9 ± 1.6 years (Median 73.5 years) vs. 63.3 ± 2.3 years (Median: 65.0 years), which was borderline significant (p = 0.04). Premedication with steroids did not eliminate the risk of CRS. Cytokine profiling in patients who developed CRS after APVO436 infusion indicates that the predominant cytokine in this inflammatory cytokine response was IL-6. APVO436-associated CRS was generally manageable with tocilizumab with or without dexamethasone. Notably, the development of CRS after APVO436 therapy did not appear to be associated with a response. The prolonged stabilization of disease, partial remissions and complete remissions were achieved in both patients who experienced CRS, as well as patients who did not experience CRS after APVO436 infusions.

Simple Summary AML is a common form of blood cancer in adults. This study was undertaken to evaluate if AML patients who have failed the available standard treatment options could tolerate and potentially benefit from a new form of therapy. This new therapy activates patients’ own immune system against AML cells. The findings from this research may provide the foundation for a potentially more effective future form of standard therapy that is less likely to fail. Abstract APVO436 is a recombinant T cell-engaging humanized bispecific antibody designed to redirect host T cell cytotoxicity in an MHC-independent manner to CD123-expressing blast cells from patients with hematologic malignancies and has exhibited single-agent anti-leukemia activity in murine xenograft models of acute myeloid leukemia (AML). In this first-in-human (FIH) multicenter phase 1B study, we sought to determine the safety and tolerability of APVO436 in R/R AML/myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) patients and identify a clinically active recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) level for its further clinical development. A total of 46 R/R AML/MDS patients who had failed 1–8 prior lines of therapy received APVO436 as weekly intravenous (IV) infusions at 10 different dose levels, ranging from a Minimum Anticipated Biological Effect Level (MABEL) of 0.3 mcg to 60 mcg. APVO436 exhibited a favorable safety profile with acceptable tolerability and manageable drug-related adverse events (AEs), and its maximum tolerated dose (MTD) was not reached at a weekly dose of 60 mcg. The most common APVO436-related AEs were infusion-related reactions (IRR) occurring in 13 (28.3%) patients and cytokine release syndrome (CRS) occurring in 10 (21.7%). The single dose RP2D level was identified as 0.2 mcg/kg. Preliminary efficacy signals were observed in both AML and MDS patients: Prolonged stable disease (SD), partial remissions (PR), and complete remissions (CR) were observed in R/R AML patients as best overall responses to APVO436 at the RP2D level. Three of six evaluable MDS patients had marrow CRs. The safety and preliminary evidence of efficacy of APVO436 in R/R AML and MDS patients warrant further investigation of its clinical impact potential.

Introduction: CPX-351 (Vyxeos®; daunorubicin and cytarabine liposome for injection), a dual-drug liposomal encapsulation of daunorubicin and cytarabine in a synergistic 1:5 molar drug ratio, has been approved by the US FDA and EMA for the treatment of adults with newly diagnosed therapy-related AML or AML with myelodysplasia-related changes. A randomized phase 3 study that evaluated patients 60 to 75 years of age with newly diagnosed high-risk/secondary AML provided the basis for approval and demonstrated that induction followed by consolidation with CPX-351 significantly improved overall survival and remission rates versus conventional 7+3, with a comparable safety profile. Several targeted therapies have demonstrated efficacy when added to cytotoxic therapy for the treatment of patients with previously untreated AML, including venetoclax (Venclexta®/Venclyxto®; a B-cell leukemia/lymphoma-2 [BCL-2] inhibitor), midostaurin (Rydapt®; a FMS-related tyrosine kinase 3 [FLT3] inhibitor), and enasidenib (Idhifa®; an isocitrate dehydrogenase 2 [IDH2] inhibitor). Preclinical data indicate synergistic activity may be achieved with CPX-351 in combination with venetoclax or midostaurin. Results of these studies suggest a rationale for the combination of targeted therapies using CPX-351 as a chemotherapy backbone. Study Design and Methods: V-FAST (Vyxeos - First Phase Assessment with Targeted Agents) is an open-label, multicenter, multi-arm, nonrandomized, phase 1b master trial (ClinicalTrials.gov #NCT04075747) to evaluate CPX-351 in combination with targeted agents (venetoclax, midostaurin, or enasidenib) in adults with previously untreated AML who are considered fit for intensive chemotherapy. As V-FAST is a master trial, it is designed to permit the expedited incorporation of CPX-351 combinations with other targeted agents into the study as it proceeds, thus ensuring a timely investigation of novel combinations moving forward. Key eligibility criteria are shown in Table 1. The primary study endpoints are to establish the recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) and safety of each combination regimen. Secondary endpoints include remission rates (via morphologic assessment), bone marrow measurable residual disease status, and pharmacokinetics. Exploratory endpoints include duration of remission, overall survival, event-free survival, and the proportion of patients proceeding to hematopoietic cell transplantation. Patients will be monitored for safety until 1 month following the end of treatment and survival for up to 2 years following the first administration of treatment. Cytogenetic and/or molecular testing will determine which treatment arm each patient is assigned to (ie, no FLT3 or IDH2 mutations: CPX-351 plus venetoclax; FLT3 mutation: CPX-351 plus midostaurin; IDH2 mutation: CPX-351 plus enasidenib). For each combination, a dose-exploration phase (standard 3+3 design; up to 12 patients/combination) will employ dose de-escalation or escalation of CPX-351 and/or the targeted agent based on the occurrence of dose-limiting toxicities to determine a RP2D and evaluate the safety of the combination. The initial cohort for each arm will be treated with the dosing described in Table 2. In the subsequent expansion phase for each combination, an additional 20 patients will be treated to confirm the RP2D, further evaluate safety, and provide an initial assessment of efficacy. In both study phases, CPX-351 will be administered intravenously by 90-minute infusion on Days 1, 3, and 5; targeted therapies will be administered per a standard route for each agent. Patients may receive 1 to 2 induction cycles of combination therapy. Those achieving remission may receive up to 2 consolidation cycles with CPX-351 plus the targeted agent received during induction; hematopoietic stem cell transplantation is permitted in place of or following chemotherapy consolidation at the discretion of the treating physician. This study is ongoing and actively enrolling patients. Disclosures Lin: Celgene: Research Funding; Aptevo: Research Funding; Abbvie: Research Funding; Astellas Pharma: Research Funding; Ono Pharmaceutical: Research Funding; Mateon Therapeutics: Research Funding; Prescient Therapeutics: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Celyad: Research Funding; Genetech-Roche: Research Funding; Gilead Sciences: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Trovagene: Research Funding; Tolero Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Bio-Path Holdings: Research Funding; Jazz: Research Funding. Mannis:AbbVie, Agios, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Genentech: Consultancy; Glycomimetics, Forty Seven, Inc, Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding. Erba:Glycomimetics: Other: member of Scientific Steering Committee; AbbVie, Daiichi Sankyo, Forma, ImmunoGen, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, MacroGenics, Novartis, PTC: Research Funding; AbbVie, Agios, Celgene, Incyte, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, and Novartis: Speakers Bureau; AbbVie, Agios, Amgen, Astellas, Celgene, Daiichi Sankyo, Glycomimetics, ImmunoGen, Incyte, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, MacroGenics, Novartis, and Pfizer: Consultancy; Celgene: Other: chair of the Scientific Steering Committee; Covance (AbbVie): Other: chair of the Independent Review Committee. Levis:Daiichi-Sankyo: Honoraria; FujiFilm: Honoraria, Research Funding; Astellas: Honoraria, Research Funding; Amgen: Honoraria; Menarini: Honoraria. Zou:Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Faderl:Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Cheung:Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Pullarkat:Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; AbbVie, Inc.: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Genetech: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Dova: Consultancy, Honoraria; Servier: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. OffLabel Disclosure: This study will explore CPX-351 in combination with targeted agents for the treatment of adults with AML.

We present primary results from the phase 1b GO29754 study evaluating the safety and tolerability of atezolizumab, a programmed death-ligand 1 inhibitor, alone and in combination with azacitidine, a hypomethylating agent (HMA), in patients with relapsed/refractory (R/R) or HMA-naïve myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS). Patients with R/R MDS received atezolizumab for 12 months (cohort A) or atezolizumab plus azacitidine for 6 cycles followed by atezolizumab as maintenance for 8 cycles (cohort B). Patients with HMA-naïve MDS received atezolizumab plus azacitidine until loss of clinical benefit (cohort C). Safety, activity, and exploratory end points were investigated. Forty-six patients were enrolled and received treatment (cohort A, n = 11; cohort B, n = 14; cohort C, n = 21). All patients experienced ≥1 adverse event (AE) on study, and all patients discontinued atezolizumab. In cohort A, 7 patients (63.6%) died, and no patients responded. In cohort B, 8 patients (57.1%) discontinued azacitidine, 11 (78.6%) died, and 2 (14.3%) responded. In cohort C, all 21 patients discontinued azacitidine, 13 died (61.9%), and 13 (61.9%) responded. The study was terminated by the sponsor before completion of recruitment because of the unexpected high early death rate in cohort C (6 [46.2%] of 13 deaths were due to AEs and occurred within the first 4 treatment cycles.). The high death rate and poor efficacy observed in this study do not support a favorable risk-benefit profile for atezolizumab as a single agent or in combination with azacitidine in R/R or HMA-naïve MDS. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT02508870.

Purpose Daunorubicin can induce left ventricular dysfunction and QT interval prolongation. This study assessed the effects of CPX-351, a liposomal encapsulation of cytarabine and daunorubicin, on cardiac repolarization. Methods Twenty-six adults with acute leukemia were treated with CPX-351 for 1–2 induction cycles and ≤ 4 consolidation cycles. The primary endpoint was mean change in QTcF from baseline. Results Mean QTcF changes were 30 h. Thirteen (50%) patients achieved remission. The most common adverse events were febrile neutropenia, fatigue, and nausea. Conclusions The cytarabine and daunorubicin in CPX-351 liposomes were metabolized and excreted similarly to conventional formulation; however, plasma pharmacokinetics were altered. CPX-351 did not prolong the QT interval, suggesting that CPX-351 may induce less cardiotoxicity than previously reported for conventional daunorubicin. Trial registration Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT02238925. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1007/s00280-019-03856-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

TPS7069 Background: Fosciclopirox (F) is a γ-secretase inhibitor being developed for the treatment of acute myeloid leukemia (AML). Following intravenous (IV) administration, F is rapidly and completely metabolized to its active metabolite, ciclopirox (CPX). CPX binds to γ-secretase complex proteins Presenilin 1 and Nicastrin, which are essential for Notch activation. In HL60 cells, CPX inhibits Notch 1 and Notch 2 expression, reduces levels of γ-secretase complex proteins Presenilin 1 and Nicastrin, and decreases expression of the downstream Notch target gene Hes-1. Utilizing Notable Labs predictive precision medicine platform, bone marrow (BM) and peripheral blood (PB) samples obtained from 10 AML patients treated with CPX demonstrated significant blast count reductions. Methods: Study CPX-POM-003 (NCT04956042) is an open-label Phase 1B/2A, trial designed to characterize the efficacy, safety, and PK/PD of F alone and in combination with cytarabine (ara-C) in patients with relapsed/refractory AML (R/R AML). Eligible patients must be 18 years of age or older with relapsed AML after complete remission or with primary refractory AML refractory to at least two cycles of induction therapy. There will be up to three cohorts of patients, approximately 42 R/R AML patients, evaluated. If disease response to F alone (Cohort 1a) is observed in at least 4 of 14 patients, an additional 14 patients will be enrolled in Cohort 1b. If disease response is not observed following F alone, the study may be terminated or a second cohort, Cohort 2a, may be initiated to evaluate the combination of F + ara-C. If disease response to F + ara-C is observed in at least 4 of 14 patients, an additional 14 patients will be enrolled in Cohort 2b. If response to F + ara-C is not observed in at least 4 of 14 patients, the study will be stopped for futility. F is being administered as 900 mg/m2 once daily as a 20-minute IV infusion on Days 1 to 5 of each 21-day treatment cycle. Ara-C is administered as 1 gm/m2 once daily on Days 1 to 5 of each cycle. BM and PB samples are collected prior to and during Cycles 1 (C1) and 2 (C2) for disease response assessment and blast count determination. Additional BM and PB samples are obtained after every two cycles beyond C2 for patients continuing treatment. Disease response is determined based on Döhner et al, Blood 2017;129(4)424-447. Next Generation Sequencing (NGS) profiles will be determined prior to and at the end of C1, and thereafter as clinically indicated. Immunohistochemistry will be performed on BM samples to elucidate drug mechanism. Ex vivo Drug Sensitivity Screening (DSS) will be performed on BM and PB samples obtained prior to treatment as well as on C1 Days 8 and 21. The steady-state plasma pharmacokinetics of F are being characterized during C1. Enrollment began in October 2022 with four patients enrolled to date. Clinical trial information: NCT04956042.