Summary Background Drug treatments for patients with high-risk myelodysplastic syndromes provide no survival advantage. In this trial, we aimed to assess the effect of azacitidine on overall survival ...compared with the three commonest conventional care regimens. Methods In a phase III, international, multicentre, controlled, parallel-group, open-label trial, patients with higher-risk myelodysplastic syndromes were randomly assigned one-to-one to receive azacitidine (75 mg/m2 per day for 7 days every 28 days) or conventional care (best supportive care, low-dose cytarabine, or intensive chemotherapy as selected by investigators before randomisation). Patients were stratified by French–American–British and international prognostic scoring system classifications; randomisation was done with a block size of four. The primary endpoint was overall survival. Efficacy analyses were by intention to treat for all patients assigned to receive treatment. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT00071799. Findings Between Feb 13, 2004, and Aug 7, 2006, 358 patients were randomly assigned to receive azacitidine (n=179) or conventional care regimens (n=179). Four patients in the azacitidine and 14 in the conventional care groups received no study drugs but were included in the intention-to-treat efficacy analysis. After a median follow-up of 21·1 months (IQR 15·1–26·9), median overall survival was 24·5 months (9·9–not reached) for the azacitidine group versus 15·0 months (5·6–24·1) for the conventional care group (hazard ratio 0·58; 95% CI 0·43–0·77; stratified log-rank p=0·0001). At last follow-up, 82 patients in the azacitidine group had died compared with 113 in the conventional care group. At 2 years, on the basis of Kaplan-Meier estimates, 50·8% (95% CI 42·1–58·8) of patients in the azacitidine group were alive compared with 26·2% (18·7–34·3) in the conventional care group (p<0·0001). Peripheral cytopenias were the most common grade 3–4 adverse events for all treatments. Interpretation Treatment with azacitidine increases overall survival in patients with higher-risk myelodysplastic syndromes relative to conventional care. Funding Celgene Corporation.
Older patients with acute myeloid leukemia were treated with intensive chemotherapy and then randomly assigned to receive placebo or oral azacitidine (CC-486) daily for 14 days per 28-day cycle. ...CC-486 was associated with significantly longer relapse-free and overall survival, with some gastrointestinal side effects but maintenance of quality of life.
In a phase III randomized trial, azacitidine significantly prolonged overall survival (OS) compared with conventional care regimens (CCRs) in patients with intermediate-2- and high-risk ...myelodysplastic syndromes. Approximately one third of these patients were classified as having acute myeloid leukemia (AML) under current WHO criteria. This analysis compared the effects of azacitidine versus CCR on OS in this subgroup.
Patients were randomly assigned to receive subcutaneous azacitidine 75 mg/m(2)/d or CCR (best supportive care BSC only, low-dose cytarabine (LDAC), or intensive chemotherapy IC).
Of the 113 elderly patients (median age, 70 years) randomly assigned to receive azacitidine (n = 55) or CCR (n = 58; 47% BSC, 34% LDAC, 19% IC), 86% were considered unfit for IC. At a median follow-up of 20.1 months, median OS for azacitidine-treated patients was 24.5 months compared with 16.0 months for CCR-treated patients (hazard ratio = 0.47; 95% CI, 0.28 to 0.79; P = .005), and 2-year OS rates were 50% and 16%, respectively (P = .001). Two-year OS rates were higher with azacitidine versus CCR in patients considered unfit for IC (P = .0003). Azacitidine was associated with fewer total days in hospital (P < .0001) than CCR.
In older adult patients with low marrow blast count (20% to 30%) WHO-defined AML, azacitidine significantly prolongs OS and significantly improves several patient morbidity measures compared with CCR.
Azacitidine (AZA) is the current standard of care for high-risk (ie, International Prognostic Scoring System high or intermediate 2) myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS), but most patients will experience ...primary or secondary treatment failure. The outcome of these patients has not yet been described.
Overall, 435 patients with high-risk MDS and former refractory anemia with excess blasts in transformation (RAEB-T) were evaluated for outcome after AZA failure. The cohort of patients included four data sets (ie, AZA001, J9950, and J0443 trials and the French compassionate use program).
The median follow-up after AZA failure was 15 months. The median overall survival was 5.6 months, and the 2-year survival probability was 15%. Increasing age, male sex, high-risk cytogenetics, higher bone marrow blast count, and the absence of prior hematologic response to AZA were associated with significantly worse survival in multivariate analysis. Data on treatment administered after AZA failure were available for 270 patients. Allogeneic stem-cell transplantation and investigational agents were associated with a better outcome when compared with conventional clinical care.
Outcome after AZA failure is poor. Our results should serve as a basis for designing second-line clinical trials in this population.
Myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) are clonal hematopoietic disorders that are more common in patients aged ≥ 60 years and are incurable with conventional therapies. Reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) ...allogeneic hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation is potentially curative but has additional mortality risk. We evaluated RIC transplantation versus nontransplantation therapies in older patients with MDS stratified by International Prognostic Scoring System (IPSS) risk.
A Markov decision model with quality-of-life utility estimates for different MDS and transplantation states was assessed. Outcomes were life expectancy (LE) and quality-adjusted life expectancy (QALE). A total of 514 patients with de novo MDS aged 60 to 70 years were evaluated. Chronic myelomonocytic leukemia, isolated 5q- syndrome, unclassifiable, and therapy-related MDS were excluded. Transplantation using T-cell depletion or HLA-mismatched or umbilical cord donors was also excluded. RIC transplantation (n = 132) stratified by IPSS risk was compared with best supportive care for patients with nonanemic low/intermediate-1 IPSS (n = 123), hematopoietic growth factors for patients with anemic low/intermediate-1 IPSS (n = 94), and hypomethylating agents for patients with intermediate-2/high IPSS (n = 165).
For patients with low/intermediate-1 IPSS MDS, RIC transplantation LE was 38 months versus 77 months with nontransplantation approaches. QALE and sensitivity analysis did not favor RIC transplantation across plausible utility estimates. For intermediate-2/high IPSS MDS, RIC transplantation LE was 36 months versus 28 months for nontransplantation therapies. QALE and sensitivity analysis favored RIC transplantation across plausible utility estimates.
For patients with de novo MDS aged 60 to 70 years, favored treatments vary with IPSS risk. For low/intermediate-1 IPSS, nontransplantation approaches are preferred. For intermediate-2/high IPSS, RIC transplantation offers overall and quality-adjusted survival benefit.
This multicenter, randomized, open-label, phase 3 trial evaluated azacitidine efficacy and safety vs conventional care regimens (CCRs) in 488 patients age ≥65 years with newly diagnosed acute myeloid ...leukemia (AML) with >30% bone marrow blasts. Before randomization, a CCR (standard induction chemotherapy, low-dose ara-c, or supportive care only) was preselected for each patient. Patients then were assigned 1:1 to azacitidine (n = 241) or CCR (n = 247). Patients assigned to CCR received their preselected treatment. Median overall survival (OS) was increased with azacitidine vs CCR: 10.4 months (95% confidence interval CI, 8.0-12.7 months) vs 6.5 months (95% CI, 5.0-8.6 months), respectively (hazard ratio HR was 0.85; 95% CI, 0.69-1.03; stratified log-rank P = .1009). One-year survival rates with azacitidine and CCR were 46.5% and 34.2%, respectively (difference, 12.3%; 95% CI, 3.5%-21.0%). A prespecified analysis censoring patients who received AML treatment after discontinuing study drug showed median OS with azacitidine vs CCR was 12.1 months (95% CI, 9.2-14.2 months) vs 6.9 months (95% CI, 5.1-9.6 months; HR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.60-0.96; stratified log-rank P = .0190). Univariate analysis showed favorable trends for azacitidine compared with CCR across all subgroups defined by baseline demographic and disease features. Adverse events were consistent with the well-established safety profile of azacitidine. Azacitidine may be an important treatment option for this difficult-to-treat AML population. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT01074047.
•Azacitidine increased median overall survival by 3.8 months vs current commonly used AML treatments (10.4 vs 6.5 months; P = .1009).•Azacitidine safety in patients age ≥65 years with AML (>30% blasts) was consistent with its known safety profile in other trials.
Within the last two decades, a new understanding of the biology of myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) has developed. With this understanding, new classification systems, such as the WHO diagnostic ...criteria, and the International Prognostic Scoring System and response criteria guidelines reported by the International Working Group (IWG) have been developed. We report the combined results of three previously reported clinical trials (n = 309) with azacitidine using the WHO classification system for MDS and acute myeloid leukemia (AML) and IWG criteria for response.
Data from three sequential Cancer and Leukemia Group B trials with azacitidine were recollected and reanalyzed as part of the New Drug Application process. The trials were conducted with either intravenous or subcutaneous azacitidine (75 mg/m2/d for 7 days every 28 days).
Complete remissions were seen in 10% to 17% of azacitidine-treated patients; partial remissions were rare; 23% to 36% of patients had hematologic improvement (HI). The median number of cycles to first response was three, and 90% of responses were seen by cycle 6. Using current WHO criteria, 103 patients had AML at baseline; 35% to 48% had HI or better responses. The median survival time for the 27 AML patients randomly assigned to azacitidine was 19.3 months compared with 12.9 months for the 25 patients assigned to observation. Furthermore, azacitidine did not increase the rate of infection or bleeding above the rate caused by underlying disease.
Azacitidine provides important clinical benefits for patients with high-risk MDS.
The Omicron (B.1.1.529) variant of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) was initially identified in November 2021 in South Africa and Botswana, as well as in a sample from a ...traveller from South Africa in Hong Kong
. Since then, Omicron has been detected globally. This variant appears to be at least as infectious as Delta (B.1.617.2), has already caused superspreader events
, and has outcompeted Delta within weeks in several countries and metropolitan areas. Omicron hosts an unprecedented number of mutations in its spike gene and early reports have provided evidence for extensive immune escape and reduced vaccine effectiveness
. Here we investigated the virus-neutralizing and spike protein-binding activity of sera from convalescent, double mRNA-vaccinated, mRNA-boosted, convalescent double-vaccinated and convalescent boosted individuals against wild-type, Beta (B.1.351) and Omicron SARS-CoV-2 isolates and spike proteins. Neutralizing activity of sera from convalescent and double-vaccinated participants was undetectable or very low against Omicron compared with the wild-type virus, whereas neutralizing activity of sera from individuals who had been exposed to spike three or four times through infection and vaccination was maintained, although at significantly reduced levels. Binding to the receptor-binding and N-terminal domains of the Omicron spike protein was reduced compared with binding to the wild type in convalescent unvaccinated individuals, but was mostly retained in vaccinated individuals.
Measurable residual disease (MRD) in patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) in remission after intensive chemotherapy is predictive of early relapse and poor survival. Postremission maintenance ...therapy that prolongs MRD negativity or converts MRD+ patients to MRD− status may delay or prevent relapse and improve overall survival (OS). In the phase 3 QUAZAR AML-001 trial, oral azacitidine (oral-AZA; formerly CC-486), a hypomethylating agent, significantly prolonged OS and relapse-free survival (RFS) compared with placebo in patients aged ≥55 years with AML in first remission after intensive chemotherapy who were not candidates for hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. In this trial, MRD (≥0.1% leukemic cells in bone marrow) was assessed by multiparameter flow cytometry in serial samples collected at baseline and on day 1 of every 3 cycles. As expected, baseline MRD status was significantly associated with both OS and RFS. Multivariate analyses showed oral-AZA significantly improved OS and RFS vs placebo independent of baseline MRD status. Oral-AZA treatment also extended the duration of MRD negativity by 6 months vs placebo and resulted in a higher rate of conversion from MRD+ at baseline to MRD− during treatment: 37% vs 19%, respectively. In the oral-AZA arm, 24% of MRD responders achieved MRD negativity >6 months after treatment initiation. Although presence or absence of MRD was a strong prognostic indicator of OS and RFS, there were added survival benefits with oral-AZA maintenance therapy compared with placebo, independent of patients' MRD status at baseline. Registered at clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT01757535.
•Oral-AZA significantly improved overall and RFS vs placebo independent of baseline MRD status.•Rate of MRD+ to MRD− conversion was higher with oral-AZA; one-fourth of MRD responders achieved MRD negativity >6 months after starting oral-AZA.
Display omitted
Prognostic factors for response and survival in higher-risk myelodysplastic syndrome patients treated with azacitidine (AZA) remain largely unknown. Two hundred eighty-two consecutive high or ...intermediate-2 risk myelodysplastic syndrome patients received AZA in a compassionate, patient-named program. Diagnosis was RA/RARS/RCMD in 4%, RAEB-1 in 20%, RAEB-2 in 54%, and RAEB-t (AML with 21%-30% marrow blasts) in 22%. Cytogenetic risk was good in 31%, intermediate in 17%, and poor in 47%. Patients received AZA for a median of 6 cycles (1-52). Previous low-dose cytosine arabinoside treatment (P = .009), bone marrow blasts > 15% (P = .004), and abnormal karyotype (P = .03) independently predicted lower response rates. Complex karyotype predicted shorter responses (P = .0003). Performance status ≥ 2, intermediate- and poor-risk cytogenetics, presence of circulating blasts, and red blood cell transfusion dependency ≥ 4 units/8 weeks (all P < 10−4) independently predicted poorer overall survival (OS). A prognostic score based on those factors discriminated 3 risk groups with median OS not reached, 15.0 and 6.1 months, respectively (P < 10−4). This prognostic score was validated in an independent set of patients receiving AZA in the AZA-001 trial (P = .003). Achievement of hematological improvement in patients who did not obtain complete or partial remission was associated with improved OS (P < 10−4). In conclusion, routine tests can identify subgroups of patients with distinct prognosis with AZA treatment.
PDF
