Explore the vast range of titles available.

Genomic investigations of acute myeloid leukemia (AML) have demonstrated that several genes are recurrently mutated, leading to new genomic classifications, predictive biomarkers, and new therapeutic targets. Mutations of the FMS-like tyrosine kinase 3 ( FLT3 ) gene occur in approximately 30% of all AML cases, with the internal tandem duplication (ITD) representing the most common type of FLT3 mutation ( FLT3 -ITD; approximately 25% of all AML cases). FLT3 -ITD is a common driver mutation that presents with a high leukemic burden and confers a poor prognosis in patients with AML. The prognostic value of a FLT3 mutation in the tyrosine kinase domain ( FLT3 -TKD), which has a lower incidence in AML (approximately 7–10% of all cases), is uncertain. Accumulating evidence demonstrates that FLT3 mutational status evolves throughout the disease continuum. This so-called clonal evolution, together with the identification of FLT3 -ITD as a negative prognostic marker, serves to highlight the importance of FLT3 -ITD testing at diagnosis and again at relapse. Earlier identification of FLT3 mutations will help provide a better understanding of the patient’s disease and enable targeted treatment that may help patients achieve longer and more durable remissions. First-generation FLT3 inhibitors developed for clinical use are broad-spectrum, multikinase inhibitors; however, next-generation FLT3 inhibitors are more specific, more potent, and have fewer toxicities associated with off-target effects. Primary and secondary acquired resistance to FLT3 inhibitors remains a challenge and provides a rationale for combining FLT3 inhibitors with other therapies, both conventional and investigational. This review focuses on the pathological and prognostic role of FLT3 mutations in AML, clinical classification of the disease, recent progress with next-generation FLT3 inhibitors, and mechanisms of resistance to FLT3 inhibitors.

Clinical recommendations for Acute Myeloid Leukemia (AML) classification and risk-stratification remain heavily reliant on cytogenetic findings at diagnosis, which are present in <50% of patients. Using comprehensive molecular profiling data from 3,653 patients we characterize and validate 16 molecular classes describing 100% of AML patients. Each class represents diverse biological AML subgroups, and is associated with distinct clinical presentation, likelihood of response to induction chemotherapy, risk of relapse and death over time. Secondary AML-2, emerges as the second largest class (24%), associates with high-risk disease, poor prognosis irrespective of flow Minimal Residual Disease (MRD) negativity, and derives significant benefit from transplantation. Guided by class membership we derive a 3-tier risk-stratification score that re-stratifies 26% of patients as compared to standard of care. This results in a unified framework for disease classification and risk-stratification in AML that relies on information from cytogenetics and 32 genes. Last, we develop an open-access patient-tailored clinical decision support tool. Classification and risk-stratification for Acute Myeloid Leukemia (AML) at diagnosis are primarily based on cytogenetics and only a few gene mutations. Here, the authors study the genomic landscape of 3653 AML patients and characterize 16 non-overlapping molecular subgroups of clinical relevance for disease classification and risk prognostication.

Patients with multiple myeloma treated with lenalidomide maintenance therapy have improved progression-free survival, primarily following autologous stem-cell transplantation. A beneficial effect of lenalidomide maintenance therapy on overall survival in this setting has been inconsistent between individual studies. Minimal data are available on the effect of maintenance lenalidomide in more aggressive disease states, such as patients with cytogenetic high-risk disease or patients ineligible for transplantation. We aimed to assess lenalidomide maintenance versus observation in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma, including cytogenetic risk and transplantation status subgroup analyses. The Myeloma XI trial was an open-label, randomised, phase 3, adaptive design trial with three randomisation stages done at 110 National Health Service hospitals in England, Wales, and Scotland. There were three potential randomisations in the study: induction treatment (allocation by transplantation eligibility status); intensification treatment (allocation by response to induction therapy); and maintenance treatment. Here, we report the results of the randomisation to maintenance treatment. Eligible patients for maintenance randomisation were aged 18 years or older and had symptomatic or non-secretory multiple myeloma, had completed their assigned induction therapy as per protocol and had achieved at least a minimal response to protocol treatment, including lenalidomide. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1 from Jan 13, 2011, to Jun 27, 2013, and 2:1 from Jun 28, 2013, to Aug 11, 2017) to lenalidomide maintenance (10 mg orally on days 1–21 of a 28-day cycle) or observation, and stratified by allocated induction and intensification treatment, and centre. The co-primary endpoints were progression-free survival and overall survival, analysed by intention to treat. Safety analysis was per protocol. This study is registered with the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN49407852, and clinicaltrialsregister.eu, number 2009-010956-93, and has completed recruitment. Between Jan 13, 2011, and Aug 11, 2017, 1917 patients were accrued to the maintenance treatment randomisation of the trial. 1137 patients were assigned to lenalidomide maintenance and 834 patients to observation. After a median follow-up of 31 months (IQR 18–50), median progression-free survival was 39 months (95% CI 36–42) with lenalidomide and 20 months (18–22) with observation (hazard ratio [HR] 0·46 [95% CI 0·41–0·53]; p<0·0001), and 3-year overall survival was 78·6% (95% Cl 75·6–81·6) in the lenalidomide group and 75·8% (72·4–79·2) in the observation group (HR 0·87 [95% CI 0·73–1·05]; p=0·15). Progression-free survival was improved with lenalidomide compared with observation across all prespecified subgroups. On prespecified subgroup analyses by transplantation status, 3-year overall survival in transplantation-eligible patients was 87·5% (95% Cl 84·3–90·7) in the lenalidomide group and 80·2% (76·0–84·4) in the observation group (HR 0·69 [95% CI 0·52–0·93]; p=0·014), and in transplantation-ineligible patients it was 66·8% (61·6–72·1) in the lenalidomide group and 69·8% (64·4–75·2) in the observation group (1·02 [0·80–1·29]; p=0·88). By cytogenetic risk group, in standard-risk patients, 3-year overall survival was 86·4% (95% CI 80·0–90·9) in the lenalidomide group compared with 81·3% (74·2–86·7) in the observation group, and in high-risk patients, it was 74.9% (65·8–81·9) in the lenalidomide group compared with 63·7% (52·8–72·7) in the observation group; and in ultra-high-risk patients it was 62·9% (46·0–75·8) compared with 43·5% (22·2–63·1). Since these subgroup analyses results were not powered they should be interpreted with caution. The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events for patients taking lenalidomide were haematological, including neutropenia (362 [33%] patients), thrombocytopenia (72 [7%] patients), and anaemia (42 [4%] patients). Serious adverse events were reported in 494 (45%) of 1097 patients receiving lenalidomide compared with 150 (17%) of 874 patients on observation. The most common serious adverse events were infections in both the lenalidomide group and the observation group. 460 deaths occurred during maintenance treatment, 234 (21%) in the lenalidomide group and 226 (27%) in the observation group, and no deaths in the lenalidomide group were deemed treatment related. Maintenance therapy with lenalidomide significantly improved progression-free survival in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma compared with observation, but did not improve overall survival in the intention-to-treat analysis of the whole trial population. The manageable safety profile of this drug and the encouraging results in subgroup analyses of patients across all cytogenetic risk groups support further investigation of maintenance lenalidomide in this setting. Cancer Research UK, Celgene, Amgen, Merck, and Myeloma UK.

Acute promyelocytic leukaemia is a chemotherapy-sensitive subgroup of acute myeloid leukaemia characterised by the presence of the PML–RARA fusion transcript. The present standard of care, chemotherapy and all-trans retinoic acid (ATRA), results in a high proportion of patients being cured. In this study, we compare a chemotherapy-free ATRA and arsenic trioxide treatment regimen with the standard chemotherapy-based regimen (ATRA and idarubicin) in both high-risk and low-risk patients with acute promyelocytic leukaemia. In the randomised, controlled, multicentre, AML17 trial, eligible patients (aged ≥16 years) with acute promyelocytic leukaemia, confirmed by the presence of the PML–RARA transcript and without significant cardiac or pulmonary comorbidities or active malignancy, and who were not pregnant or breastfeeding, were enrolled from 81 UK hospitals and randomised 1:1 to receive treatment with ATRA and arsenic trioxide or ATRA and idarubicin. ATRA was given to participants in both groups in a daily divided oral dose of 45 mg/m2 until remission, or until day 60, and then in a 2 weeks on–2 weeks off schedule. In the ATRA and idarubicin group, idarubicin was given intravenously at 12 mg/m2 on days 2, 4, 6, and 8 of course 1, and then at 5 mg/m2 on days 1–4 of course 2; mitoxantrone at 10 mg/m2 on days 1–4 of course 3, and idarubicin at 12 mg/m2 on day 1 of the final (fourth) course. In the ATRA and arsenic trioxide group, arsenic trioxide was given intravenously at 0·3 mg/kg on days 1–5 of each course, and at 0·25 mg/kg twice weekly in weeks 2–8 of course 1 and weeks 2–4 of courses 2–5. High-risk patients (those presenting with a white blood cell count >10 × 109 cells per L) could receive an initial dose of the immunoconjugate gemtuzumab ozogamicin (6 mg/m2 intravenously). Neither maintenance treatment nor CNS prophylaxis was given to patients in either group. All patients were monitored by real-time quantitative PCR. Allocation was by central computer minimisation, stratified by age, performance status, and de-novo versus secondary disease. The primary endpoint was quality of life on the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QLQ-C30 global health status. All analyses are by intention to treat. This trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN55675535. Between May 8, 2009, and Oct 3, 2013, 235 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to ATRA and idarubicin (n=119) or ATRA and arsenic trioxide (n=116). Participants had a median age of 47 years (range 16–77; IQR 33–58) and included 57 high-risk patients. Quality of life did not differ significantly between the treatment groups (EORTC QLQ-C30 global functioning effect size 2·17 [95% CI −2·79 to 7·12; p=0·39]). Overall, 57 patients in the ATRA and idarubicin group and 40 patients in the ATRA and arsenic trioxide group reported grade 3–4 toxicities. After course 1 of treatment, grade 3–4 alopecia was reported in 23 (23%) of 98 patients in the ATRA and idarubicin group versus 5 (5%) of 95 in the ATRA and arsenic trioxide group, raised liver alanine transaminase in 11 (10%) of 108 versus 27 (25%) of 109, oral toxicity in 22 (19%) of 115 versus one (1%) of 109. After course 2 of treatment, grade 3–4 alopecia was reported in 25 (28%) of 89 patients in the ATRA and idarubicin group versus 2 (3%) of 77 in the ATRA and arsenic trioxide group; no other toxicities reached the 10% level. Patients in the ATRA and arsenic trioxide group had significantly less requirement for most aspects of supportive care than did those in the ATRA and idarubicin group. ATRA and arsenic trioxide is a feasible treatment in low-risk and high-risk patients with acute promyelocytic leukaemia, with a high cure rate and less relapse than, and survival not different to, ATRA and idarubicin, with a low incidence of liver toxicity. However, no improvement in quality of life was seen. Cancer Research UK.

A randomized trial comparing immunosuppression (horse ATG and cyclosporine) with the same therapy plus eltrombopag showed more rapid and complete responses with the addition of eltrombopag. Severe adverse effects were similar in the two groups. Somatic mutations increased in both groups but did not lead to an increase in leukemia.

Patients with relapsed or refractory FLT3 internal tandem duplication (FLT3-ITD)-positive acute myeloid leukaemia have a poor prognosis, including high frequency of relapse, poorer response to salvage therapy, and shorter overall survival than those with FLT3 wild-type disease. We aimed to assess whether single-agent quizartinib, an oral, highly potent and selective type II FLT3 inhibitor, improves overall survival versus salvage chemotherapy. QuANTUM-R is a randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial done at 152 hospitals and cancer centres in 19 countries. Eligible patients aged 18 years or older with ECOG performance status 0–2 with relapsed or refractory (duration of first composite complete remission ≤6 months) FLT3-ITD acute myeloid leukaemia after standard therapy with or without allogeneic haemopoietic stem-cell transplantation were randomly assigned (2:1; permuted block size of 6; stratified by response to previous therapy and choice of chemotherapy via a phone-based and web-based interactive response system) to quizartinib (60 mg [30 mg lead-in] orally once daily) or investigator's choice of preselected chemotherapy: subcutaneous low-dose cytarabine (subcutaneous injection of cytarabine 20 mg twice daily on days 1–10 of 28-day cycles); intravenous infusions of mitoxantrone (8 mg/m2 per day), etoposide (100 mg/m2 per day), and cytarabine (1000 mg/m2 per day on days 1–5 of up to two 28-day cycles); or intravenous granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (300 μg/m2 per day or 5 μg/kg per day subcutaneously on days 1–5), fludarabine (intravenous infusion 30 mg/m2 per day on days 2–6), cytarabine (intravenous infusion 2000 mg/m2 per day on days 2–6), and idarubicin (intravenous infusion 10 mg/m2 per day on days 2–4 in up to two 28-day cycles). Patients proceeding to haemopoietic stem-cell transplantation after quizartinib could resume quizartinib after haemopoietic stem-cell transplantation. The primary endpoint was overall survival in the intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02039726, and follow-up is ongoing. Between May 7, 2014, and Sept 13, 2017, 367 patients were enrolled, of whom 245 were randomly allocated to quizartinib and 122 to chemotherapy. Four patients in the quizartinib group and 28 in the chemotherapy group were not treated. Median follow-up was 23·5 months (IQR 15·4–32·3). Overall survival was longer for quizartinib than for chemotherapy (hazard ratio 0·76 [95% CI 0·58–0·98; p=0·02]). Median overall survival was 6·2 months (5·3–7·2) in the quizartinib group and 4·7 months (4·0–5·5) in the chemotherapy group. The most common non-haematological grade 3–5 treatment-emergent adverse events (within ≤30 days of last dose or >30 days if suspected to be a treatment-related event) for quizartinib (241 patients) and chemotherapy (94 patients) were sepsis or septic shock (46 patients [19%] for quizartinib vs 18 [19%] for chemotherapy), pneumonia (29 [12%] vs eight [9%]), and hypokalaemia (28 [12%] vs eight [9%]). The most frequent treatment-related serious adverse events were febrile neutropenia (18 patients [7%]), sepsis or septic shock (11 [5%]), QT prolongation (five [2%]), and nausea (five [2%]) in the quizartinib group, and febrile neutropenia (five [5%]), sepsis or septic shock (four [4%]), pneumonia (two [2%]), and pyrexia (two [2%]) in the chemotherapy group. Grade 3 QT prolongation in the quizartinib group was uncommon (eight [3%] by central reading, ten [4%] by investigator report); no grade 4 events occurred. There were 80 (33%) treatment-emergent deaths in the quizartinib group (31 [13%] of which were due to adverse events) and 16 (17%) in the chemotherapy group (nine [10%] of which were due to adverse events). Treatment with quizartinib had a survival benefit versus salvage chemotherapy and had a manageable safety profile in patients with rapidly proliferative disease and very poor prognosis. Quizartinib could be considered a new standard of care. Given that there are only a few available treatment options, this study highlights the value of targeting the FLT3-ITD driver mutation with a highly potent and selective FLT3 inhibitor. Daiichi Sankyo.

Patients with FLT3-mutated AML have a high relapse rate and suboptimal outcomes. Many have co-mutations suitable for measurable residual disease (MRD) monitoring by RT-qPCR and those destined to relapse can be identified by high or rising levels of MRD, called molecular failure. This provides a window for pre-emptive intervention, but there is little evidence to guide treatment. The use of FLT3 inhibitors (FLT3i) appears attractive but their use has not yet been evaluated. We identified 56 patients treated with FLT3i at molecular failure. The FLT3 mutation was an ITD in 52, TKD in 7 and both in 3. Over half of patients had previously received midostaurin. Molecular failure occurred at a median 9.2 months from diagnosis and was treated with gilteritinib (n = 38), quizartinib (n = 7) or sorafenib (n = 11). 60% achieved a molecular response, with 45% reaching MRD negativity. Haematological toxicity was low, and 22 patients were bridged directly to allogeneic transplant with another 6 to donor lymphocyte infusion. 2-year overall survival was 80% (95%CI 69–93) and molecular event-free survival 56% (95%CI 44–72). High-sensitivity next-generation sequencing for FLT3-ITD at molecular failure identified patients more likely to benefit. FLT3i monotherapy for molecular failure is a promising strategy which merits evaluation in prospective studies.

Investigators seeking to identify genetic prognostic markers in a clinical trial to treat acute myeloid leukemia found that minimal residual disease, detected by the presence of mutation in NPM1, provided prognostic information independent of other risk factors. Although acute myeloid leukemia (AML) is genetically less complex than many other tumors, the condition is molecularly heterogeneous. 1 – 3 Despite improved understanding of the mutational landscape, treatment decisions, particularly regarding allogeneic stem-cell transplantation, remain guided by cytogenetic analysis, a limited panel of molecular genetic markers, and morphology-based assessment of remission. 4 – 6 Currently, a predicted risk of relapse of more than 35% is widely considered to warrant stem-cell transplantation during the first remission. 5 Patients with high-risk disease undergo stem-cell transplantation if feasible, whereas those with low-risk disease usually do not. However, there is uncertainty about the role of transplantation in patients . . .

Old age and FMS-like tyrosine kinase 3 internal tandem duplication (FLT3-ITD) mutations in patients with acute myeloid leukaemia are associated with early relapse and poor survival. Quizartinib is an oral, highly potent, and selective next-generation FLT3 inhibitor with clinical antileukaemic activity in relapsed or refractory acute myeloid leukaemia. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of single-agent quizartinib in patients with relapsed or refractory acute myeloid leukaemia. We did an open-label, multicentre, single-arm, phase 2 trial at 76 hospitals and cancer centres in the USA, Europe, and Canada. We enrolled patients with morphologically documented primary acute myeloid leukaemia or acute myeloid leukaemia secondary to myelodysplastic syndromes and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0–2 into two predefined, independent cohorts: patients who were aged 60 years or older with relapsed or refractory acute myeloid leukaemia within 1 year after first-line therapy (cohort 1), and those who were 18 years or older with relapsed or refractory disease following salvage chemotherapy or haemopoietic stem cell transplantation (cohort 2). Patients with an FLT3-ITD allelic frequency of more than 10% were considered as FLT3-ITD positive, whereas all other patients were considered as FLT3-ITD negative. Patients received quizartinib once daily as an oral solution; the initial 17 patients received 200 mg per day but the QTcF interval was prolonged for more than 60 ms above baseline in some of these patients. Subsequently, doses were amended for all patients to 135 mg per day for men and 90 mg per day for women. The co-primary endpoints were the proportion of patients who achieved a composite complete remission (defined as complete remission + complete remission with incomplete platelet recovery + complete remission with incomplete haematological recovery) and the proportion of patients who achieved a complete remission. Efficacy and safety analyses included all patients who received at least one dose of quizartinib (ie, the intention-to-treat population). Patients with a locally assessed post-treatment bone marrow aspirate or biopsy were included in efficacy analyses by response; all other patients were considered to have an unknown response. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00989261, and with the European Clinical Trials Database, EudraCT 2009-013093-41, and is completed. Between Nov 19, 2009, and Oct 31, 2011, a total of 333 patients were enrolled (157 in cohort 1 and 176 in cohort 2). In cohort 1, 63 (56%) of 112 FLT3-ITD-positive patients and 16 (36%) of 44 FLT3-ITD-negative patients achieved composite complete remission, with three (3%) FLT3-ITD-positive patients and two (5%) FLT3-ITD-negative patients achieving complete remission. In cohort 2, 62 (46%) of 136 FLT3-ITD-positive patients achieved composite complete remission with five (4%) achieving complete remission, whereas 12 (30%) of 40 FLT3-ITD-negative patients achieved composite complete remission with one (3%) achieving complete remission. Across both cohorts (ie, the intention-to-treat population of 333 patients), grade 3 or worse treatment-related treatment-emergent adverse events in 5% or more of patients were febrile neutropenia (76 [23%] of 333), anaemia (75 [23%]), thrombocytopenia (39 [12%]), QT interval corrected using Fridericia's formula (QTcF) prolongation (33 [10%]), neutropenia (31 [9%]), leucopenia (22 [7%]), decreased platelet count (20 [6%]), and pneumonia (17 [5%]). Serious adverse events occurring in 5% or more of patients were febrile neutropenia (126 [38%] of 333; 76 treatment related), acute myeloid leukaemia progression (73 [22%]), pneumonia (40 [12%]; 14 treatment related), QTcF prolongation (33 [10%]; 32 treatment related), sepsis (25 [8%]; eight treatment related), and pyrexia (18 [5%]; nine treatment related). Notable serious adverse events occurring in less than 5% of patients were torsades de pointes (one [<1%]) and hepatic failure (two [1%]). In total, 125 (38%) of 333 patients died within the study treatment period, including the 30-day follow-up. 18 (5%) patients died because of an adverse event considered by the investigator to be treatment related (ten [6%] of 157 patients in cohort 1 and eight [5%] of 176 in cohort 2. Single-agent quizartinib was shown to be highly active and generally well tolerated in patients with relapsed or refractory acute myeloid leukaemia, particularly those with FLT3-ITD mutations. These findings confirm that targeting the FLT3-ITD driver mutation with a highly potent and selective FLT3 inhibitor is a promising clinical strategy to help improve clinical outcomes in patients with very few options. Phase 3 studies (NCT02039726; NCT02668653) will examine quizartinib at lower starting doses. Ambit Biosciences/Daiichi Sankyo.