Impact of infectious comorbidity and overall time of hospitalization in total outpatient management of acute myeloid leukemia patients following venetoclax and hypomethylating agents

Real-Life Multicenter Experience of Venetoclax in Combination with Hypomethylating Agents in Previously Untreated Adult Patients with Acute Myeloid Leukemia in Greece

BACKGROUND

The landscape of first-line treatment for acute myeloid leukemia (AML) patients ineligible for intensive chemotherapy has changed remarkably after venetoclax approval. Accumulating real-world data further apprises us with more knowledgeable use. To assess the efficacy and safety challenges in the real-life setting of the combination of hypomethylated agent (HMA) and venetoclax, we conducted a multi-center retrospective study.

METHODS

Forty adult AML patients treated with the combination of HMA and venetoclax as a first-line treatment after full approval (2020) were included. To confirm VIALE-A results, this group was compared to a historical cohort of 17 chemotherapy-ineligible AML patients treated with HMA monotherapy before 2020.

RESULTS

The combination of HMA-venetoclax achieved a composite complete response rate of 86.8% (p < 0.001), median overall survival, and event-free survival of 33.8 and 19.7 months, respectively, in a median follow-up of 17.8 months (pos < 0.001, HR = 0.276, CI: 0.132-0.575, pEFS = 0.004, HR = 0.367, CI: 0.174-0.773). High rates of neutropenia (90%) and consequent infection rates (57.5%) were noted. Only 55% of our patients received antifungal prophylaxis, as its use remains controversial, and invasive fungal infections were presented in 7.5%.

CONCLUSIONS

Evidently, venetoclax-HMA yields high response rates and profound survival benefits in real life and has changed our approach to alternative chemotherapy options.

Effective venetoclax-based treatment in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma patients with translocation t(6;14)

Introduction: The selective Bcl-2 inhibitor venetoclax has shown promising therapeutic potential in multiple myeloma, particularly in cases associated with t(11;14) IGH::CCND1 translocation. However, the efficacy of venetoclax in myeloma patients with the t(6;14) IGH::CCND3 translocation remains less investigated. Methods: In this study, we conducted a retrospective analysis to investigate the efficacy of venetoclax-based therapy in relapsed/refractory myeloma patients with t(6;14) translocation. The treatment courses of three patients, that included previous therapies and responses to venetoclax, were assessed. Clinical data, laboratory results, and adverse events were analyzed to evaluate treatment outcomes. Results: Our findings demonstrated remarkable therapeutic responses in three consecutive patients with t(6;14) translocation-associated myeloma who received venetoclax-based therapy. Patient 1, a lenalidomide-bortezomib-daratumumab and alkylator treatment refractory patient, achieved sustained stringent complete remission (sCR) after combining carfilzomib-dexamethasone with venetoclax, which was his best response ever. Similarly, Patient 2, refractory to frontline bortezomib-thalidomide-dexamethasone therapy, attained CR following a transition to bortezomib-dexamethason-venetoclax treatment. Patient 3, who was immunomodulatory (IMID)-intolerant, showed a highly favorable response to venetoclax-dexamethasone therapy after his first relapse following autologous stem cell transplantation. No significant adverse effects were observed in any of the patients. Discussion: Our study provides compelling preliminary evidence for the efficacy of venetoclax in t(6;14) translocation-associated myeloma. The outcomes observed in our patients suggest that venetoclax-based therapy holds substantial promise as an effective treatment option for this specific genetic subgroup. Furthermore, the similarities in treatment response between t(11;14) and t(6;14) translocation subgroups highlight the importance of personalized approaches targeting specific genetic abnormalities to optimize therapeutic outcomes.

The Role of Venetoclax in Relapsed/Refractory Acute Myeloid Leukemia: Past, Present, and Future Directions

Relapsed and/or refractory (R/R) acute myeloid leukemia (AML) is hallmarked by dramatic prognosis. Treatment remains challenging, with allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) as the only curative option. The BCL-2 inhibitor venetoclax (VEN) has proven to be a promising therapy for AML and is currently the standard of care in combination with hypomethylating agents (HMAs) for newly diagnosed AML patients ineligible for induction chemotherapy. Given its satisfactory safety profile, VEN-based combinations are increasingly being investigated as a part of the therapeutic strategy for R/R AML. The current paper aims to provide a comprehensive review of the main evidence regarding VEN in the setting of R/R AML, with a specific focus on combinational strategies, including HMAs and cytotoxic chemotherapy, as well as different clinical settings, especially in view of the crucial role of HSCT. A discussion of what is known about drug resistance mechanisms and future combinational strategies is also provided. Overall, VEN-based regimes (mainly VEN + HMA) have provided unprecedented salvage treatment opportunities in patients with R/R AML, with low extra-hematological toxicity. On the other hand, the issue of overcoming resistance is one of the most important fields to be addressed in upcoming clinical research.

AVALON: The Italian cohort study on real-life efficacy of hypomethylating agents plus venetoclax in newly diagnosed or relapsed/refractory patients with acute myeloid leukemia

BACKGROUND

Venetoclax in combination with hypomethylating agents (HMA) is revolutionizing the therapy of acute myeloid leukemia (AML). However, evidence on large sets of patients is lacking, especially in relapsed or refractory leukemia.

METHODS

AVALON is a multicentric cohort study that was conducted in Italy on patients with AML who received venetoclax-based therapies from 2015 to 2020. The study was approved by the ethics committee of the participating institution and was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. The effectiveness and toxicity of venetoclax + HMA in 190 (43 newly diagnosed, 68 refractory, and 79 relapsed) patients with AML are reported here.

RESULTS

In the newly diagnosed AML, the overall response rate and survival confirmed the brilliant results demonstrated in VIALE-A. In the relapsed or refractory AML, the combination demonstrated a surprisingly complete remission rate (44.1% in refractory and 39.7% in relapsed evaluable patients) and conferred to treated patients a good expectation of survival. Toxicities were overall manageable, and most incidents occurred in the first 60 days of therapy. Infections were confirmed as the most common nonhematologic adverse event.

CONCLUSIONS

Real-life data show that the combination of venetoclax and HMA offers an expectation of remission and long-term survival to elderly, newly diagnosed patients, and to relapsed or chemoresistant AML, increasing the chance of cure through a different mechanism of action. The venetoclax + HMA combination is expected to constitute the base for triplet combinations and integration of target therapies. Our data contribute to ameliorate the understanding of venetoclax + HMA effectiveness and toxicities in real life.

Azacitidine plus Venetoclax for the Treatment of Relapsed and Newly Diagnosed Acute Myeloid Leukemia Patients

Venetoclax (VEN) belongs the BH3-mimetic class that selectively targets BCL-2, activating apoptosis. The combination of VEN and azacitidine (AZA) has changed the paradigm of treatment of newly diagnosed (ND) acute myeloid leukemia (AML) patients ineligible for intensive chemotherapy. There is scarce evidence for the use of VEN–AZA for relapsed or refractory (R/R) AML. We compared the outcome of 39 R/R AML and 38 ND AML patients treated between 01/20 and 12/21. The median age was 69 (22–86) and 73 (61–81) in the R/R and ND groups, respectively. Adverse cytogenetics were found in 36% of patients in the R/R group and 59% of patients in the ND group. Overall response rate was 37% in R/R AML, including 13% CR, 8% CRi, 3% PR and 13% MLFS, and 58% in the ND AML, including 32% CR, 13% CRi and 13% MLFS. Adverse cytogenetics was associated with treatment failure in the R/R group (Relative Risk = 0.13, p = 0.005). Median overall survival (OS) was 5.9 months in the R/R group and 9.4 months in the ND group. Median OS was 2.2 months in the adverse cytogenetics group versus 8.7 months in the intermediate cytogenetics group in the R/R group (p = 0.02). Median leukemia-free survival was not different between the two groups (9.4 months and 10.3 months), indicating that VEN–AZA can be an efficient salvage treatment for selected R/R AML patients. In conclusion, VEN–AZA is a promising treatment for ND AML and for selected R/R AML patients.