Tag Archive for: decitabine
An Overview of Current AML Treatment Types
Dr. Daniel Pollyea provides an overview of AML treatment options, explaining the choices between intensive chemotherapy and targeted therapies, while also discussing when stem cell transplants are considered.
Dr. Daniel Pollyea is Clinical Director of Leukemia Services in the Division of Medical Oncology, Hematologic Malignancies and Blood and Marrow Transplant at University of Colorado Cancer Center. Learn more about Dr. Pollyea.
Related Resources:
|
AML Gene Mutations | Emerging Targeted Therapies in Development |
|
Transcript:
Katherine Banwell:
Would you share an overview of the types of therapy for AML, and how do you decide which patient gets what?
Dr. Daniel Pollyea:
Yeah. Because things are very different at relapse too, but at diagnosis, the options still are intensive chemotherapy, which is a regimen that hasn’t changed much in several decades really, 50 years.
And then, there are other treatments. There’s a treatment called venetoclax (Venclexta) that we pair with a low-intensity chemotherapy treatment, either azacitidine (Vidaza), decitabine (Dacogen), or something called low-dose cytarabine (Cytosar U). Those are the three sort of partners for venetoclax.
And then, there’s a targeted therapy against leukemia cells that have an IDH1 mutation that’s called ivosidenib (Tibsovo) that we also give with low-dose chemotherapy. So, in most cases those are the sort of three general options. That last treatment that’s targeted against IDH1, we typically preserve that for older patients or those that really are not good candidates for intensive chemotherapy but who have that IDH1 mutation, which is only somewhere around 10 percent of AML patients.
And then, so then the main decision then is “Do we give intensive chemotherapy, or do we give the venetoclax regimen?” And our policy is sort of, if we think we can cure you within intensive chemotherapy, and there’s certain disease biology subtypes that can be cured potentially with intensive chemotherapy, then that would be our first choice for you.
If we don’t think we can cure you with intensive chemotherapy, if you don’t have that disease biology or if you do but you’re just not a candidate for that type of an approach, that’s when we give the venetoclax regimen.
Katherine Banwell:
Are there other targeted therapies that you use?
Dr. Daniel Pollyea:
Yes. So, venetoclax is a targeted therapy against Bcl-2. Unlike some of these other gene mutations, you don’t have to have something; there’s no mutation in Bcl-2 that you need to be a candidate for venetoclax. We give venetoclax pretty much to any potential AML patients. Genomically-targeted therapies: you mentioned FLT3. Before I mentioned IDH1. There’s also one for IDH2. We hope there’s a couple more of these coming. Where these are approved, for the most part, at the moment, are in the relapse setting.
So, a patient who receives a treatment, and then either doesn’t respond or responds and then relapses, that’s typically where we bring in these genomically-targeted therapies. There’s an exception for IDH1 that, like I said, can be used now in the upfront treatment setting. But for the most part, these genomically-targeted therapies are relevant in relapse disease.
Katherine Banwell:
When would you use stem cell transplant?
Dr. Daniel Pollyea:
So, stem cell transplant for the majority of AML patients is still the only potential way to cure this disease. And so, a stem cell transplant is something that we give for that purpose. It’s something that we really reserve for people whose disease is in a remission. So, nobody comes in at diagnosis and goes right into a stem cell transplant; that wouldn’t work. So, you first have to achieve a remission with any number of one of the combinations of things that we’ve already discussed.
But once the patient is in a remission and doesn’t have a curative strategy with, like, intensive chemotherapy or some other approach and is a good candidate for a transplant, which is a whole other sort of set of circumstances that has to be considered, that’s patients who we offer a transplant for.
Elevate | Expert Advice for Accessing Quality AML Care and Treatment
How can you access the best care and treatment for YOUR AML? Dr. Daniel Pollyea, an AML expert, discusses the importance of patient education, including understanding the available treatment options for AML, how test results may impact care, and he shares advice for advocating for yourself.
Dr. Daniel Pollyea is Clinical Director of Leukemia Services in the Division of Medical Oncology, Hematologic Malignancies and Blood and Marrow Transplant at University of Colorado Cancer Center. Learn more about Dr. Pollyea.
Related Resources:
|
Expert Overview | AML Treatment Options and Phases of Therapy |
|
Transcript:
Katherine Banwell:
Hello and welcome, I’m your host Katherine Banwell. Thanks for joining us for another webinar in the Patient Empowerment Network’s Elevate Series. The goal of these programs is to help AML patients and care partners feel educated and informed when making decisions with their healthcare team.
Before we get into the discussion, please remember that program is not a substitute for seeking medical advice. Please refer to your healthcare team about what might be best for you. Well, let’s meet our guest today. Joining us is Dr. Daniel Pollyea. Welcome. Thank you so much for being with us. Would you introduce yourself?
Dr. Daniel Pollyea:
Yes, thanks so much for having me. I’m Dan Pollyea and I work at the University of Colorado where I lead the leukemia team.
Katherine Banwell:
Thank you so much for joining us today. As part of this new series we’re learning more about researchers like you. You’re on the frontlines of advancing AML care. What led you here and why is it important to you?
Dr. Daniel Pollyea:
I think my path is everyone’s, is distinct and a bit different.
In short, I think working in AML is one of the most exciting areas in medicine that a person can be in right now. It’s this incredible intersection between delivering potentially curative treatments to patients and sort of harnessing the most unbelievable research-driven sort of drug development, new therapies to patients. So, it’s just a really, really exciting time for all of us who work in the AML field because of all that those opportunities bring to bear.
Katherine Banwell:
Let’s start by having you define AML for the audience.
Dr. Daniel Pollyea:
AML, acute myeloid leukemia, it’s a type of a cancer. You can think of it as a cancer of the bone marrow, and it’s the likely result of several abnormalities, or sometimes I call them mistakes that can occur in stem cells or a stem cell in the bone marrow. And those mistakes that occur, most times, we don’t understand why they happen.
In most cases, they’re completely out of a person’s control. This isn’t something that comes on because it runs in a family in most cases, or because of something somebody did or didn’t do. These appear to be pretty random events that occur. But these mutations that occur in these sort of stem cells in the bone marrow cause a cell to become a cancer cell.
And over a course of a variable amount of time, these can evolve and develop into this condition, AML.
Katherine Banwell:
Okay, thank you for that. Health literacy, which is defined by the ability to find, understand, and use information for health-related decisions, is essential. Would you expand on the term “health literacy” and why it’s important to accessing quality AML care?
Dr. Daniel Pollyea:
Yeah. So, I think health literacy in our field is a challenge, because these are acute conditions that come on oftentimes very quickly. And these are not diseases that are top of mind. Most people don’t know somebody who’s had this. They’re not common; only about 30,000 people every year in the United States will have AML. So, it’s very hard to have any sort of background in this.
And for most patients because of the pace at which this disease occurs, it can be very difficult to sort of read up on it before meeting with a provider or an expert or a specialist. So, there’s a lot of challenges or barriers to health literacy. But like anything, the more a person knows, the more sort of empowered they can be, the more ability they have to ask questions and seek care at sort of the optimal place.
What I find often is that health literacy is best harnessed by a patient’s team; so, in other words, their support system, their family and friends. Because it’s so much to deal with in such rapid succession, to get this diagnosis and to usually be feeling very poorly. To also be expected to sort of have read the most relevant literature and come armed with that information is often too much at the beginning.
So, in the beginning, I think it’s best to leave that to your support system, and then as time goes on and as you start treatment, get comfortable, health literacy in our field, it becomes a more prevalent issue. And I think that when patients learn the most about how the field has evolved and where we are, the better that they can potentially do.
Katherine Banwell:
Well, that leads us perfectly into my next question. What resources do you suggest for boosting knowledge about AML?
Dr. Daniel Pollyea:
AML is like so many fields in medicine, but probably more so, moving so quickly that sort of the usual Google search is not going to, in most cases, bring up the most important, the most relevant information.
So, I think that there are some organizations out there that do a really good job of educating patients. The Leukemia & Lymphoma Society is one. They have a good website.
They have people you can contact, and they have really good information that’s available to patients and their families. That’s where I typically recommend people start. And then from there, based on our interest in education level and things like that, there can be other resources. But I think The Leukemia & Lymphoma Society’s a great place to start.
Katherine Banwell:
Okay. Newly diagnosed patients and their care partners are often overwhelmed, as you mentioned earlier. What advice do you give them at their first appointment?
Dr. Daniel Pollyea:
Right. So, this is a huge challenge. Anybody in the situation would be feeling like this. So, first of all, it’s sort of like, it’s okay to feel like this. It’s normal.
It would be unnatural to not be overwhelmed with what you’re going through; that’s an important message. And then, I think there’s this period of time between diagnosis and a plan that is particularly anxiety-provoking. And so, as your doctor and their team sort of sorts through the necessary information to get a plan together, just know that that this a very anxiety-provoking time when you’re being told that you have a really significant and serious disease, and we don’t have a plan yet.
So, making sure that you sort of comfort yourself during that period, knowing that that his temporary and that is potentially the worst anxiety you will feel, I think, can be helpful. And then, from there once the plan is sort of in place and enacting it, it really is just focusing on short-term goals.
So, instead of thinking three steps ahead and how’s the transplant going to work, in the early days, focusing on “Okay, how am I going to get into a remission?” and “How am I going to feel day-to-day? How can I feel as best I can day-to-day? What’s the best path to a remission?” And then, once you sort of meet the goal of remission, “Okay, what’s next? How are we going to cure this?” So, thinking through sort of in short bites, I think, is best.
Katherine Banwell:
Are there other key questions that they should be asking their doctor or their healthcare team?
Dr. Daniel Pollyea:
Yeah. Depending on the situation, this is a disease that can be cured; and so, from the first day, asking “Is that a possibility for me? Is there a curative plan for me, and what might that look like?” I think is an important question to ask from the beginning.
Making sure you communicate your goals and your wishes, how you define quality of life, what that means to you. And in that way, that can really help inform your doctor and their team to put together a plan that sort of is most customized to you.
Katherine Banwell:
That makes sense. Excuse me. When it comes to choosing AML therapy, it’s important to work with your healthcare team to identify what will be best for you. Would you walk us through the factors that are considered when choosing therapy for AML?
Dr. Daniel Pollyea:
Sure, yeah. So, we now have options in treatments for this disease and for decades, that wasn’t the case. This was a one-size-fits-all type of disease. And in the last eight years, that has completely changed.
So, there are approaches and diagnosis that vary between very intensive chemotherapy and less intensive treatments. What we call “targeted therapies” in some cases can be considered or be appropriate.
And so, having a sense, after learning a little bit about this, of how much would you be willing to tolerate an intensive chemotherapy regimen and all the risks inherent in that, if that’s even being presented as an option, and if so, what does that look like? And if not, hey, what are the other options if that sort of doesn’t sound like something that you would be willing to accept? So, I think those kind of probing questions.
First, asking yourself and then sort of translating that into your treatment team, into “Hey, this is sort of how I define quality of life.
And these are some red lines that I wouldn’t cross,” that can really help the healthcare team because, again, this is not one-size-fits-all anymore. We do have several options to consider at the time of diagnosis.
Katherine Banwell:
What other factors would you take into consideration? Do you look at age and overall health and fitness, test results?
Dr. Daniel Pollyea:
Absolutely. So, the relevant factors at the time of diagnosis would be, as you described, age, to some extent. And there’s no magic cutoff. “When a person is a certain age, this is no longer a treatment.” But age just gives us guidelines. Other comorbidities, other disease that you may be dealing with, things in your past, organ dysfunction; all those things are really, highly considered.
And also, sort of your own attitude toward “Hey, would I be okay with a month-long stay in the hospital or is that something that there’s no sort of outcome that that would be okay for me to withstand?” But then, the other huge part of this are things that are sort of, at diagnosis, unknown to you and unknown to your doctor for a little bit. And those are disease factors. So, what are the mutations that make up your disease? What’s making your disease tick? And now, just with normal clinical care, we have unbelievable access to this information. We can essentially learn within a week or two every relevant mutation that’s contributing to your disease.
And that helps us tremendously with respect to prognostication, sure, but also treatment selection because there are some treatments that will work, we think, better with certain disease biology, and other treatments that will work less well.
And we even have targeted therapies; so, based on particular mutations or other abnormalities, sort of a rationally designed therapy for exactly that disease biology. So, that is also a huge part of treatment selection, and we call those disease factors.
Katherine Banwell:
Why is molecular testing important following an AML diagnosis?
Dr. Daniel Pollyea:
Right. So, this basically just gets into what we were just discussing. So, that molecular testing is the testing that will tell us all the mutations that make up your disease biology. And so, that is crucial for prognostication, but also treatment selection.
And frankly, also when thinking about how to potentially cure your disease, those will be factors taken into account to make decisions that are pretty significant, such as should you receive a bone marrow transplant at some point in the future or not. And the reason it’s so crucial to get this done at diagnosis is, after diagnosis, we start a treatment, and hopefully we put your disease into a remission.
And at that point, we no longer have access to your disease cells. They’re gone, or they’re too low to even measure. And so, we need to get this information at diagnosis so that we can have it later on so that we can really understand your disease and make the best treatment plan for you.
Katherine Banwell:
Right. We’ve covered this in past programs, but I think it’s worth reiterating. Would you define induction and consolidation therapy for the audience?
Dr. Daniel Pollyea:
Yeah. So, traditionally when we only had intensive chemotherapy treatments, induction meant “Let’s get your disease under control.” That’s the first sort of line of treatment. “Let’s induce a remission.” That’s where that comes from.
And then, consolidation meant “Let’s do more stuff, more chemotherapy to consolidate that remission,” or you can think of it as maintain that remission, deepen that remission. All those are sort of the same adjectives there. So, induction was step one. Consolidation was step two. We’ve retained a lot of this language into a time when we don’t only have intensive chemotherapy. So, we’ll still use the word induction sometimes to mean “Let’s get your disease under control, even if it’s not with intensive chemotherapy.” So, admittedly that can be very confusing, but if someone uses it in that manner, that what they’re talking about is “Let’s get your disease under control.”
And consolidation still meant “Let’s deepen your remission” or “Let’s prolong your remission.” So, those are the general terms. They’re very much linked to intensive chemotherapy, which we still use, but it’s not all we use anymore.
So, I think it has gotten confusing, and it’s perfectly reasonable to be confused about that terminology.
Katherine Banwell:
Would you share an overview of the types of therapy for AML, and how do you decide which patient gets what?
Dr. Daniel Pollyea:
Yeah. Because things are very different at relapse too, but at diagnosis, the options still are intensive chemotherapy, which is a regimen that hasn’t changed much in several decades really, 50 years.
And then, there are other treatments. There’s a treatment called venetoclax (Venclexta) that we pair with a low-intensity chemotherapy treatment, either azacitidine (Vidaza), decitabine (Dacogen), or something called low-dose cytarabine (Cytosar U). Those are the three sort of partners for venetoclax.
And then, there’s a targeted therapy against leukemia cells that have an IDH1 mutation that’s called ivosidenib (Tibsovo) that we also give with low-dose chemotherapy. So, in most cases those are the sort of three general options. That last treatment that’s targeted against IDH1, we typically preserve that for older patients or those that really are not good candidates for intensive chemotherapy but who have that IDH1 mutation, which is only somewhere around 10 percent of AML patients.
And then, so then the main decision then is “Do we give intensive chemotherapy, or do we give the venetoclax regimen?” And our policy is sort of, if we think we can cure you within intensive chemotherapy, and there’s certain disease biology subtypes that can be cured potentially with intensive chemotherapy, then that would be our first choice for you.
If we don’t think we can cure you with intensive chemotherapy, if you don’t have that disease biology or if you do but you’re just not a candidate for that type of an approach, that’s when we give the venetoclax regimen.
Katherine Banwell:
Are there other targeted therapies that you use?
Dr. Daniel Pollyea:
Yes. So, venetoclax is a targeted therapy against Bcl-2. Unlike some of these other gene mutations, you don’t have to have something; there’s no mutation in Bcl-2 that you need to be a candidate for venetoclax. We give venetoclax pretty much to any potential AML patients. Genomically-targeted therapies: you mentioned FLT3. Before I mentioned IDH1. There’s also one for IDH2. We hope there’s a couple more of these coming. Where these are approved, for the most part, at the moment, are in the relapse setting.
So, a patient who receives a treatment, and then either doesn’t respond or responds and then relapses, that’s typically where we bring in these genomically-targeted therapies. There’s an exception for IDH1 that, like I said, can be used now in the upfront treatment setting. But for the most part, these genomically-targeted therapies are relevant in relapse disease.
Katherine Banwell:
When would you use stem cell transplant?
Dr. Daniel Pollyea:
So, stem cell transplant for the majority of AML patients is still the only potential way to cure this disease. And so, a stem cell transplant is something that we give for that purpose. It’s something that we really reserve for people whose disease is in a remission. So, nobody comes in at diagnosis and goes right into a stem cell transplant; that wouldn’t work. So, you first have to achieve a remission with any number of one of the combinations of things that we’ve already discussed.
But once the patient is in a remission and doesn’t have a curative strategy with, like, intensive chemotherapy or some other approach and is a good candidate for a transplant, which is a whole other sort of set of circumstances that has to be considered, that’s patients who we offer a transplant for.
Katherine Banwell:
Okay. What about new and emerging treatments?
Dr. Daniel Pollyea:
So much that’s really exciting here. So, we’ve had several new approvals. We have a new FLT3 inhibitor that we can use for newly diagnosed patients who have a FLT3 mutation and who are getting intensive chemotherapy. We have, even now, a new therapy that’s given as a maintenance treatment. It’s called oral azacitidine or Onureg, which is really exciting as well.
But I think the next sort of big thing in the field is going to be a targeted therapy for another subset of patients who are defined by the presence of a gene mutation, NPM1, but also by a chromosomal abnormality, something we call KMT2A. But these patients have disease that’s potentially amenable to what we call a menin inhibitor. And there are several companies with menin inhibitors. These therapies are getting pretty far along. We expect approval potentially soon for at least one of them. And then, I think these are going to have a big impact on the field for those patients who have that type of disease.
Katherine Banwell:
Oh, that’s exciting news. Where do clinical trials fit in?
Dr. Daniel Pollyea:
So, clinical trials are crucial for everything that we’re trying to do. We don’t make any progress without clinical trials. So, that’s the field as a whole. We don’t move forward. We don’t get any of these new treatments without clinical trials.
On an individual patient level, clinical trials are also really important because, for many patients we are still not doing as well as we want to be doing with this disease. We’ve made progress, but there’s still a lot of room for improvement. And so, for an individual patient, getting access to another therapy that, although we admit we don’t quite know yet whether it may be helpful but might be helpful, I think, is a really compelling situation to potentially consider participating because it is a guarantee you will help the field; and it’s a guarantee you will help every patient that comes after you through participation in clinical trial.
But all these clinical trials are also designed to help you; to help you in a situation where we as a field don’t feel like we’re doing well enough. So, clinical trials, totally crucial if we’re going to continue making progress.
And clinical trials are the reason why these last 10 years we have had such just dramatic improvement in availably of all these new therapies because literally thousands of patients have chosen to participate.
Katherine Banwell:
How can patients find clinical trials that might be right for them?
Dr. Daniel Pollyea:
So, back to The Leukemia & Lymphoma Society. They can be really helpful in guiding this. Asking your doctor, “Hey, are there any clinical trials her or at any other center that I should be considering?” And then, people who are interested in just going to the source. Every clinical trial that is available is registered at clinicaltrials.gov. And so, going to clinicaltrials.gov and then putting in some keywords like “acute myeloid leukemia,” you’ll see every clinical trial that’s available.
Katherine Banwell:
Oh, that’s excellent. I’d also like to add for our viewers that if you’re interested in learning more about AML care and treatment, PEN has a number of resources available to you.
You can find these at powerfulpatients.org/AML or by scanning the QR code on your screen.
So, Dr. Pollyea, when choosing a therapy what questions should patients be asking their healthcare team about a treatment plan?
Dr. Daniel Pollyea:
So, at the time of diagnosis I think it’s a reasonable question to say, “Is my disease amenable to a cure? Can I be potentially cured?” and “Is this treatment part of a plan for a cure?” If that is possible, then I would want to be walked through the steps that that’s going to executed. And if it’s not possible for me to be cured, then I would like to discuss what is the treatment plan that could potentially give me the longest duration of a remission and the best quality of life. And so, that’s the conversation that I think is important to have.
And then, everything that we discuss comes into play there; an individual’s sort of appropriateness for intensive chemotherapy versus less intensive regimens, and also the disease biology and what that maybe make them a candidate for.
Katherine Banwell:
Are there certain symptoms or side effects a patient should share with their care team?
Dr. Daniel Pollyea:
Yeah. So, we have a very, very sort liberal request that really anything, it should be shared. We have a 24/7 number to call with one of us on-call at all times. So, it’s very difficult for a patient to kind of be able to appreciate, when they’re going through such dramatic changes, “Hey, is this expected or not?” So, we really emphasize oversharing concerns about symptoms.
All these drugs have very different side effect profiles, and some of them are common and some of them are less common. The disease itself can cause symptoms and clinical issues. So, instead of really trying to educate yourself in an impossible way on what could be or is not related, it’s better just to ask.
Katherine Banwell:
What is the role of a care partner when someone is in active treatment?
Dr. Daniel Pollyea:
Having a care partner is crucial. This is physically and mentally extraordinarily stressful on the body and on the mind. Having that support person for those purposes is really important. Having that person be an advocate for a patient to ask those questions that may not be getting asked, to reframe questions to get the best answers is really, really important.
And then, there’s the more mundane things; just getting patients to their appointments and kind of keeping their morale up and those things. So, there’s data and research on this that patients with caregivers, they have better outcomes. When it comes to a transplant, a caregiver is not an option. You must have a caregiver. And the importance of that will be sort of relayed to you in the context of a discussion about a transplant. But a caregiver in the setting of a transplant is so important that it is a requirement to even be considered for that.
Katherine Banwell:
Sounds like that’s vital. I’d like to get to a few audience questions that we received before the program. Chris sent in this question: I would like to hear more about mutations found during molecular testing. Are there new AML drugs in trials for other less common mutations?
Dr. Daniel Pollyea:
Great question. So, at the moment, what we have clinically available are targeted therapies for patients with FLT3 mutations, IDH1, and IDH2 mutations.
And there are about 50 different genes that can be mutated in AML, and so that’s a small slice of the pie. Those are relatively common mutations, but still, small slice of the pie. A lot of the very uncommon or less common gene mutations we don’t have great paths to targeted therapies for them. And is that just we never will? I don’t think necessarily, but I think those can be really challenging. Not every mutation is amenable to a targeted therapy, at least as far as we know now. The one that’s coming, that we’re hopeful about is NPM1, which may be able to be targeted with one of those menin inhibitors that we talked about. So, that’s the next big one up.
And that will probably constitute 40 percent of patients that have one of those mutations that I listed. But research is ongoing to kind of try and dig into this more. What I will say is that the AML research community is so fantastic that every lead is being pursued, and there is a lab somewhere in the world whose focus is on whatever small, even the most least common AML mutation; that’s somebody’s focus.
And so, if there were to be promising therapies developed for even rare mutations, I assure you, the field would take those forward and figure out a way to do those clinical trials and to get to approval if it’s appropriate. So, but I think that’s where the landscape is right now.
Katherine Banwell:
This question comes from Rita: Outside of changes in bloodwork, what are signs that AML is returning?
Dr. Daniel Pollyea:
Great question.
So, this can be a really tough one, and bloodwork is what we sorta hang our hat on. There are some times that patients sort of have clinical symptoms that proceed changes in bloodwork. I will say, I find that to be pretty uncommon. But some of the things that are pretty rare but might happen, would be leukemic involvement of the skin; so, it would appear as a rash. Some people might have some fatigue that comes on before the blood counts really change. That’s also pretty rare.
And then, if this disease were to work its way into any other organ or tissue in the body, and that’s rare, it’s possible that that could present with clinical signs and symptoms before a blood count change. But for the most part, the blood counts are really early sign that something is changing, and typically we’ll see that before any clinical signs.
Katherine Banwell:
Thank you for that, Dr. Pollyea, and those were great questions. Please continue to send them to question@powerfulpatients.org, and we’ll work to get them answered on future programs. So, as we close out the program, Dr. Pollyea, what would you like to leave the audience with? Why are you hopeful that about the future of AML care and treatment?
Dr. Daniel Pollyea:
Well, we’ve made unbelievable progress in just the last 10 years. And so, just looking into the future, I see nothing stopping that progress. So, it’s really exciting to think about where we’ll be two, five, 10 years from now. We never could have envisioned 10 years ago where we are now in terms of the therapies we have, how active and effective they are, and the impact that it’s had on patients.
Again, just so proud to be part of this community, both on the patient care side and on the research side. It’s such a committed group of people, working around the clock on this disease to figure it out and to make some improvements. For all those reasons, I’m just super hopeful that we’ll just keep making progress, and I see no signs of anything slowing down.
Katherine Banwell:
That’s a promising outlook to leave our audience with. Dr. Pollyea, thank you so much for joining us today.
Dr. Daniel Pollyea:
Thanks so much for having me.
Katherine Banwell:
And thank you to all of our collaborators. To learn more about AML and to access tools to help you become a proactive patient, visit powerfulpatients.org. I’m Katherine Banwell. Thanks for being with us today.
What Myelofibrosis Treatment Types Are Available?
Dr. Naveen Pemmaraju outlines available myelofibrosis therapies, such as JAK inhibitors, and discusses the role of clinical trials and emerging treatments for managing the disease.
Dr. Naveen Pemmaraju is Director of the Blastic Plasmacytoid Dendritic Cell Neoplasm (BPDCN) Program and Professor in the Department of Leukemia at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center. Learn more about Dr. Pemmaraju.
See More from Elevate Myelofibrosis
Related Resources:
Myelofibrosis Symptoms and Side Effects | Why Speaking Up Is Vital |
|
|
Transcript:
Katherine Banwell:
So, once all testing is complete and the patient has an accurate diagnosis, they’ll work with their doctor then on a treatment approach. You’ve touched on this a little bit, but
What are the types of treatment available for people with myelofibrosis?
Dr. Naveen Pemmaraju:
Yeah, thanks, Katherine. We’ll keep it general and standard of care. As you mentioned at the top, I’ll reiterate, that none of these are intended to be specific instructions for specific folks. However, in general, for the category of patients with myelofibrosis, in general, there’s not many treatments, unfortunately. As of 2024, we have only four standard JAK inhibitors. So, that’s this pathway we’re talking about, JAK-STAT. Interestingly, you don’t have to be JAK2V617F mutated. These are for the whole pathway.
So, all patients with myelofibrosis, are intermediate to high risk. The first one, Katherine, is ruxolitinib (Jakafi), which has been around for more than a decade, and first in class JAK inhibitor. The second drug is fedratinib (Inrebic). The third is pacritinib (Vonjo), approved only in 2020 for those patients with less than platelets of 50. Then the myelofibrosis drug, momelotinib (Ojjaara), just approved not even a year ago, in September of 2023 for myelofibrosis with anemia. So, those four are considered as called JAK inhibitors.
They are really the only targeted therapy class of drugs specifically approved in the MF space. Outside of that, there’s older and other drugs that me and others have used, if you will, so-called off-label or historical use, hydroxyurea (Hydrea), interferon products such as pegylated interferon. Hypomethylators such as azacitidine (Vidaza) and decitabine (Dacogen), particularly in more advanced cases. Some of those drugs are borrowed from MDS and AML and have been around for decades.
Then of course, finally, clinical trials. We really recommend folks, if they have the ability and feasibility, clinical trials, even in the first diagnosis setting. So, untreated, first therapy. These clinical trials, Katherine, are based on three factors. One is JAK inhibitor plus another agent. So, that’s kind of like a combination trial. Two is add-on agents. So, you’re already on the JAK inhibitor for a while, maybe it’s starting to not work. Then you add in a third agent.
Then three is a completely novel agent beyond the JAK-STAT pathway. Then maybe we can even add a fourth one now as this is evolving in real-time, which is anemia-targeting drugs. Many of our patients have either transfusion-dependent or bad anemia. Some of the drugs that are being developed are specifically aimed at them.
Expert Overview | AML Treatment Options and Phases of Therapy
Expert Overview | AML Treatment Options and Phases of Therapy from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.
What are the treatment options and phases of therapy for AML? Dr. Gail Roboz discusses the various therapies available to treat AML and to maintain remission, the timing of these therapies, and novel treatment approaches offered.
Dr. Gail Roboz is director of the Clinical and Translational Leukemia Programs and professor of medicine at Weill Cornell Medicine and the New York Presbyterian Hospital. Learn more about Dr. Roboz.
Related Resources:
|
|
|
|
Transcript:
Katherine Banwell:
Dr. Roboz, would you provide a brief explanation of the phases of therapy for AML?
Dr. Gail Roboz:
Yeah. So, here, too, I have to say that it’s more confusing than it used to be for the following reasons. So, historically and currently, we typically talk about induction as the first therapy that you’re going to get to get into remission.
Then, the treatment paradigm is you do something to get into remission; do some treatment to get into remission. After that, in the realm of post-remission therapy, there are different things that can happen. There can be something called consolidation, which might be another round of chemotherapy. Some patients get consolidation, some patients don’t. After consolidation, there can be a transplant.
So, you get into remission, you may or may not get a little bit of what’s called consolidation chemotherapy, and then go on to a transplant.
However, sometimes either after the transplant or after chemotherapy before ever getting or instead of ever getting a transplant, there might be ongoing treatment in a lower intensity ongoing basis that is called maintenance.
So, you’ve got to think about it as induction as what happens first, consolidation is something that happens when you’re in remission, and then maintenance usually refers to ongoing therapy that is different from consolidation.
It’s usually lower intensity, easier to take, oral types of treatment that may go on and on. And just to be incredibly confusing, it’s different from something like breast cancer, where often the patients are given, “You get six cycles of this, and then you’re done.” From AML, there’s actually often not that type of an obvious plan right out of the gate for the patient.
The answer will be, “It depends.” It depends. It depends how your treatment looks at this point in time. It depends how you look at this point in time.
So then, the patients say, “Well, aren’t you going to cure me of this? What are you doing? Aren’t you going to get rid of it?” So, historically, there are some patients who get cured with chemotherapy. They get chemotherapy to get into remission, they get some chemotherapy afterwards, and there’s a cure rate for some patients with that. The majority of patients who are cured with AML get an allotransplant, or a transplant from somebody else.
Then there’s a whole group of patients where we’re asking the question now, is it possible to get those patients beyond five years – so in oncology, five years is typically defined as cure. Can we get some patients with ongoing therapy to that past-five-year mark without a transplant? That’s in the zone of the ‘coming soon.’ Don’t have a ton of patients in that group right now, but hopefully we will.
Katherine Banwell:
You’ve mentioned some various treatment types that are used to treat AML. Can you share a brief overview of available treatments?
Dr. Gail Roboz:
So, the terminology that we use is a little bit annoying, because it is a little bit general. We say intensive and not intensive.
But historically, intensive chemotherapy referred to a combination of generally two types of agents, cytarabine (Cytosar-U) and an anthracycline, which is a class of chemotherapy, that either just those two together or in combination with sometimes a third or a fourth drug usually keeps people in the hospital for around a month. Not that the chemotherapy takes that long, but the treatment gets rid of basically a lot of cells in the bone marrow, good guys and bad guys, and it takes about three weeks for those normal cells to recover.
So, a standard intensive induction for AML is often around three to four weeks in the hospital, somewhere between three and five or so days of chemotherapy up front, depending on exactly what the protocol is. The classic regimen is actually still called 3+7, three days of one drug, seven of the other. But there are many variations of that that work.
The chemo is then stopped, the patient hangs out in the hospital, very frequently getting transfusions and antibiotics, and we wait for the bone marrow to recover.
Another current path that many patients are getting – almost all older patients, with ‘older’ being defined not by a specific age cutoff, but often 75 and older, almost everybody agrees no longer gets the classic chemotherapy that I just described. At some institutions, that 75 is going down, and even 70 and 65 and above are getting a new type of therapy, mostly because the new type of therapy is working pretty well. That is a combination of something called a hypomethylating agent.
Drugs like azacitidine (Vidaza, Onureg) or decitabine (Dacogen) in combination with a pill that has changed the landscape of AML more than any other called venetoclax (Venclexta). Venetoclax is a drug that is not exclusively used for AML.
It actually was originally approved for another type of leukemia. But I think that not many people would argue with the statement that what has changed absolutely the face of AML treatment has been this drug, because it’s a BCL2 inhibitor. What it does is it actually – cancer cells and leukemia cells in particular are very, very good at staying alive.
They don’t undergo cell death, they don’t want to die, and venetoclax brings down their forcefield so that those cells can actually undergo apoptosis and die.
Venetoclax in combination with azacitidine or decitabine has transformed the care of the disease, because many patients older than 65 – and the median age of diagnosis of AML is around 68 to 70. So, many patients never were well enough to have the intensive therapy. They weren’t going into remission, and they weren’t having prolonged survival often beyond a few months.
But now, those patients do actually much better with the combination of aza [azacitidine] and venetoclax. So typically, the induction path is going to be deciding who gets an intensive therapy backbone, usually associated with long hospitalization. Who gets a less intensive backbone – by the way, that is often associated with just the same hospitalization. So, that’s why I don’t love the term ‘low intensity,’ because that implies that it doesn’t work.
It does, and it also implies that you’re not going to be in the hospital. You probably will, because in the same way as for the more so-called intensive therapies, getting into remission involves getting rid of bone marrow cells and waiting for the normal ones to recover. Even if you are a patient who is getting the venetoclax combined with the azacitidine or decitabine, which is typically called low intensity, you may very well be in the hospital for a month.
Because depending on where you live and who your family is and how sick you might be, you will probably want us to watch you carefully during that first month, but it’s worth it. Because if you have a good chance of getting into remission, remission is what makes life better and life longer. So, we want to get patients into remission, even if it means upfront time in the hospital.
Elevate | What You Should Know About Your Role in AML Treatment and Care Decisions
Elevate | What You Should Know About Your Role in AML Treatment and Care Decisions from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.
How can you elevate your AML care and treatment? AML expert Dr. Gail Roboz discusses the importance of participating in AML treatment decisions, reviews key factors that may impact therapy options, and shares advice for advocating for yourself.
Dr. Gail Roboz is director of the Clinical and Translational Leukemia Programs and professor of medicine at Weill Cornell Medicine and the New York Presbyterian Hospital. Learn more about Dr. Roboz.
Related Resources:
|
Thriving With AML | Advice for Setting Goals and Making Treatment Decisions |
Expert Advice | Managing AML Symptoms and Treatment Side Effects |
Transcript:
Katherine Banwell:
Hello, and welcome. I’m your host, Katherine Banwell. It’s no secret that the quality-of-care patients receive can vary, and patients who are educated about their condition and involved in their care may have improved outcomes. That’s why the Patient Empowerment Network created the Elevate series, to help AML patients and their care partners feel well-informed when making treatment decisions with their healthcare team.
In today’s program, an AML expert will join us to share advice for accessing better overall care. Before we get into the discussion, please remember that this program is not a substitute for seeking medical advice. Please refer to your healthcare team about what might be best for you. Well, let’s meet our guest today. Joining us is Dr. Gail Roboz. Dr. Roboz, would you please introduce yourself?
Dr. Gail Roboz:
Absolutely. Thank you so much for having me. My name is Gail Roboz. I’m a professor of medicine and director of the clinical and translational leukemia programs at Weill Cornell Medicine and the NewYork-Presbyterian Hospital in New York City. Thank you again for having me.
Katherine Banwell:
Well, thank you so much for joining us today. We really appreciate it. I’d like to start by discussing your role as a researcher. You’re on the frontlines for advancements in the AML field. What led you here, and why is it important to you?
Dr. Gail Roboz:
So, I’m actually asked that question quite frequently, because AML is a challenging, difficult, scary disease, and people don’t necessarily assume that somebody in medical school would gravitate toward it.
But I have to say that what is incredibly fascinating back then and now about leukemia is the continuous access to the disease. Patients will maybe giggle or groan as I’m saying that, because you can get a blood sample really anytime. You can even get a bone marrow sample anytime, although patients don’t enjoy that so much.
But from a research perspective, it is absolutely extraordinary to be dealing with a disease where you can, in real time, truly run back and forth to a laboratory and see what’s happening, what is the new drug or the old drug doing, what’s happening with the patient, and I would say that from a fascination of a medical student perspective that grabbed me then and still does today.
Katherine Banwell:
When it comes to choosing therapy for AML, it’s important to work with your healthcare team to identify what will work best for you, the patient. So, I’d like to know how you define shared decision-making.
Dr. Gail Roboz:
The problem with AML sometimes is that it can be such an acute, emergency-type of presentation and urgent decision-making that I think your question is almost right out of the gate for some patients that will, “Wait, I don’t even have a minute, here. How do I build a team, do the research, look online if people are telling me that I’m in the middle of an emergency?”
That isn’t always the case for acute leukemia, but it sometimes is. I think that what happens in AML in particular for patients is a building of knowledge and a building of the team, and figuring out, first of all, where am I when I am being told this diagnosis, and is it really an emergency? Do I have to make decisions really right now, because is it life-threatening today, I don’t have time to look around? Or do I have a minute to pause and get more information?
I definitely feel that with the Internet era and with so much connection between doctors and teams, there is much more ability to reach out instantaneously for doctors, too, to get advice on a patient who might be in a smaller hospital that doesn’t have AML experience. But I think that the first thing is to try to figure out very, very quickly, what needs to happen to me as a patient immediately, and what can wait a minute, so that I can figure out what am I being told, and what are my options?
Katherine Banwell:
Right, right. It can be confusing for patients, just finding out this new information. Part of making care decisions is setting goals. What are AML treatment goals, and how are they determined?
Dr. Gail Roboz:
I would say that leaving cure on the table from the beginning is always a good place to start, because you want to figure out, first of all, what am I dealing with? What are the actual options?
But when AML strikes, and a patient who has multiple medical conditions or comorbidities that are truly compromising function independently of the diagnosis of AML, that’s going to be a special path of what is actually reasonable for someone who is terribly medically ill or otherwise frail right from the beginning? That can be defining goals, but I think from the beginning, the best thing is to leave everything on the table. What can actually be done to make me better, first of all, to get me out of my immediate trouble? What can be done to make me better, and if I’m getting better, well, I like that, how do I stay there?
What can be done to hang on to the state of ‘better,’ which is sometimes defined as remission? In AML, the goal is to get the bone marrow working again, functioning again, get rid of the acute emergency problem, if there is one, which there may or may not be in acute leukemia.
Sometimes it’s truly an emergency, and sometimes it isn’t. But once I get better, can I stay there? What is required to keep me with a working bone marrow for as long as possible?
But once you are starting to sort through the diagnosis, you realize that saying that somebody has acute myeloid leukemia is not telling me nearly enough information. This is a disease that is what we call biologically heterogeneous, which means there are lots of different forms. It’s like saying you’re sick. What exactly does that mean? There are lots of things that can make you sick. There are lots of different subtypes of AML, and fairly quickly in most institutions, we start getting back some information specifically on the subtype and biological characteristics of the disease.
This can be very, very important in the initial treatment planning, and depending on where you are, the information that you get back can sometimes take 24 hours, 48 hours, 72 hours, a week. So, you start learning very quickly though that, “If I’m not in a complete emergency that requires instantaneous treatment, can I get back more information about the biological subtype of the disease so that I can start treatment planning of what is my best option right out of the gate?” That’s usually called induction, or the first therapy that you’re going to get with the goal, ‘getting rid of leukemia cells and getting into remission.’ That’s part one, and then everything that comes after that is about keeping you in remission.
But for the initial goal, what is the therapy that the patient needs to get to get into remission? In order to figure that out, the good news is there are a lot of different ways to slice and dice getting into remission, and actually, it used to be such a weighty decision.
Now, I would actually encourage people to – not relax, you can never use the word ‘relax’ with acute leukemia. But there are several different induction strategies for most patients that would be okay.
So, even if you get started with one strategy and you hear five days later that another doctor might do something different, there are a lot of ways to safely get into remission. I think everybody should be pleased about the fact that we’re doing much better than we used to for patients across the board, all the way from children to much older adults, to safely getting people into remission.
Katherine Banwell:
Right. So, what sort of factors then do you take into consideration when you’re choosing a therapy?
Dr. Gail Roboz:
So, out of the gate, there are the patients that I think I referred to earlier who truly, truly are in situations based on their other diseases that there are certain treatments we would just cross out right out of the gate.
If there are patients with very, very severely compromised cardiac or renal or lung function or are terribly ill from other conditions, AML doctors will right out of the gate for those patients eliminate certain treatments. But absent that scenario, what we try to look for is the biology of the disease. Not look at the age, not look at the comorbidities unless they are so severe that they make obvious certain choices.
But rather, what I like to do is say, “What kind of AML is this, and what is the best treatment that I have to get this patient into remission?” And then ask the question, “can this particular patient handle this therapy?” Sometimes, these days, there actually may be more than one route to get to remission depending on the biology of the disease, and then, if that’s the case, then I can start getting picky and look at the individual patient. Where does the patient live? Who’s the patient’s family? What other diseases has the patient been treated for?
Is there something that I can use? If I have a choice, if there are a couple of different things that might work, how do I fit the treatment to best take care of the needs of this particular patient? If I don’t have choices, then my question is, “Okay, how do I get this patient through my one therapy that I think is the truly, truly best option?”
Katherine Banwell:
Okay. I’d like to turn to test results for a moment. What sort of tests should be done following an AML diagnosis?
Dr. Gail Roboz:
We often generally recommend a bone marrow biopsy, even if we know we can make the diagnosis from a blood test, because even though the bone marrow biopsy is not the most fun test in the world, it does offer better information for follow-up care than what you can get initially from the blood.
So, every once in a while, we do have a patient for whom a bone marrow biopsy itself for whatever reason can’t be done. But almost always, we need a bone marrow biopsy, and on that biopsy, you’re going to look under the microscope and see what the cells look like. You’re going to get back standard testing, which is called flow cytometry, which is going to tell the difference between what are the different cells that you’re seeing under the microscope.
But then you’re actually going to get progressively much more fancy testing, including things called chromosomes or cytogenetics, and then ultimately, the majority of patients, if at all possible, will be having mutational testing to identify certain subgroups of AML that benefit from very particular treatments. Next-generation sequencing, PCR, fusion proteins, FISH, cytogenetics, I can go on and on with all kinds of terminology that is very confusing, even to hematology fellows, let alone to patients.
Usually, we use a combination of tests to decide, “Is this patient likely to be able to be cured with chemotherapy alone, or might this patient benefit from a stem cell transplant from somebody else after they go into remission?”
That’s basically what the prognostic scoring systems used to be asking, but now it’s a lot more complicated than that. Because even in the favorable categories, even in the adverse categories, where there used to be very little subtlety, now there is a lot of subtlety.
It’s all about defining getting into remission, and what do I give you once you’re in remission to keep you there? It’s no longer this windshield wiper thing of good, bad, transplant, no transplant. There’s a lot more to AML than there used to be.
Katherine Banwell:
I’d like to add that if you, the viewer, are interested in learning more about AML testing and treatment, PEN has a number of resources available for you. You can find these at powerfulpatients.org/AML, or by scanning the QR code on your screen.
Before we get into specific treatment types, Dr. Roboz, would you provide a brief explanation of the phases of therapy for AML? You mentioned induction therapy earlier. Would you tell us what that is?
Dr. Gail Roboz:
Yeah. So, here, too, I have to say that it’s more confusing than it used to be for the following reasons. So, historically and currently, we typically talk about induction as the first therapy that you’re going to get to get into remission.
Then, the treatment paradigm is you do something to get into remission; do some treatment to get into remission. After that, in the realm of post-remission therapy, there are different things that can happen. There can be something called consolidation, which might be another round of chemotherapy. Some patients get consolidation, some patients don’t. After consolidation, there can be a transplant.
So, you get into remission, you may or may not get a little bit of what’s called consolidation chemotherapy, and then go on to a transplant.
However, sometimes either after the transplant or after chemotherapy before ever getting or instead of ever getting a transplant, there might be ongoing treatment in a lower intensity ongoing basis that is called maintenance.
So, you’ve got to think about it as induction as what happens first, consolidation is something that happens when you’re in remission, and then maintenance usually refers to ongoing therapy that is different from consolidation.
It’s usually lower intensity, easier to take, oral types of treatment that may go on and on. And just to be incredibly confusing, it’s different from something like breast cancer, where often the patients are given, “You get six cycles of this, and then you’re done.” From AML, there’s actually often not that type of an obvious plan right out of the gate for the patient.
The answer will be, “It depends.” It depends. It depends how your treatment looks at this point in time. It depends how you look at this point in time.
So then, the patients say, “Well, aren’t you going to cure me of this? What are you doing? Aren’t you going to get rid of it?” So, historically, there are some patients who get cured with chemotherapy. They get chemotherapy to get into remission, they get some chemotherapy afterwards, and there’s a cure rate for some patients with that. The majority of patients who are cured with AML get an allotransplant, or a transplant from somebody else.
Then there’s a whole group of patients where we’re asking the question now, is it possible to get those patients beyond five years – so in oncology, five years is typically defined as cure. Can we get some patients with ongoing therapy to that past-five-year mark without a transplant? That’s in the zone of the ‘coming soon.’ Don’t have a ton of patients in that group right now, but hopefully we will.
Katherine Banwell:
You’ve mentioned some various treatment types that are used to treat AML. Can you share a brief overview of available treatments?
Dr. Gail Roboz:
So, the terminology that we use is a little bit annoying, because it is a little bit general. We say intensive and not intensive.
But historically, intensive chemotherapy referred to a combination of generally two types of agents, cytarabine (Cytosar-U) and an anthracycline, which is a class of chemotherapy, that either just those two together or in combination with sometimes a third or a fourth drug usually keeps people in the hospital for around a month. Not that the chemotherapy takes that long, but the treatment gets rid of basically a lot of cells in the bone marrow, good guys and bad guys, and it takes about three weeks for those normal cells to recover.
So, a standard intensive induction for AML is often around three to four weeks in the hospital, somewhere between three and five or so days of chemotherapy up front, depending on exactly what the protocol is. The classic regimen is actually still called 3+7, three days of one drug, seven of the other. But there are many variations of that that work.
The chemo is then stopped, the patient hangs out in the hospital, very frequently getting transfusions and antibiotics, and we wait for the bone marrow to recover.
Another current path that many patients are getting – almost all older patients, with ‘older’ being defined not by a specific age cutoff, but often 75 and older, almost everybody agrees no longer gets the classic chemotherapy that I just described. At some institutions, that 75 is going down, and even 70 and 65 and above are getting a new type of therapy, mostly because the new type of therapy is working pretty well. That is a combination of something called a hypomethylating agent.
Drugs like azacitidine (Vidaza, Onureg) or decitabine (Dacogen) in combination with a pill that has changed the landscape of AML more than any other called venetoclax (Venclexta). Venetoclax is a drug that is not exclusively used for AML.
It actually was originally approved for another type of leukemia. But I think that not many people would argue with the statement that what has changed absolutely the face of AML treatment has been this drug, because it’s a BCL2 inhibitor. What it does is it actually – cancer cells and leukemia cells in particular are very, very good at staying alive.
They don’t undergo cell death, they don’t want to die, and venetoclax brings down their forcefield so that those cells can actually undergo apoptosis and die.
Venetoclax in combination with azacitidine or decitabine has transformed the care of the disease, because many patients older than 65 – and the median age of diagnosis of AML is around 68 to 70. So, many patients never were well enough to have the intensive therapy. They weren’t going into remission, and they weren’t having prolonged survival often beyond a few months.
But now, those patients do actually much better with the combination of aza [azacitidine] and venetoclax. So typically, the induction path is going to be deciding who gets an intensive therapy backbone, usually associated with long hospitalization. Who gets a less intensive backbone – by the way, that is often associated with just the same hospitalization. So, that’s why I don’t love the term ‘low intensity,’ because that implies that it doesn’t work.
It does, and it also implies that you’re not going to be in the hospital. You probably will, because in the same way as for the more so-called intensive therapies, getting into remission involves getting rid of bone marrow cells and waiting for the normal ones to recover. Even if you are a patient who is getting the venetoclax combined with the azacitidine or decitabine, which is typically called low intensity, you may very well be in the hospital for a month.
Because depending on where you live and who your family is and how sick you might be, you will probably want us to watch you carefully during that first month, but it’s worth it. Because if you have a good chance of getting into remission, remission is what makes life better and life longer. So, we want to get patients into remission, even if it means upfront time in the hospital.
Katherine Banwell:
You mentioned one inhibitor as targeted therapy, but there are a couple of others. Would you briefly tell us about those?
Dr. Gail Roboz:
So, over the years recently, we have identified certain specific targets in AML which are resulting in the addition of medications on these standard backbones. So, the target for venetoclax is something called BCL2, and actually, venetoclax probably makes all chemotherapy better. It’s kind of a controversial statement, but I’m going to stand by it. But in AML, it has been shown that the addition of venetoclax to lots of different backbones makes them work better. There are other things to hit, though.
For example, there are patients with AML who have something called a FLT3, F-L-T-3 mutation. This mutation also has specific inhibitors that are FDA-approved drugs that target specifically the FLT3 mutation, and if you have one of those, your doctor may add on a FLT3 inhibitor to either a lower intensity or an intensive backbone. Similarly, there are agents called IDH inhibitors. There are IDH1 and IDH2 inhibitors.
If I start getting into isocitrate dehydrogenase pathways on this webinar, I think everybody will click off, because it’s certainly bored all of the medical students in med school, and it’s pretty tough to understand. But the bottom line is it’s very cool stuff because that boring pathway in medical school that nobody really thought about too much is actually part of very, very, central cellular functions that are a vulnerability now that have been identified in leukemic cells that, if you hit them with these specific inhibitors, patients do better.
Now, couple of things for patients. It doesn’t mean that it’s better to have a FLT3 or an IDH mutation because the targeted therapies are available. So, a lot of patients are disappointed when they don’t have mutations. I don’t want you to think in that way. It’s not that it’s better, it’s different.
It identifies a different biology. If you have certain mutations, there are certain medications that may help you more.
That’s why I think the patients are learning quickly, too, to ask the doc – they may not remember the letters of the alphabet soup, but “Do I have something about my AML that can get one of these targeted therapies added on?” I think is a good question to think about. “Do I have something about my disease that has a specific drug that we’ve already learned makes outcomes better?”
Katherine Banwell:
There’s a new emerging therapy as well. Is it the menin inhibitor?
Dr. Gail Roboz:
I think that, in understanding different targets and different pathways, it leads me to a general statement that if you can get yourself potentially onto a clinical trial at an academic center, that is something to consider right out of the gate. Because there is a lot, a lot, a lot going on in this field right now.
What we are hoping, and the reason that I am talking to you about venetoclax and FLT3 inhibitors and IDH inhibitors, is because of all the patients who jumped onto those clinical trials and proved that those drugs are better. Some of them are my patients! I was fortunate on some of those early trials to have some real winners in patients who got onto the trials. They’re the ones who drove the success.
So, for example, menin inhibitors, which are very, very exciting, targeted agents for NPM1 and KMT2A mutations and rearrangements – these are complicated to remember as a patient, but there’s a cool drug out there that might be for you. I think that patients who really think about asking the question wherever they are, the “Hey, I just got a diagnosis of AML. Is there a clinical trial that might look good for me?” I think is a great question to ask pretty much out of the gate.
Katherine Banwell:
The symptoms of AML as well as the side effects of certain medications can vary greatly among patients. So, how do you approach symptom management with your patients?
Dr. Gail Roboz:
Patients will giggle because I repeat this line. You have to be afraid of the disease, not the treatment. I think that if you read the package insert on a Tylenol, you’re certainly not going to think you’re going to live for more than 20 minutes if you take one of those. You can certainly appreciate that, with chemotherapy drugs and including some of the novel agents that I’m talking about, if you read package inserts and look at some of the signs and symptoms and things that can happen, it’s extraordinarily overwhelming.
I think that a lot of what I do for patients is I keep them close. Because if the patient is in the hospital or coming in very frequently in clinic, I think that that everyday assessment of, “What are you experiencing?” and “What can I tell you is the disease’s fault, and what can I tell you is the medication’s fault?” is so, so important.
Especially in the newly diagnosed patients, where the disease is active. Of course, we want to try to minimize anything that we can do to make the process better for patients, more comfortable for patients, but there are certain things that we do tell people, “You’ve got to slug through this particular problem, because this is the disease’s fault.” This is different from a patient in remission, where they might be getting ongoing therapy with something, or we say, “Hey, wait a minute. You’d be feeling fine, except now you’re taking this medication. How do we minimize messing up quality of life in remission?”
Because we want you to feel great when you’re in remission. I think the real answer of that is to have a really close collaboration with the healthcare team, and for the patients to really understand – I repeat this because it’s so important. What is the disease’s fault, and what is the treatment’s fault? If there’s something that is therapy-related, do I have a substitute or do I not have a substitute?
Because if the drug is essential to get us where we need to go, well, what can we do to manage comfort and to manage symptoms until you get to the place where your marrow is working again?
Katherine Banwell:
That’s great advice, Dr. Roboz. I would like to get to an audience question that we received prior to the program. This one comes from Johanna. “How can I better understand my lab test results? What questions should I be asking my provider about those results?”
Dr. Gail Roboz:
One of the things that I would say to patients is to be careful when interpreting your own results, because I really am not exaggerating to say that patients have had absolute trauma looking at things that I look at it and say, “Oh, this looks great.” So, the first thing is, be careful being your own doctor.
The second thing though is that the author of the question has to understand that there’s going to be a tsunami of data coming in with respect to AML treatment. Sometimes in the hospital on a daily basis when you’re in the middle of an induction, there is a true – tsunami is the right word – a deluge of data, and you have to work with your team to say, “What am I following here? What’s important at this phase in my treatment? What’s the number I’m looking at?” Patients sometimes tell me, “I don’t want to know any of this,” and I’m fine with that.
I think it’s actually okay. Sometimes patients will say, “Give me guidance,” and I will be specific. Because you can actually have a leukemia induction patient where every single laboratory value is abnormal. They might be getting pushed to a device, in the morning, sitting in the hospital on your iPad, 50 abnormal results. You’re trying to battle back the disease and be positive and advocate for yourself, but there are 50 abnormal results in front of you.
I think you have to really work with the team to say, “What am I looking at today? What are the numbers that are the really important ones? There are 50 abnormal ones here; everything is getting a yellow or a red light in this. How do I go through this?”
And to appreciate, also, that at different points in the treatment, the beginning of treatment induction post-remission therapy, you’re looking for different things. So, work with your team so that you’re not assessing every single result with equivalent weight, because I think you’re going to stress yourself out.
Katherine Banwell:
That’s great advice, Dr. Roboz. Thank you. As we close out the program, I’d like to find out what you would like to leave the audience with. Why are you hopeful?
Dr. Gail Roboz:
AML is changing incredibly rapidly. And I can tell you it is a lot more fun to be an AML doctor now than it used to be, with respect to what I am offering for patients. We have always fought really, really hard to have our wins, but we’re winning more. I do think that it is a complicated space to navigate for patients, but there is room for a lot of optimism.
I think we are getting patients transplanted – patients that we never thought would ever go through a transplant or getting transplanted. Patients who never had a chance of even living more than six or eight months or living much longer than that. Is it perfect? No. Do we have as many cures as we want?
No, but there’s a lot going on. I think if patients feel that excitement, they will also feel the need to ask about those clinical trials. Because I think that for a lot of patients, clinical trials is an area where they would be worried. They’re not sure that they want to. “I don’t want to be a guinea pig,” and yet here I can say in the AML space, one after another after another drug approvals in the last several years, with the patients on those trials being awfully happy that they participated.
So, I think that it’s a very, very terrifying diagnosis. There’s nothing that I can do to take the sting out of that. But try to find yourself in an optimistic place with options that are being offered to the very, very, very best that we can do. There are patients who are listening, I’m sure, who have relapsed or refractory disease who are not feeling that optimism.
I want to address you specifically, because we don’t have enough yet. We’re trying. When you have AML that has come back or come back multiply, that’s dangerous and difficult. But for those patients in particular, try really hard to get onto clinical trials. If the drugs that we have out there – if you’ve already taken them and they haven’t worked for you or if they’re not serving you well, if you’re in good shape and the drugs that we have aren’t good enough, well, let’s see if we can get you on something that’s investigational.
Katherine Banwell:
Dr. Roboz, thank you so much for taking the time to join us today.
Dr. Gail Roboz:
Thank you for having me.
Katherine Banwell:
I also want to thank all of our collaborators. To learn more about AML and to access tools to help you become a proactive patient, visit powerfulpatients.org. I’m Katherine Banwell. Thanks for joining us today.
Is Stem Cell Transplant the Only Curative Option for Myelofibrosis?
Is Stem Cell Transplant the Only Curative Option for Myelofibrosis? from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.
Is there a cure for myelofibrosis? Dr. Lucia Masarova explains the role of stem cell transplant for the treatment of myelofibrosis and reviews additional therapies for patients who do not qualify for the procedure, such as JAK inhibitor therapy.
Dr. Lucia Masarova is an MPN Specialist and Assistant Professor in the Department of Leukemia at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center. Learn more about Dr. Masarova.
See More from Evolve Myelofibrosis
Related Resources:
|
Choosing a Myelofibrosis Treatment Plan | Key Questions to Ask |
|
Transcript:
Katherine Banwell:
Dr. Masarova, stem cell transplant is sometimes recommended for people with myelofibrosis. Is this still the closest option to cure for those patients?
Dr. Lucia Masarova:
I would say so, as much as we don’t like it. We would like to develop novel conservative, less aggressive, that we call procedures or drugs. Stem cell transplants still represent a long-term cure for patients that are eligible.
Katherine Banwell:
What about for patients who don’t qualify for stem cell transplant? What are effective long-term treatments for them?
Dr. Lucia Masarova:
That’s a very, very important question and topic. The key point here is the long-term because long-term is a little difficult term in conservative management of myeloproliferative neoplasm, particularly when it comes to myelofibrosis.
With the development of JAK inhibitors, the longest experiences we have with the first one called ruxolitinib or Jakafi, we have seen prolonged outcomes in survival so patients could live longer than expected before.
However, it’s not forever. So, that’s why we are trying to develop novel strategies where I see a lot of roles of combinations of JAK inhibitors and other correlative compounds, such as bromodomains inhibitors or hypomethylating agents or others that would affect the pathways that we are missing currently to cover with the JAK inhibition. And that ultimately leads to medication failures and patients being refractory and then having a shortened lifespan.
So, I’m hoping we will develop something for long-term. Particularly promising a very, very interesting concept is with the calreticulin where we are developing monoclonal antibodies or vaccines because we have seen and discovered calreticulin driver to be a targetable thing that causes immunogenicity.
But I do really hope that we will move forward with these discoveries and the JAK mutate or other drivers causing myeloproliferative neoplasms to offer long-term management.
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.
Related Resources:
What Is the AGILE Study? Research for AML Patients With the IDH1 Mutation |
|
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.
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.
Related Resources:
|
|
|
|
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.
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 en español
Related Resources:
What AML Treatment Options Are Available for MRD-Positive Patients? |
|
|
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 en español
Related Resources:
What Are Some Clinical Predictors for Relapse in Acute Myeloid Leukemia? |
|
|
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
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 en español
Related Resources:
|
What AML Treatment Options Are Available for MRD-Positive Patients? |
|
|
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
What Are the Latest Acute Myeloid Leukemia Therapies?
What Are the Latest Acute Myeloid Leukemia Therapies? from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.
What are the latest treatments in acute myeloid leukemia (AML)? Dr. Catherine Lai from Penn Medicine discusses the increase in available AML treatments. Learn about combination therapies and treatment options for patients with IDH1, IDH2, and FLT3 mutations.
[ACT]IVATION TIP from Dr. Lai: “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 en español
Related Resources:
How Can We Address Disparities in AML Among Diverse Populations? |
What Promising AML Treatments Are Available for Newly Diagnosed Patients? |
Transcript:
Art:
Dr. Lai, for newly diagnosed AML patients, what are the latest available therapies?
Dr. Catherine Lai:
That’s a great question. The last, I would say, a handful of years have really seen a dramatic increase in the number of new treatment options for AML patients, specifically since 2017, the FDA has approved 10 new drugs for AML, that’s both for patients who are newly diagnosed and in the relapsed refractory setting.
And so what I would say is that we break our patients into two different categories in terms of being able to tolerate intensive chemotherapy versus non-intensive chemotherapy, and as well as looking at specifically targeted mutations that patients may have so that we can better understand the disease but also treat these patients more specifically to try to maximize efficacy while minimizing toxicity.
And so specifically, I would say for patients who have FLT3 mutations, there are drugs such as midostaurin (Rydapt) and gilteritinib (Xospata), there are drugs for mutations in IDH1 and IDH2, enasidenib (Idhifa) and ivosidenib (Tibsovo) and recently, or in December of 2022, olutasidenib (Rezlidhia) was also approved for IDH1-mutated patients as well.
We have a general targeted agent that’s an oral chemotherapy that probably has made the biggest difference in how we treat patients called venetoclax (Venclexta), and that’s used in combination with azacitidine (Onureg) or decitabine (Dacogen), or low dose cytarabine (Cytosar).
Although most commonly in the United States, we use azacitidine or decitabine in combination with the venetoclax, and that I think is really what I’d say has been practice changing for the most part, in terms of both increasing the complete remission rates as well as the overall survival for these patients. So I would say there are a lot of new drugs. It is all very exciting.
The biggest activation tip in terms of takeaways is to 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.
Art:
Okay. Dr. Lai, what are the latest approaches to combination chemotherapy to treat AML?
Dr. Catherine Lai:
So, the latest approaches for combination chemotherapy would be in the combination of a hypomethylating agent, azacitidine or decitabine in combination with venetoclax. This is the most practice-changing combination that has been approved since 2017 to 2018, and now more recently, what’s been happening is now looking, so we call that a doublet, and now it’s been looking at…what we’ve been studying is now whether or not triplets are more effective, when we do have triple combinations, we do see an increase in toxicity and so on, we haven’t come up with the right algorithm in terms of what that exact formula should be, but often I think about it in kind of a three-fold in terms of wins the right time, what’s the right combination, and how do we see in the drugs, and I think the sequencing is the biggest thing that we don’t yet know, and how do we combine the two different..two different drugs in a way, and how do we give them in a way that will maximize efficacy, will minimize the toxicity, so as an example is, Do we give two drugs for a specific period of time, and then after some determined time point, do we…
And change it to a different set of combination of drugs to make sure that patients are getting the most benefit of the drugs, and we don’t know that yet, but I think that that’s where the general direction…where the landscape is heading, so the activation tip I would take home from this is just to have a conversation with your physician about potential clinical trials and how combination therapies are being used.
