OVERALL SURVIVAL (OS) WITHOUT COMPLETE REMISSION (CR) IN OLDER PATIENTS WITH ACUTE MYELOID LEUKEMIA (AML): AZACITIDINE (AZA) VS CONVENTIONAL CARE REGIMENS (CCR) IN THE AZA-AML-001 STUDY
Author(s): ,
Andre Schuh
Affiliations:
Princess Margaret Cancer Centre,Toronto,Canada
,
Hervé Dombret
Affiliations:
Hôpital Saint Louis, Institut Universitaire d’Hématologie, University Paris Diderot,Paris,France
,
Irwindeep Sandhu
Affiliations:
University of Alberta Hospital,Edmonton,Canada
,
John F. Seymour
Affiliations:
Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre,East Melbourne,Australia
,
Richard M Stone
Affiliations:
Dana-Farber Cancer Institute,Boston,United States
,
Haifa Kathrin Al-Ali
Affiliations:
Universitätsklinikum Leipzig,Leipzig,Germany
,
Giuliana Alimena
Affiliations:
Policlinico Umberto I - Università La Sapienza,Rome,Italy
,
Ian Lewis
Affiliations:
Royal Adelaide Hospital,Adelaide,Australia
,
Sohn Sang Kyun
Affiliations:
Kyungpook National University Hospital,Daegu,Korea, Republic Of
,
Michelle Geddes
Affiliations:
Tom Baker Cancer Centre,Calgary,Canada
,
Daniela Cilloni
Affiliations:
AOU San Luigi Gonzaga,Torino,Italy
,
Lee Je-Hwan
Affiliations:
Asan Medical Center,Seoul,Korea, Republic Of
,
Steve Songer
Affiliations:
Celgene Corporation,Summit,United States
,
Lela M. Lucy
Affiliations:
Celgene Corporation,Summit,United States
,
CL Beach
Affiliations:
Celgene Corporation,Summit,United States
Hartmut Döhner
Affiliations:
Universitätsklinikum Ulm,Ulm,Germany
EHA Learning Center. Schuh A. Jun 13, 2015; 100716
Andre Schuh
Andre Schuh

Access to EHA Members only content is an EHA membership benefit. Click here to join EHA or renew your membership here.


Abstract
Discussion Forum (0)
Rate & Comment (0)
Abstract: P575

Type: Poster Presentation

Presentation during EHA20: From 13.06.2015 17:15 to 13.06.2015 18:45

Location: Poster area (Hall C)

Background
The international phase 3 AZA-AML-001 study compared treatment (Tx) effects of AZA vs CCR on OS in older patients (pts) with AML; AZA prolonged median OS by ~4 months (10.4 vs 6.5 months, overall p=0.10) (Dombret, Haematologica, 2014:LB2433). AZA is known to improve OS vs CCR in pts with higher-risk myelodysplastic syndromes (HR-MDS) who have not achieved CR during Tx (Gore, Haematologica, 2013). MDS and AML are biologically and clinically distinct; it is unknown whether OS benefits in the absence of CR shown for AZA in HR-MDS extend to AML.

Aims
This post hoc exploratory analysis examined Tx effects on OS in subgroups of pts in AZA-AML-001 who did not attain CR on-study.

Methods
Eligible pts were aged ≥65 years with newly diagnosed AML with >30% bone marrow blasts, and with ECOG PS of 0-2, WBC count ≤15x109/L, and intermediate- or poor-risk cytogenetics. Before randomization, pts were preselected to receive 1 of 3 commonly used CCR per investigator choice of most appropriate Tx: intensive chemotherapy (IC; cytarabine IV x7days (d) + an anthracycline IV x3d, with ≤2 subsequent cycles), low-dose cytarabine (LDAC; 20mg SC BID x10d/28d cycle), or best supportive care only. Pts were then randomized to AZA (75 mg/m2/d SC x7d/28d cycle), or to CCR and received their preselected Tx. CR (IWG 2003) was adjudicated centrally by an Independent Review Committee blinded to Tx assignment. Median OS and 1-year survival were estimated using Kaplan-Meier methods. OS was compared between AZA and CCR groups by log-rank test stratified by ECOG PS and cytogenetic risk. OS was compared between AZA and LDAC and AZA and IC within preselection groups by unstratified log-rank test. Hazard ratios (HR) and 95% CIs are from a stratified Cox proportional hazards model. Results should be interpreted cautiously, as OS comparisons of pt subgroups defined by post-randomization outcomes may be biased. The current analysis did not control for time-dependency of response or interactions between Tx and response that could influence OS.

Results
Of all pts in AZA-AML-001 (AZA n=241, CCR n=247), 47 (19.5%) in the AZA arm and 54 (21.9%) in the CCR arm attained CR and were excluded from these analyses. Median OS in the remaining pts in the AZA vs CCR groups was 6.9 (95%CI: 5.1, 8.9) vs 4.2 (95%CI 3.2, 5.1) months, reflecting a 23% reduced risk of death with AZA; HR=0.77 (95%CI 0.62, 0.95), p=0.0171 (Figure). Estimated 1-year survival was 33.8% with AZA and 20.4% with CCR (difference 13.4% [95%CI 4.5%, 22.4%]). For pts with no CR who were preselected to receive LDAC, median OS with AZA (n=126) vs LDAC (n=120) was 8.1 vs 4.2 months, respectively (HR=0.75 [95%CI 0.57, 0.99], p=0.0390), and 1-year survival was 36.8% vs 16.4% (difference 20.4% [95%CI 9.4%, 31.3%]). For pts with no CR who were preselected to receive IC, median OS with AZA (n=30) vs IC (n=28) was 8.0 vs 7.5 months, respectively (HR=0.81 [95%CI 0.46, 1.44], p=0.4765), with 1-year survival of 40.0% vs 40.2%.

Summary
The relative benefit on OS seen with AZA vs CCR for all pts in AZA-AML-001 was maintained in pts who did not attain CR on-study. Similarly, median OS with AZA was almost twice that with LDAC in pts preselected to receive LDAC who did not achieve CR. Clinically meaningful improvements in 1-year survival rates with AZA vs CCR (13.4%) and with AZA vs LDAC (20.4%) in this analysis are similar to those reported for all AZA-AML-001 pts (12% and 15%, respectively; Dombret, Haematologica, 2014). These findings suggest that CR is not necessary to gain a survival benefit with AZA vs other commonly used Tx for older pts with AML.

Keyword(s): Acute myeloid leukemia, Survival



Session topic: Acute myeloid leukemia - Clinical 4
Code of conduct/disclaimer available in General Terms & Conditions
Anonymous User Privacy Preferences

Strictly Necessary Cookies (Always Active)

MULTILEARNING platforms and tools hereinafter referred as “MLG SOFTWARE” are provided to you as pure educational platforms/services requiring cookies to operate. In the case of the MLG SOFTWARE, cookies are essential for the Platform to function properly for the provision of education. If these cookies are disabled, a large subset of the functionality provided by the Platform will either be unavailable or cease to work as expected. The MLG SOFTWARE do not capture non-essential activities such as menu items and listings you click on or pages viewed.


Performance Cookies

Performance cookies are used to analyse how visitors use a website in order to provide a better user experience.



Google Analytics is used for user behavior tracking/reporting. Google Analytics works in parallel and independently from MLG’s features. Google Analytics relies on cookies and these cookies can be used by Google to track users across different platforms/services.


Save Settings