Tag Archive for: azacitidine

Combination AML Therapy for Newly Diagnosed Patients | What Are the Long-Term Effects?

Combination AML Therapy for Newly Diagnosed Patients | What Are the Long-Term Effects? from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.

A Patient Empowerment Network community member wants to know the length of time that patients can stay on the combined treatment of azacitidine (Vidaza) and venetoclax (Venclexta). AML specialist Dr. Jacqueline Garcia responds, sharing an update on the long-term follow-up data for this combination treatment.

Dr. Jacqueline Garcia is an oncologist and AML researcher at the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute. Learn more about Dr. Garcia.

See More from Thrive AML

Related Resources:

Acute Myeloid Leukemia Care | Who Are the Essential Team Members

Understanding AML Treatment Categories

New and Emerging AML Therapies Being Studied in Clinical Trials

New and Emerging AML Therapies Being Studied in Clinical Trials


Transcript:

Katherine Banwell:

Jerry had this question. “How long can patients stay on azacitidine (Vidaza) and venetoclax (Venclexta) before relapse or toxicities force them to abandon treatment?”  

Dr. Jacqueline Garcia:

So, this is a good question. I would say azacitidine and venetoclax just got FDA-approved just shy of five years now, and it’s totally changed our treatment paradigm in many great ways. It was initially approved for patients that could not get intensive chemotherapies or were above 75. We call these our older patients, our more vulnerable.   

And we demonstrated and compared to azacitidine alone. It was given with placebo. We saw that the combination of azacitidine and venetoclax not only was safe, well-tolerated, it led to two-and-a-half times higher complete remission rates and impressively longer survival. That’s all we care about, patients are living longer. So, one of the things that we are appreciating in 2023 now, now that we have more patients on azacitidine and venetoclax, is that we have many patients that are long-term responders.  

So, in the original clinical trial we’ve been reported – and we just submitted the update for the long-term follow-up that we presented at the American Society of Hematology meeting in 2022, in December.   

We presented the long-term follow-up data that shows that responses can be durable and even as long as two years or three years in some patients. The average amount of time the patients are on therapy is somewhere between one-and-a-half to two years. But not every patient performs like an average patient.  

We have some that respond for less time. We have some that respond for a longer time. So, I definitely have a few patients that have been on combination therapy, and we’ve gone to year three, then four, and two that got to year five. And that was using the original indication of older the 75, no intensive chemotherapy. Most of those patients in the original trial and led to the approval were not transplant candidates. But once those drugs got approved, more patients that were older started getting this therapy.  

And so, the durability of this treatment might be longer for people that don’t have competing health problems and for specific mutation subtypes. There are a couple of mutation subtypes that include IDH2 and NPM1, where we’ve seen some extreme long-term responders.  

And then, there are others that are much shorter. So, I would say it’s very individual. In terms of toxicities in general, the regimens very well-tolerated. And if it’s not, often it’s because there should be supportive care, prophylaxis, and adjustments to the dosing strategy, which has been well-published. Sometimes, if you have a treating oncologist that is less familiar, they won’t know the nuances of how to adjust the doses, so I would ask your local oncologist to reach out to anybody that was part of the original trials. Often, a lot of us are very responsive to helping out our colleagues to help patients to stay on treatment.   

But at the end of the day, if a patient loses response or has a bad toxicity that makes it very difficult, we have to move on to another therapy.   

Phases of AML Therapy | Understanding Treatment Options

Phases of AML Therapy | Understanding Treatment Options from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.

What are the types and phases of acute myeloid leukemia (AML) treatment? Dr. Alice Mims, an AML specialist, defines induction, consolidation, and maintenance therapy for patients. Dr. Mims also explains the role of stem cell transplant and discusses promising new AML therapies.

Dr. Alice Mims is a hematologist specializing in acute and chronic myeloid conditions. Dr. Mims serves as the Acute Leukemia Clinical Research Director at The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center – James. Learn more about Dr. Mims

See More from Thrive AML

Related Resources:

AML Treatment Decisions | Understanding Factors That Impact Your Options

How Can You Thrive With AML Advice for Navigating Care.

New and Emerging AML Therapies Being Studied in Clinical Trials

New and Emerging AML Therapies Being Studied in Clinical Trials


Transcript:

Katherine Banwell:

I’d like to move on to treatment now, Dr. Mims. And, of course, treatment takes place in phases for AML. The first is induction therapy. Can you start by defining induction therapy for our audience?  

Dr. Alice Mims:

Sure. So, induction therapy is really terminology that we use to talk about initial therapy for someone with a new diagnosis. So, we can have intensive induction therapies and non-intensive induction therapies. But the goal for either of those types of treatment is to get the leukemia into remission.  

Katherine Banwell:

And what are the available treatment options for induction therapy?  

Dr. Alice Mims:

So, to talk about that in a little bit more detail, for intensive induction regimens, those typically involve cytotoxic chemotherapy. So, you may hear terminology like, “7 + 3 induction,” or “high-dose cytarabine regimens,” but those are typically more intensive regimens that we use that can have increased side effects but may be very important based off the type of acute leukemia. 

And then for non-intensive based regimens, one of the standards has really evolved to be venetoclax (Venclexta) and azacitidine (Vidaza) as a non-intensive regimen that can work very well for a majority of patients. And there are some off shoots of that as well. 

Katherine Banwell:

Okay. And when does stem cell transplant come into play? 

Dr. Alice Mims:

Sure. So, stem cell transplant is something that we all think about at the beginning for anyone with a new diagnosis of acute myeloid leukemia where as we’re working to get back genomic information about the individual’s acute leukemia, we may go ahead and start looking for different donors, doing typing, just in case that’s something that we need as far as someone’s therapy.  

But typically we reserve stem cell transplant for patients who have either intermediate or high-risk features of their AML. Or who may have even favorable respite are not responding as well as we would like when looking at the depth of remission. And so, we always want  to be prepared in case that’s something we need to move forward with as part of their care, if the goal of their treatment is for curative intent. 

Katherine Banwell:

Let’s talk about what happens after the initial phase of treatment. What’s the purpose of consolidation therapy? 

Dr. Alice Mims:

Sure. So, there are a few different purposes we can use consolidation therapy for. So, for patients – consolidation therapy is used for patients who have achieved remission. And then it’s either to try to hopefully get them cure of their AML. The patients have more favorable risk features of their AML and cure is an option through just chemotherapy alone.  

Or it can be used to try to keep people in remission while we’re working to get towards stem cell transplant as that can sometimes take a few months to get a donor ready, have things ready to move forward with transplant. 

Katherine Banwell:

And what are the options for consolidation therapy?  

Dr. Alice Mims:

Sure. So, options for consolidated chemotherapy are typically based off of what you had initially for induction chemotherapy. So, if it’s more intensive-based regimens, it typically is consolidation with intensive consolidation, cytarabine-based (Cytosar-U) regimens.  

For lower intensity regimens, typically consolidation is more continuing therapy on what you started but may have adjustments of the treatment based off of trying to decrease the toxicity now that the patients are in remission. 

Katherine Banwell:

And how are patients monitored in consolidation therapy? 

Dr. Alice Mims:

Sure. So, it definitely is based off of the individual’s type of consolidation chemotherapy or treatment. But most patients, if we feel like the treatment is going to lower blood counts, they have bloodwork twice a week, and we’re watching for things, for side effects for treatment, looking out for risk of infection, giving transfusion support, and then if something happens that we feel like we can’t support patients in an outpatient setting, then we’ll get them back into the hospital if they need to for care. 

Katherine Banwell:

What side effects are you looking for? 

Dr. Alice Mims:

So, most of the side effects with any of the treatments that we give are what we call myelosuppressives. So, it lowers the different types of blood counts.  

So, white blood cell count which increases risk of infection, red blood cells, so, side effects or symptoms from anemia. And then risk of bleeding from low platelet counts.  

Katherine Banwell:

Okay. Maintenance therapy has become more common in other blood cancers particularly in multiple myeloma. Is there a role for maintenance therapy in AML? 

Dr. Alice Mims:

There actually is now, which is something that’s newer that has evolved for acute myeloma leukemia. So, in the context of intensive therapy, we now have oral azacitidine (Onureg), which is a little bit different than some of the IV formulations that we give.  

But for patients who receive intensive induction therapy, get into remission and may receive consolidation but are not able to go onto transplant if they have that immediate or higher risk features, there’s FDA approval for oral azacytidine, which has been shown to improve overall survival and keep people in those remissions for longer. 

More recently, specifically for patients who have a particular type of mutation called FLT3, if they also receive intensive induction therapy with a FLT3 inhibitor added onto that, then their quizartinib (Vanflyta) was just recently approved as a maintenance therapy for patients with that particular type of AML. 

Katherine Banwell:

Are there emerging AML therapies that patients should know about other than what you just mentioned? 

Dr. Alice Mims:

Sure. So, I think there are a lot of exciting treatments that are up and coming based off of many small molecule inhibitors that are being studied.  

One in particular I would mention that everyone’s very excited about is a class of agents called menin inhibitors.  

And so that’s an oral agent that has been shown to have responses for patients with relapsed or refractory AML who have NMP-1 mutations or have something called KNT2A rearrangements. And seeing responses with just a single agent in the relapsed/refractory setting, it’s been really exciting. And so, I think we’re hopeful that that may become FDA-approved in the near future. And it’s also now being explored in combination with intensive chemotherapies as well as less intensive induction regimens. And so, maybe we can do a better job with upfront treatment by adding these therapies on.  

New and Emerging AML Therapies Being Studied in Clinical Trials

Are there newer AML treatments that patients should know about? AML researcher Dr. Jacqueline Garcia discusses therapies being studied and how recent clinical trials have advanced care for patients.

Dr. Jacqueline Garcia is an oncologist and AML researcher at the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute. Learn more about Dr. Garcia.

See More from Thrive AML

Related Resources:

Understanding AML Treatment Categories

AML Treatment Decisions | Understanding Factors That Impact Your Options

Combination AML Therapy for Newly Diagnosed Patients | What Are the Long-Term Effects


Transcript:

Katherine Banwell:

As a researcher, Dr. Garcia, you’re on the frontlines of AML treatment. Are there new and emerging therapies that patients should be aware of?  

Dr. Jacqueline Garcia:

Yeah. I think we’re at this really exciting point now where we had for a long time just been giving people standard two agent intensive chemotherapy. We have been studying in Phase II and Phase III settings, and even in Phase I – which means testing safety out for the first time. We’ve been moving a lot of treatments to more mature settings where we’re testing the addition of a third drug. So, for people that are getting intensive chemo, we’re looking at, “Can we add a pill to augment responses deep in them to reduce risk of disease returning?”  

For less intensive chemotherapies, one of the most common regimens we now use is something called azacitidine (Vidaza), which is a hypomethylating agent that is given by IV or subcutaneous administration. Plus, a pill called venetoclax (Venclexta).  

We helped to get that FDA-approved a couple of years ago. That combination of therapy, we call that a doublet, meaning it’s two drugs – because it’s so well-tolerated and active, we’re now asking the greedy question of, “Well, can we make it more active for patients since we’re seeing how well-tolerated it is?”  

So, there have been a lot of therapies that are currently under investigation that are adding a third drug to these less-intensive doublets. So, there’s a lot of therapies under investigation to test, “Can we add an immunotherapy target? Is there another pill that we can add? Is there another targeting mutation to add to the doublet?” So, we’re looking at AML therapies from different angles. We’re looking at adding something to the existing new standard of care – those are these new, so-called, triplets.  

We’re looking at still the role of cellular therapy or CAR Ts targeting leukemia cells from an immunotherapy standpoint.  

That remains underdeveloped overall, and we have not succeeded as well, like our lymphoid colleagues in the lymphoma and acute lymphoblastic leukemia realm where there are drugs that are active and FDA-approved.  

So, we’re still trying to identify the right target. But those are some of the areas that are currently under study. 

Advances in the Treatment of Relapsed/Refractory Acute Myeloid Leukemia (AML)

Advances in the Treatment of Relapsed/Refractory Acute Myeloid Leukemia (AML) from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.

AML expert Dr. Omer Jamy discusses his approach when considering treatment for patients with relapsed or refractory AML, including transplant eligibility, molecular markers, and whether clinical trials may be an appropriate option.

Dr. Omer Jamy is a Leukemia and Bone Marrow Transplant Physician and Assistant Professor at the University of Alabama at Birmingham. Learn more about Dr. Omer Jamy.

See More From INSIST! AML

Related Resources:

What Is the AGILE Study? Research for AML Patients With the IDH1 Mutation

What Is the AGILE Study? Research for AML Patients With the IDH1 Mutation

What Is the Purpose of AML Genetic Testing

What is the Purpose of AML Genetic Testing?

Essential Testing | Optimizing AML Care With Personalized Medicine

Essential Testing Optimizing AML Care with Personalized Medicine

Transcript:

Katherine Banwell:

Dr. Jamy, are there any recent advances that may affect the care of patients with relapsed or refractory AML? 

Dr. Omer Jamy:

Yeah, that’s a good question. So, patients with relapse refractory AML, of course, carry a poor prognosis. That means that chemotherapy was working and has stopped working or chemotherapy didn’t work from the get-go, right?  

So, in my practice I try to divide patients into two different buckets. One is that I need to get them into remission, and they’re fit for a transplant, so I take them to transplant.  

So, then my treatment approach is a little different for those patients. As opposed to someone who’s elderly or too frail, that they may go into remission, but they may not be able to proceed to stem cell transplantation after that.  

So, what happened in the relapsed/refractory setting also depends on what the patient received in the upfront setting. Ideally, I would recommend a clinical trial enrollment for patients with relapse refractory AML if they have access to it. At the time of relapsed/refractory AML, it is very important to again profile the leukemia to see if there are any mutations that were present at diagnosis or if there are any new mutations for which there may be targeted therapy. Some of those mutations for which we have targeted therapy include FLT3-ITD for which there is a drug called gilteritnib (Xospata), which is FDA-approved in the relapsed/refractory setting. 

We spoke about IDH 1 which is ivosidenib, IDH 2 which is enasidenib (Idhifa) is also approved for patients with relapsed/refractory AML. And then more recently the FDA approved another IDH1 compound called olutasidenib (Rezlidhia) which is also for patients with relapse refractory acute myeloid leukemia with an IDH1 mutation. I think these are target therapies which have shown to get people into a second remission and beyond. And these have been approved in the last few years. And I think it is very important to basically test whether the person harbors these mutations so that we can target them accordingly.  

For patients who don’t have any mutations we would generally, outside of a clinical trial, probably use the combination of some of the approved agents that may be venetoclax (Venclexta) with azacitidine (Vidaza) or decitabine (Dacogen). Patients who may have received this venetoclax or a hypomethylating agents frontline and may still be eligible for intensive chemotherapy.  

You could offer them intensive chemotherapy in the relapsed/refractory setting, but I would say that at this point being at a center where there’s opportunities to enroll in a clinical trial would be really helpful as well. 

What Is the AGILE Study? Research for AML Patients With the IDH1 Mutation

What Is the AGILE Study? Research for AML Patients With the IDH1 Mutation from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.

AML expert Dr. Omer Jamy reviews the results of the AGILE study, a clinical trial evaluating the efficacy and safety of ivosidenib + azacitidine vs placebo + azacitidine in patients with previously untreated AML with an IDH1 mutation.

Dr. Omer Jamy is a Leukemia and Bone Marrow Transplant Physician and Assistant Professor at the University of Alabama at Birmingham. Learn more about Dr. Omer Jamy.

See More From INSIST! AML

Related Resources:

Advances in the Treatment of Relapsed/Refractory Acute Myeloid Leukemia (AML)

Advances in the Treatment of Relapsed/Refractory Acute Myeloid Leukemia (AML)

How Have Advances in Testing Impacted AML Care

How Have Advances in Testing Impacted AML Care?

Essential Testing | Optimizing AML Care With Personalized Medicine

Essential Testing Optimizing AML Care with Personalized Medicine

Transcript:

Katherine Banwell:

Dr. Jamy, data was presented at ASCO from the agile study. What is the study and what does the news mean for AML patients? 

Dr. Omer Jamy:

Yes, thank you. So, the AGILE study is basically a randomized Phase III study. It is specifically for patients with AML who harbor an IDH1 or isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 mutation. Now IDH1 mutation is thought to be rare.   

It occurs in around six to 12 percent of patients with acute myeloid leukemia. So, a few years ago there was a drug approved by the FDA to treat patients in the relapsed or refractory setting with an IDH1 mutation. And that drug is called ivosidenib (Tibsovo). And this drug is also approved for elderly patients ineligible for intensive chemotherapy but it was mainly initially approved for the relapsed/refractory setting.  

So, all of these drugs when they initially get approved – so this is targeted therapy. It’s targeting IDH1 mutant AMLs, so patients with AML without an IDH mutation will not benefit from such a drug. So, when you find targeted therapy, the general workflow is it gets tested in the later settings. If it looks promising, then people try to bring it in the upfront settings. So, this was a Phase III study of newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia patients harboring an IDH mutation.  

And it randomized them to a combination of azacitidine plus ivosidenib versus azacitidine plus placebo.  

When the study was started, the standard of care for patients ineligible to receive intensive chemotherapy was azacitidine (Vidaza). So, this study again, just to highlight, focused on patients who were not ineligible for intensive chemotherapy. So, these may be patients who were either above the age of 75 or below the age of 75 but had comorbidities which would have prevented them from receiving intensive chemotherapy. These comorbidities could be any organ dysfunction such as the heart, kidneys, liver, lung, or poor performance status. So, the primary endpoint of the study was event free survival. And the primary endpoint of the study was met with a hazard ratio of .33 in favor of the combination of azacitidine  and ivosidenib. The study also showed that overall survival was improved in patients getting the combination compared to patients just getting azacitidine and placebo.  

Which was roughly around 20 to 24 months versus eight months for the placebo and azacitidine arm. And then obviously when you combine drugs you want to make sure that by adding two drugs, you’re not causing more toxicity. So, the toxicity profile between the two arms was similar actually. They saw less infections and neutropenia in the ivosidenib and azacitidine arm compared to azacitidine alone. So, that was basically the AGILE study where they looked at patients with IDH mutant acute myeloid leukemia.  

AML Treatment Approaches | Factors That Impact Options

AML Treatment Approaches | Factors That Impact Options from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.

What factors are considered when choosing an AML treatment approach? Dr. Ann-Kathrin Eisfeld explains how shared decision-making comes into play when deciding on a therapy and reviews the options available to treat AML.

Dr. Ann-Kathrin Eisfeld is Director of the Clara D. Bloomfield Center for Leukemia Outcomes Research at The Ohio State University and a member of the Leukemia Research Program at the OSUCCC – James. Learn more about Dr. Eisfeld.

See More From INSIST! AML

Related Resources:

Essential Testing | Optimizing AML Care With Personalized Medicine

How Have Advances in Testing Impacted AML Care

AML Targeted Therapy: How Molecular Test Results Impact Treatment Options

Transcript:

Katherine Banwell:

With all the new tools that are available, what other factors do you consider when working with an AML patient to choose a treatment approach for them?  

Dr. Eisfeld:

The most important aspects are what we call – and this is – I’m glad that you bring this question up because I feel you have to think of – and that was what we’ve been talking about – called disease-associated factors. This is everything in the leukemic cell. They – how does a leukemia looks like? How does the blast look like? What changes are there?  

That’s the biggest part of what I would call patient-associated factors: the patient age, the patient performance status, actually the patient. In every – because I think, sometimes, we forget about it. But we just look at all the molecular testing.  

But even if – for example, there would be a patient with a very good risk leukemia, where I think, “Oh, this leukemia should respond very well to an intensive chemotherapy.” 

If the patient cannot tolerate chemotherapy or – and I see it more often than I would wish for patients who are young who have a great performance status, but they just cannot – they – their family reasons. Small children sometimes – they just cannot be away for so long. This all comes into consideration. So, it’s really important because we all work together as a team. And the right treatment for the leukemia might not be the right treatment for the patient.  

And for most cases, however, I think, it will only work if one stands with a whole heart with both physicians, and patients, and family. Because it’s a long journey behind the care that’s being given. And so, this is a joint decision-making, and there are different options that can be done. Of course, I would not advise something where I would think there are no chances of success.  

And so, this has to be an open discussion. But this is – it’s very often a very tough treatment to communicate that and see what are the goals of each patient? That will be most important for treatment and decision-making.     

Katherine Banwell:

What types of AML treatment classes are currently available?  

Dr. Eisfeld:

This is a very good question. The most classic treatment class is intensive chemotherapy. This is just because people might have heard the names. It is called 3 + 7 or 7 + 3, which refers to one weeklong impatient chemotherapy treatment. But you get one chemotherapy for seven days. And the first three days, you get a second treatment as well.  

That’s why it’s called three in seven in here, but it’s a total of seven days. So, we have intensive chemotherapy. And there are different flavors of it. But this is usually the backbone. The second class is what I would call a targeted inhibitor. And here we can look at two different aspects. We have targeted inhibitors for a specific DNA mutation that are found. And specifically, one are called IDH or FLT3 mutations.  

And these are pill forms that I usually by now combined with a third drop class which is called hypomethylating agents. And I will go through in a moment.  

But these are pills that really only work in patients and carry that genetic change. They have very, very low toxicity and very high chances of working. So, that’s why this testing is so important to see if one is one of the 15 percent of AML patients carrying an IDH mutation – 15 percent isn’t low. And a similar rate carries a FLT3 mutation.  

And then there is also going to target inhibitors. That is targeted because it is against what I would call a pathway. The gene that is commonly activated in acute leukemia – and this is called BCL-2 and the drug is called venetoclax (Venclexta).  

This is now stormed through the acute myeloid leukemia world in just a few years ago and has been approved as a front-line treatment option for several patients, especially for those who are older. And we know that even patients who respond usually favorably to chemotherapy, some of those also respond well to venetoclax the Bcl-2 inhibitor. The benefit is that this treatment in many cases if it works, can be done as an outpatient in here and has very often lower complications.  

It is actually has so good results that I – sometimes it seems too easy. So, we actually advise patients to still try to get – the first time they get the treatment, do it at a center where it’s done more commonly. Because it sometimes – don’t underestimated the power of a pill. And it’s still a very, very powerful drug. So, doing it in a controlled setting – because if cancer cells break down, they break down and can create all sorts of trouble.  

So, that is really something – for several leukemias, it can be concerning. And again, now the treatment group would be called hypomethylating agents. The names are azacitidine (Vidaza) and decitabine (Dacogen). And they act in a very different way. They try to change the epigenetics like methylation patterns. And often, if it is an untargeted way of the tumor cells and they can be used alone.  

Or very often by now in combination with the targeted inhibitors that I was just mentioning. These are infusions that can be done either over five, seven, or 10 days depending on the combination treatment. And for patients, as I mentioned before, that don’t respond well to many other options to those patients with a complex karyotype. This is, for example, a scenario where patients can just receive this as their only therapy.          

Katherine Banwell:

What about stem cell transplant? You didn’t mention that.   

Dr. Eisfeld:

Yes. That would be the next one. So, stem cell transplant always comes as an option, which I would call as a maintenance therapy. Again, two aspects. We have two different end goals.  

First is get rid of some leukemia. Second is to make sure it stays away. And as soon as the leukemia is in complete remission, depending on the performance status – the agent. Again, in multiple different things. It’s not an easy decision. 

At that time, there has to be a conversation. And that always involves a leukemia physician and a transplant physician very often. These are different providers that goes for the risks and benefits. Where the question is if I only continue to do chemotherapy – because it’s never only once. You would always have to repeat your chemotherapy. What is the likelihood that the leukemia comes back, and does it outweigh the risks that comes with the stem cell or bone marrow transplant that comes in here. But for many leukemias, especially for young patients and for patients with higher risks, this is the only chance of a cure. That is the most curative and only curative attempt for many leukemia attempts.  

Katherine Banwell:

Where do clinical trials fit into the treatment plan? 

Dr. Eisfeld:

That is the absolute backbone. We always have to think about that. 

Everything – all the treatment options that I mentioned – have been clinical trials, just very, very short time – very few years ago. So, every patient that comes to a leukemia or a cancer center, clinical trials will be discussed if they’re available. Because they will provide a special opportunity to have even more fine-tuned treatments – either newer agents. And I think what is very important to mention is that all clinical trials that are available would give the option of the best standard of care.  

And then the hope that a patient wouldn’t be getting any of the best standard of care options that are approved. The hope is that the new agent or added agent in many cases would even do better.  

It’s also important that there’s a lot of additional monitoring during the trial. I think it can be seen in two ways as two parts of a coin. In one way, it may be additional visits to the hospital or additional blood draws that are necessary to be sure that the medications are safe, and that researchers and conditions can learn about it. But on the other hand, it also gives you this extra bit of being looked after and really getting checked in and out, making sure that all organs are functioning that everything is just going fine. And many patients appreciate this a lot. And they have this pair of extra eyes on them all the time.  

Katherine Banwell:

Dr. Eisfeld, what therapies are available for AML patients who relapse or don’t respond to initial therapy? And is this treatment approach different from those who are newly diagnosed?  

Dr. Eisfeld:

Most of the time, the treatments available at relapse are the same available at the first diagnosis. Just because we know now that, for example, if you have a molecular marker that, for example, is available, it would act with also relatively high chance of relapse upset. However, at relapse, the most important thing I personally would do is consider a clinical trial even stronger than in the first mindset. 

 Because it means that the leukemia outsmarted current treatments very often. So, usually what we would be doing is see if there is a targeted inhibitor or a cell mutation FLT3 or IDH, which I would personally always prefer to go in MLL rearrangement now for the new menin inhibitors where one would go with the same option as if it would have been their diagnosis. But if not to really consider clinical trials is a strong urge. 

Katherine Banwell:

Should patients or should relapsed patients undergo genetic testing again? Is it necessary?  

Dr. Eisfeld:

Yes. At any time. Yes. Because we know that the leukemia changes. And you just can think about it in the way is that the cells that are surviving treatment, they’ve become smart. There was so much poison. There was so much treatment put on them. 

And the ones that survive might have a quiet additional chromosome change as additional gene changes. And even if a genetic change has not been present at time of diagnosis, the reason the cell has survived might have been that it has now one of these changes that came up on a later time during treatment or while the cell is hiding somewhere to come back. 

[ACT]IVATED AML Resource Guide en español

Download Resource Guide

_ACT_IVATED_AML_Resource_Guide_Spanish

Download Resource Guide

See More from [ACT]IVATED AML

Share Your Feedback About [ACT]IVATED AML

Challenges in Treating TP53-Mutated AML, Hope on the Horizon

Challenges in Treating TP53-Mutated AML, Hope on the Horizon from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.

TP53-mutated acute myeloid leukemia (AML) treatment has some challenges. Dr. Naval Daver from the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center shares his perspective. Learn about promising treatments on the horizon for this AML subgroup

[ACT]IVATION TIP from Dr. Daver: “The TP53 mutation remains the most difficult subset of acute myeloid leukemia, there is hope on the horizon with new treatments such as CD47 antibodies and targeted therapies like APR that are being looked at, and also a strong consideration for allogeneic transplant in TP53, because this seems to be the only modality associated with a good chance of cure after achieving remission with one of the frontline therapies.”

Download Resource Guide

Download Resource Guide en español

See More from [ACT]IVATED AML

Related Resources:

What Are the ASH 2022 Takeaways for AML Patients

What Are the ASH 2022 Takeaways for AML Patients

Why Is the Menin Pathway Important in AML

Why Is the Menin Pathway Important in AML?

What Is MRD-Positive Acute Myeloid Leukemia

What Is MRD-Positive Acute Myeloid Leukemia?

Transcript: 

Art:

Dr. Daver, what have we learned about TP53-mutated AML? And what is the takeaway for these patients?

Dr. Naval Daver:

TP53-mutated AML remains the most difficult molecular subset of all acute myeloid leukemia. Patients who have this mutation, unfortunately, do not respond well to any of the established standard care therapies, including intensive chemotherapy, the HMA alone, such as azacitidine (Onureg or Vidaza), decitabine (Dacogen) alone, or even HMA venetoclax (Venclexta) with all of these, we do see responses, especially with HMA venetoclax or intensive chemotherapy, we can see 15 to 55 percent remission rate, but the remission, very short lived, early relapses and the median overall survival across all of these currently available standards of cares are between six to 10 months.

So there has been an intense effort in the last six, seven years to develop TP53-directed therapies or therapies that will work regardless of TP53 mutation, and there are two drugs this time that are very promising and being evaluated as ongoing Phase II and Phase III studies.

One of them is an immunotherapy drug called magrolimab which seems to have very similar activity and probability with good response rates in TP53-mutated AML. This has been completed in a single arm phase 1B study in front line TP53-mutated AML where we saw close to 50 percent CR, CRI complete permission rates. And median survival was above 11 months in older unfit TP53, which is better than any survival we have seen in the past in this population.

The other study was with the oral care targeted therapy towards TP53, called APR, and this therapy was specifically designed to target the TP53 mutation, and this is being evaluated in the frontline setting in combination with a society in venetoclax. We hope that these regimens are these novel therapies, one or both of them will be able to at least incrementally improve their current outcomes in TP53.

The other area where we have really been doing a lot of research, and I think the data is suggesting, is that allogeneic transplant may work for separate, and we are routinely considering transplant in these patients in the frontline setting, once they are able to achieve remission.

My activation tip is the TP53 mutation remains the most difficult subset of acute myeloid leukemia, there is hope on the horizon with new treatments such as CD47 antibodies and targeted therapies like APR that are being looked at, and also a strong consideration for allogeneic transplant in TP53, because this seems to be the only modality associated with a good chance of cure after achieving remission with one of the frontline therapies. 

Share Your Feedback About [ACT]IVATED AML

What Does Triplet Therapy in AML Mean for the Future?

What Does Triplet Therapy in AML Mean for the Future? from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.

What do acute myeloid leukemia (AML) patients need to know about triplet therapy? Dr. Naval Daver from the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center shares his perspective. Learn about the meaning, progress, and outlook for triplet therapy. 

[ACT]IVATION TIP from Dr. Daver:Some of the early data with the FLT3 inhibitor as well as the CD47 antibody triplets are showing very, very promising activity and are now moving into larger multi-center and randomized studies.”

Download Resource Guide

Download Resource Guide en español

See More from [ACT]IVATED AML

Related Resources:

What Are Some Clinical Predictors for Relapse in Acute Myeloid Leukemia

What Are Some Clinical Predictors for Relapse in Acute Myeloid Leukemia?

Why Is the Menin Pathway Important in AML

Why Is the Menin Pathway Important in AML?

Challenges in Treating TP53-Mutated AML, Hope on the Horizon

Transcript: 

Art:

Dr. Daver, what does triplet therapy in AML mean for the future?

Dr. Naval Daver:

So when we say triplet therapy, what we’re really thinking about is building on the existing FDA-approved combination of HMA venetoclax (Venclexta), so as a background venetoclax, showed a CR, CRI which is a complete remission rate of about 70 to 75 percent with the median survival in 15 months.

This was in older patients, about 75 years in age, those who were not considered fit for intensive chemotherapy, although this was a major step forward in comparison to what we have seen with traditional low intensities with azacitidine (Onureg or Vidaza), decitabine (Dacogen) alone, we do see the three-year survival is about 25 to 30 percent. 

So this is progress compared to 10 percent long-term survival, we used to get a decade ago, but, of course, we want to improve on that. Also, a molecular analysis of data has shown that there are certain molecular subsets that don’t respond as well to azacitidine, venetoclax or if they respond they relapse quickly these include FLT3 mutated and the TP53 mutated as well as potentially MLL rearranged.

And so here we have started incorporating the targeted therapies like inhibitors like the menin inhibitors like CD47 antibodies to target those specific high-risk or bad molecular cytogenetic groups, and we are seeing that with the combinations of these three drugs, especially for those particular molecular subsets.

So azacitidine and venetoclax for FLT3 inhibitor for FLT3 mutator, azacitidine, and venetoclax, magrolimab for TP53 mutated, the response rates that we’re getting, as well as the depth of response and the early trends towards survival are looking very, very promising compared to what we have seen with azacitidine venetoclax alone.

So we believe, and I personally believe that these three drug combinations, the so-called triplets will actually be eventually the way to go forward now, that means that one has to realize that when you add a third drug, there is a cumulative myelosuppression, azacitidine-venetoclax is already a myelosuppressive regimen. 

Yes, it’s manageable, but it is myelosuppressive. And the third drug, this can become more cumulative, so we have been working for the last three, four years and continue to work on those optimization because since we are seeing true synergy but pre-clinically and what we think in the clinic, we are not needing to give full doses and we’re doing reduced durations of venetoclax and those with FLT3 inhibitor, and now we feel that some of those triplets are actually giving very, very, very good efficacy.

There’s a lot of discussion in the community of whether we need to combine all two drugs up front or can be sequence these drugs or can we introduce a targeted therapy based on a molecular escape, and I think a lot of these will have to be evaluated and many of these are being looked at in various trials, but I do think the bottom line is that bringing in your targeted therapy or immunotherapies early on in the frontline setting and some way or the other is probably where you’re going to get the most bang for the buck and the most benefit in curing patients long-term rather than trying to reserve them for the salvage, because in salvage AML historically, nothing has really been able to improve the long-term cure rate significantly.

So the activation tip for this question is that now with the identification of certain molecular subsets that have poorer outcomes with the HMA venetoclax, we have started incorporating targeted and immunotherapies in the earlier settings, either up front in the three drug combination or an early sequential approach.

And we believe that with such combinations, we may be able to achieve deeper remission and longer responses. Some of the early data with the FLT3 inhibitor as well as the CD47 antibody triplets are showing very, very promising activity and are now moving into larger multi-center and randomized studies. 

Share Your Feedback About [ACT]IVATED AML

A Look at Lower Intensity Chemotherapy in Untreated AML

A Look at Lower Intensity Chemotherapy in Untreated AML from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.

Dr. Naval Daver from the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center discusses whether untreated acute myeloid leukemia (AML) can be treated with lower intensity chemotherapy.

[ACT]IVATION TIP from Dr. Daver: “Ask your physician and your oncologist when you’re talking with them about what all the newest therapies are and what would be specifically the best treatment for their specific leukemia with respect to the different mutations.”

Download Resource Guide

Download Resource Guide en español

See More from [ACT]IVATED AML

Related Resources:

What Is MRD-Positive Acute Myeloid Leukemia

What Is MRD-Positive Acute Myeloid Leukemia?

What Does Transfusion Burden Mean in Acute Myeloid Leukemia

What Does Transfusion Burden Mean in Acute Myeloid Leukemia?

Challenges in Treating TP53-Mutated AML, Hope on the Horizon

Transcript: 

Art:

Dr. Daver, what are we learning about patients with untreated AML who are ineligible for intensive chemotherapy? Will intensive chemotherapy, a thing of the past, in the near future?

Dr. Naval Daver:

There has been a major shift over the last four or five years towards using lower intensity combinations, such as azacitidine (Onureg or Vidaza) and venetoclax (Venclexta) and patients who are definitely about 75 and not fit for intensive induction. I don’t think anybody debates in that population, but even in patients 60 to 75 years away, you are borderline, and maybe we could give intensive induction chemotherapy and get patients to through it with support of care, antifungals, antibiotics by close monitoring, but we’re seeing similar remission rates with azacitidine (Vidaza), venetoclax (Venclexta), much less toxicity, less mortality, and especially the goal is to get a number of these patients to allogeneic stem cell transplant, which it is.

Then we feel that the lower intensity, better tolerated, smoother remission getting patients in a good condition an allogeneic transplant may be the way to go now, of course, to really make the standard of care, we have to look at this in a randomized fashion to make sure that what we believe is actually what the data is going to confirm, so there is an ongoing randomized study looking at the azacitidine and venetoclax intensity versus the traditional intensive chemotherapy called three plus seven in patients 18 to 65 years of age, and that…then you will, I think, give us a lot of information and data as for whether we can start for placing intensive chemotherapy for a large proportion or majority of AML patients, even those who are younger.

Today, I don’t think that in terms of chemotherapies are a thing of the past, I think those patients who are below 60 or even those who are 60 to 65, who are routinely doing intensive induction chemotherapy, one has to realize that the five-year survival for many molecular subsets are close to 50 to 60 percent with intensive induction chemotherapy, whereas with HMA venetoclax in the older unit, we’re looking at three to five-year survival rates of about 30 percent, so we have still not seen data and younger patients with Hamas to be convinced that this will replace intensive chemotherapy altogether, I think the signal suggests that there is a potential for it to do so, especially with the use of allergenic tensor as plan, which we’re using quite frequently and…or maintenance.

But that has not yet been established. So I would still say we do use intensive chemo in those who are young and fit, so my activation tip for this is that there has been a lot of progress in the lower intensity therapies over the last six or seven years. 

A decade ago would not even be asking whether there’s anything that can replace intensive chemo today we do have data with HMA venetoclax that suggest that it may be as good as intensive chemo looking at the response rates MRD negativity, and especially with three drug combinations where adding targeted therapies to HMA venetoclax, those response rates and depth of response looking as good, if not better, than intensive chemo there are randomized studies ongoing that are going to be looking at intensive chemotherapy versus HMA venetoclax and if those show equivalents or superiority for HMA venetoclax, I think in the next five, six years there will be a huge shift towards less use of intense and chemotherapy in the frontline setting, but we’re not there yet. 

Share Your Feedback About [ACT]IVATED AML

AML Clinical Trials Critical to Treatment Breakthroughs and Improvements

AML Clinical Trials Critical to Treatment Breakthroughs and Improvements from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.

Why are acute myeloid leukemia (AML) clinical trials so critical? Dr. Naval Daver from the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center shares his perspective about clinical trials. Learn how clinical trials help both current and future AML patients. 

[ACT]IVATION TIP from Dr. Daver:Clinical  trials are critical, both for the patients themselves to get access to what we call tomorrow’s medicine today as well as potentially to help move the entire field forward.”

Download Resource Guide

Download Resource Guide en español

See More from [ACT]IVATED AML

Related Resources:

What Are the Latest Acute Myeloid Leukemia Therapies

What Are the Latest Acute Myeloid Leukemia Therapies?

What Promising AML Treatments Are Available for Newly Diagnosed Patients

What Promising AML Treatments Are Available for Newly Diagnosed Patients?

A Look at Treatment Strategies for High-Risk AML Patients

A Look at Treatment Strategies for High-Risk AML Patients

Transcript: 

Art:

Dr. Daver, what is the importance of clinical trial participation as it relates to breakthroughs in AML, and what advice do you have for AML patients considering a clinical trial?

Dr. Naval Daver: Clinical trials are critical for the progress that we have already seen an acute myeloid leukemia, the drugs that have been improved in the last six, seven years, including venetoclax (Venclexta), FLT3 inhibitors, midostaurin (Rydapt or Tauritmo),  gilteritinib (Xospata), hopefully quizartinib other emerging targeted therapies…IDH1, IDH2 inhibitors, menin inhibitors, CD47 antibodies, we’ve learned about all of them and have got approvals and many of them through the ongoing clinical trials.

I think it’s very important for patients to realize that in most large academic centers, we will only participate in the clinical trial if we think it has the potential to improve the standard of care in the future. There’s very little incentive for academic investigators or clinical investigators, such as myself, we’re very, very busy to get involved in a trial if we don’t think that it has the potential to improve the outcome or change the nature of AML therapy in the future, so a lot of patients often ask me, Oh, I want the randomized or placebo arm. There is no real placebo alone in any AML study that I’m aware of, most of the studies will use standard of care, which is what you would’ve gotten wherever you were getting treatment at home, locally, community hospital versus a standard of care plus where the new drug will be added, whether it’s the FLT3 inhibitor, the CD47 antibody, the menin inhibitor 

So there’s a good chance, 50 percent that you’re going to get standard of care plus that we think has the potential to improve the outcome, of course, you never know, that’s what you do, the trial, but we think based on the previous pre-clinical data to pass when the page to deliver this looks like it will improve the outcome for this molecular or site group versus standard of care, which is what you will have gotten.

So I think it’s important to realize that you will never get less on standard of care and any clinical trial, at least in the AML field, and at least in our experience that they understand. 

Now, beyond that, there’s also a Phase I in two states, and those are the ones that we focus on quite a bit at MD Anderson, these are single arm studies, meaning everybody will get the investigational agent combo, so azacitidine (Onureg or Vidaza) and venetoclax (Venclexta), we were one of the first sites to work on and leave this study and all of our patients in 2015, 2016, we’re getting this regiment, it was not approved to much later in 2019, 2020, and for those three, four years, our patients, hundreds of patients were able to get that combination, which probably cured many, many more than would have been cured to the standard of care until, of course, I’ve got a pro four years later, but for an option, of course, you cannot wait four years, so I’m a huge believer in clinical trials, I think it’s really, really important, both for the patients themselves as well as for the field, for us to be able to move the entire AML field forward for the next decade, and I would very strongly consider looking at or discussing with your treating physician trial options, and then you can look at them on your own through clinicaltrials.gov, or other sites with leukema and lymphoma that give a lot of information on clinical trials. 

So my activation tip related to this question is that I think clinical  trials are critical, both for the patients themselves to get access to what we call tomorrow’s medicine today as well as potentially to help move the entire field forward, all of the clinical drug approvals in progress we have seen in AML in the last six, seven years have come through clinical trials that patients in the past have agreed to kindly participate and helped probably themselves by getting better medications and combinations, and definitely the field to move forward, so definitely a big proponent for clinical trials. 

Share Your Feedback About [ACT]IVATED AML

A Look at Treatment Strategies for High-Risk AML Patients

A Look at Treatment Strategies for High-Risk AML Patients from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.

What acute myeloid leukemia (AML) treatments are available for high-risk patients? Dr. Naval Daver from the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center discusses various mutations, potential for cure, and clinical trials. Learn about the outlook for high-risk AML treatments.

[ACT]IVATION TIP from Dr. Daver:The best way to get up to these agents is to go on clinical trials and incorporate these therapies, both in the frontline setting as well as in the relapsed refractory setting.” 

Download Resource Guide

Download Resource Guide en español

See More from [ACT]IVATED AML

Related Resources:

What Are Some Clinical Predictors for Relapse in Acute Myeloid Leukemia

What Are Some Clinical Predictors for Relapse in Acute Myeloid Leukemia?

Assessing Untreated AML Patients Who Are Ineligible for Intensive Chemotherapy

Assessing Untreated AML Patients Who Are Ineligible for Intensive Chemotherapy

What Does Triplet Therapy in AML Mean for the Future (2)

What Does Triplet Therapy in AML Mean for the Future?

Transcript: 

Art:

Dr. Daver, what treatment strategies are available for high-risk AML patients?

Dr. Naval Daver:

High-risk AML patients includes a group of a number of different mutations, and cytogenetic abnormalities, this includes TP53 mutation, as well as adverse cytogenetics, which includes chromosome 17, deletion 5, deletion 7, as well as complex carrier type. This entire group historically had a poor outcome and has had limited responses to traditional intensive chemo, even if we achieve responses there, usually short-lived.

We do have some patients where we are able to achieve remission with intensive chemo or with azacitidine-venetoclax (Vidaza-Venclexta) and transition and transmission them transplant with about 25 to 30 percent potentially achieving a long-term remission and possible cure. 

But aside from that, there is very little potential to cure these patients with just traditional intensive chemo, venetoclax in this area, there has been developments with the emergence new class of immunotherapy drugs, called CD47 antibodies, the one that’s most advanced in this field is a drug called magrolimab, and we are evaluating the drugs such as magrolimab in combination with azacitidine as well as in combination with azacitidine-venetoclax and are seeing high remission rates, both in TP53 mutated and TP53 wild type.

So this pathway that works by activating a macrophages or the immune system to attack the tumor cells, seems to be in some way mutation agnostic with response rates being maintained even in the traditional high-risk subsets, especially such as TP53 and complex cytogenetics for some of the other high-risk groups such as MLL, we’re using targeted therapies like menin inhibitors, and these seem to work well in those patients who have these adverse cytogenetic molecular abnormalities, so there is progress, and we think that the CD47 antibody field and hopefully the main inhibitor feed will be able to improve outcomes in these traditionally molecular cytogenetic subsets.

My activation point related to this question is for high-risk mutations and cytogenetic commonalities such as TP53 complex carrier chromosome 17 MLL,  best hope at this time is in clinical trials evaluating novel therapies such as CD47 antibodies and menin inhibitors. These are not yet FDA-approved, but based on emerging data from the ongoing Phase I, II studies, we think that there is a good chance they will be approved in the future.

However, this time, the best way to get up to these agents is to go on clinical trials and incorporate these therapies, both in the frontline setting as well as in the relapsed refractory setting. 

Share Your Feedback About [ACT]IVATED AML

AML Treatment Approaches Expand for Older and High-Risk Patients

AML Treatment Approaches Expand for Older and High-Risk Patients from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.

How have acute myeloid leukemia (AML) treatment approaches expanded for older and high-risk patients? Dr. Naval Daver from the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center shares insight about additional treatment options. Learn about the potential for long-term cures for these patient groups. 

[ACT]IVATION TIP from Dr. Daver: “There is a dramatic progress, especially in the treatment of older unfit AML with the approval of the azacitidine-venetoclax combination.”

Download Resource Guide

Download Resource Guide en español

See More from [ACT]IVATED AML

Related Resources:

Long-Term Effects Acute Myeloid Leukemia Patients Should Know

Long-Term Effects Acute Myeloid Leukemia Patients Should Know

Assessing Untreated AML Patients Who Are Ineligible for Intensive Chemotherapy

Transcript: 

Art: 

Dr. Daver, for older and high-risk AML patients, how are the treatment approaches expanding?

Dr. Naval Daver: 

In older and high-risk AML, the major approval has been the combination of azacitidine (Onureg or Vidaza) and venetoclax (Venclexta), which is a BCL-2 inhibitor, the regimen was evaluated in a large Phase III study called the VIALE study, where we looked at the standard of care for the last two decades for older unfit AML, which azacitidine alone versus the combination of azacitidine and venetoclax and this combination showed a three times higher remission rate, 75 versus 28 percent overall remission rate as well as an improvement in overall survival and long-term survivors.

So this has led to great progress with now remission rates of 75 percent achievable in older unfit AML and many of them being durable at three years with ongoing follow-up, so this has really opened the door for us to be able to treat patients up to 75, 80, 85 years of age with effective therapy given the three parts of these to achieve remission, which is usually associated with freedom from transfusion improvement, quality of life, improved energy, less time in the hospital, less infections.

The other progress now is coming from the use of targeted therapies as well in these populations, and even though the HMA venetoclax or azacitidine combination is doing very well.

We now have data, in fact, from the ASH 2022 December meeting that at three years, about 25 percent or so I would still remain alive with azacitidine was even or 8 percent, now it’s 25 percent. But, of course, we want to do much better than that, and so this is where we are incorporating the targeted therapies, the FLT3 inhibitors, the IDH1, IDH2 inhibitors, menin inhibitors, and immunotherapies onto the backbone of azacitidine-venetoclax, which we hope will further improve that long-term survival cure from 25 to hopefully 50 to 60 percent and beyond.

So a lot of progress, you know, going from less than 10 percent, a 30 percent survival, long-term, and I think in the next few years, even up to 50 percent with some of these new combinations. The activation tip related to this question is that there is a dramatic progress, especially in the treatment of older unfit AML with the approval of the azacitidine-venetoclax combination.

This regimen is now giving high remission rates, which approximate remission rates that are seen with traditional intensive chemotherapy without the mucositis and toxicities and better volatility, and we are now working to further improve the remission and the durability of this dominant of initial.

 …potentially adding targeted therapy such as FLT3 inhibitors, IDH1, IDH2 menin inhibitors, and we think that potentially in the next decade, we could be achieving long-term cures in a large proportion of older unfit AML, which was something one could just dream of a decade ago. 

Share Your Feedback About [ACT]IVATED AML

What Promising AML Treatments Are Available for Newly Diagnosed Patients?

What Promising AML Treatments Are Available for Newly Diagnosed Patients? from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.

What do newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia (AML) patients have for promising treatment options? Dr. Naval Daver from the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center discusses progress in available treatments. Learn about therapies determined by key factors.

[ACT]IVATION TIP from Dr. Daver: “It’s very important to really consider all the available treatment options and if needed to seek consultation with an expert or academic center to get the most up-to-date treatments available for AML.

Download Resource Guide

Download Resource Guide en español

See More from [ACT]IVATED AML

Related Resources:

What Are the ASH 2022 Takeaways for AML Patients

The Importance of the FLT3 Mutation In AML

The Importance of the FLT3 Mutation In AML

A Look at Ongoing Acute Myeloid Leukemia Phase III Trials

Transcript: 

Art:

Dr. Daver, for newly diagnosed AML patients, what are the latest and most promising available therapies?

Dr. Daver:

For newly diagnosed AML at this time, the most promising agents include targeted therapies and BCL-2 inhibitor treatments, these are non-chemotherapeutic drugs, and we’ve seen great progress in the application of these as well as recent FDA approvals.

So one of these is an agent called venetoclax (Venclexta), which is a BCL-2 inhibitor and venetoclax in combination with hypomethylating agents such as azacitidine (Onureg or Vidaza) has shown a response to close to 75 percent. 

And the nice thing is that this regimen can be given and patients who are older than 70, 75 years of age, and even those who are having comorbidities are not fit for traditional intensive chemotherapy with similar response rates, so this has been approved in the last couple of years for the frontline treatment of AML, and we’ve been using this combination of venetoclax and azacitidine quite frequently with high efficacy in this patient population, the other new agents that have shown breakthroughs in AML are the targeted therapies, these include FLT3 inhibitors that target the FLT3 mutation and these have shown good activity, but the single agents with gilteritinib (Xospata) being approved in the relapsed refractory setting as a single agent where gilteritinib showed a response rate of about 50 percent as a single oral targeted therapy in relapsed FLT3-mutated AML, which is actually better than the response rate with high-dose combination more where the response rate is only about 25 to 30 percent.

So, gilteritinib is now approved, and it’s now moving and being evaluated in frontline setting other FLT3 inhibitors like lestaurtinib (CEP-701), actually just recently completed frontline studies showing improved outcome when lestaurtinib added to intensive chemo versus just intensive chemo in FLT3 in AML. And we hope and think there’s a good chance lestaurtinib will be approved in the near future.

And also IDH inhibitors have been approved both in the relapsed setting, frontline setting, and now we even have a third group of targeted therapy is called the menin inhibitors, they target MLL rearrangement and NPM1 mutations, which are seen in about 15 percent to 20 percent of the AML, so there’s been a lot of progress.

All of this in the last seven years, six, seven years with multiple targeted therapies, with multiple inhibitor-based treatments, showing progress in AML and then also recently, the concept of maintenance therapy, this is something we used for the last couple of decades in a acute lymphoblastic leukemia and multiple myeloma and in lymphoma.

But we had not had clear data in AML, but the recent study using oral formulation of a azacitidine in CC486 has shown the maintenance in patients who complete an induction consolidation and could not go to allogeneic stem cell transplant for one reason or the other was important and improve both overall survival and relapse-free survival, and so this is the first time now we have an FDA-approved and standard use of maintenance therapy after the traditional induction consolidation, so even changing the general paradigm of AML therapy.

So a lot has changed in the last seven to eight years in the treatment of acute myeloid leukemia, and this is very exciting.

And the activation tip related, this question is that there are multiple new targeted and low intensity therapeutic options available for patients with acute myeloid leukemia, and in our institution, in my opinion, even older patients are eligible for some form of therapy or the other…very few patients, if any, today, are being sent to hospitals or palliative care without treatment.

So it’s very important to really consider all the available treatment options and if needed to seek consultation with an expert or academic center to get the most up-to-date treatments available for AML. 

Share Your Feedback About [ACT]IVATED AML

Assessing Untreated AML Patients Who Are Ineligible for Intensive Chemotherapy

Assessing Untreated AML Patients Who Are Ineligible for Intensive Chemotherapy from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.

How are acute myeloid leukemia (AML) patients assessed for intensive chemotherapy? Dr. Catherine Lai from Penn Medicine explains eligibility criteria. Learn factors that impact patient eligibility and treatment options for AML patients who are categorized as ineligible for intensive chemotherapy.

[ACT]IVATION TIP from Dr. Lai: Talk with your physician about how they will determine whether or not you are fit or unfit for intensive chemotherapy.

Download Resource Guide

Download Resource Guide en español

See More from [ACT]IVATED AML

Related Resources:

What AML Treatment Options Are Available for MRD-Positive Patients

What AML Treatment Options Are Available for MRD-Positive Patients?

AML Treatment Approaches Expand for Older and High-Risk Patients

What Does Triplet Therapy in AML Mean for the Future (2)

What Does Triplet Therapy in AML Mean for the Future?

Transcript: 

Art:

Okay, Dr. Lai, what are we learning about patients with untreated AML who are ineligible for intensive chemotherapy?

Dr. Catherine Lai:

To define ineligible for intensive chemotherapy, I think that that is a moving target because historically, we would define patients as eligible for intensive or less intensive chemotherapy based on an age cut-off. And as the population is becoming more fit and is also getting older, what I would like to say is that we should use physiologic age, not chronologic age to determine who is eligible for intensive chemotherapy, and that is…in terms of how that is assessed, that is not uniformly done. 

But, in general, it takes into account how active a patient is and what they’re able to do on a day-to-day basis, so mostly their physical function, we also take into consideration their cognitive function as well, but to a lesser extent.

So, for patients who are ineligible for intensive chemotherapy, the standard practice would be the combination of azacitidine (Onureg or Vidaza) or decitabine (Dacogen), both of which are hypomethylating agents in combination with venetoclax (Venclexta), and that combination has really changed the landscape in terms of how we treat patients, it can be given as an outpatient, so it’s much better tolerated and has fewer side effects compared to intensive chemotherapy.

So the activation tip here is to talk with your physician about how they will determine whether or not you are fit or unfit for intensive chemotherapy. 

Share Your Feedback About [ACT]IVATED AML