Understanding the Continuum between High-Risk Myelodysplastic Syndrome and Acute Myeloid Leukemia

Myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) is a clonal hematopoietic neoplasm characterized by bone marrow dysplasia, failure of hematopoiesis and variable risk of progression to acute myeloid leukemia (AML). Recent large-scale studies have demonstrated that distinct molecular abnormalities detected at earlier stages of MDS alter disease biology and predict progression to AML. Consistently, various studies analyzing these diseases at the single-cell level have identified specific patterns of progression strongly associated with genomic alterations. These pre-clinical results have solidified the conclusion that high-risk MDS and AML arising from MDS or AML with MDS-related changes (AML-MRC) represent a continuum of the same disease. AML-MRC is distinguished from de novo AML by the presence of certain chromosomal abnormalities, such as deletion of 5q, 7/7q, 20q and complex karyotype and somatic mutations, which are also present in MDS and carry crucial prognostic implications. Recent changes in the classification and prognostication of MDS and AML by the International Consensus Classification (ICC) and the World Health Organization (WHO) reflect these advances. Finally, a better understanding of the biology of high-risk MDS and the mechanisms of disease progression have led to the introduction of novel therapeutic approaches, such as the addition of venetoclax to hypomethylating agents and, more recently, triplet therapies and agents targeting specific mutations, including FLT3 and IDH1/2. In this review, we analyze the pre-clinical data supporting that high-risk MDS and AML-MRC share the same genetic abnormalities and represent a continuum, describe the recent changes in the classification of these neoplasms and summarize the advances in the management of patients with these neoplasms.

The Growing Role of the BH3 Mimetic Drug Venetoclax in the Therapy of Acute Myeloid Leukemia

Despite recent progress, acute myeloid leukemia (AML) remains a disease associated with poor prognosis, particularly in older AML patients unfit to tolerate intensive chemotherapy treatment. The development and introduction in the therapy of Venetoclax (VEN), a potent BH3 mimetic targeting the antiapoptotic protein BCL-2, inducing apoptosis of leukemic cells, has shown to be a promising treatment for newly diagnosed, relapsed, and refractory AML patients ineligible for induction chemotherapy. Combination treatments using Ventoclax and a hypomethylating agent (azacitidine or decitabine) or low-intensity chemotherapy have shown in newly diagnosed patients variable response rates, with highly responsive patients with NPM1, IDH1-IDH2, TET2, and RUNX1 mutations and with scarcely responsive patients with FLT3, TP53 and ASXL1 mutations, complex karyotypes, and secondary AMLs. Patients with refractory/relapsing disease are less responsive to Venetoclax-based regimens. However, in the majority of patients, the responses have only a limited duration, and the development of resistance is frequently observed. Therefore, understanding the resistance mechanisms is crucial for developing new strategies and identifying rational drug combination regimens. In this context, two strategies seem to be promising: (i) triplet therapies based on the combined administration of Venetoclax, a hypomethylating agent (or low-dose chemotherapy), and an agent targeting a specific genetic alteration of leukemic cells (i.e., FLT3 inhibitors in FLT3-mutated AMLs) or an altered signaling pathway; (ii) combination therapies based on the administration of two BH3 mimetics (i.e., BCL-2 +MCL-1 mimetics) and a hypomethylating agent.

Outcomes following venetoclax-based treatment in therapy-related myeloid neoplasms

Therapy‐related myeloid neoplasms (t‐MN) are aggressive malignancies in need of effective therapies. The BCL‐2 inhibitor venetoclax represents a paradigm shift in the treatment of acute myeloid leukemia. However, the effectiveness of venetoclax has not been studied in a large cohort of t‐MN. We retrospectively analyzed 378 t‐MN patients, of which 96 (25.4%, 47 therapy‐related acute myeloid leukemia, 1 therapy‐related chronic myelomonocytic leukemia, 48 therapy‐related myelodysplastic syndrome) received venetoclax. Median interval from t‐MN to venetoclax initiation was 2.9 (Interquartile range [IQR] 0.7–12) months, and patients received a median of 3 (IQR 1–4) cycles. The composite complete remission (CRc) rate, median progression‐free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) were 39.1%, 4.9 months, and 7 months, respectively. The upfront use of venetoclax and achieving CRc were associated with improved survival, whereas the presence of Chromosome 7 abnormalities was associated with an inferior survival. Neither the TP53‐status nor the percent bone marrow blast predicted the likelihood of CRc or survival. Paired genetic analysis performed at venetoclax initiation and failure did not show the evidence of the selection of the TP53‐mutated clone. In a propensity‐matched analysis, the use of venetoclax‐based regimen as the first‐line therapy was associated with a superior survival compared to hypomethylating agent (HMA)‐based first‐line therapy (9.4 vs. 6.1 months, p = .01). We conclude that the upfront use of venetoclax with HMA improved survival, though PFS and OS remain poor. As the phenotype at diagnosis or the percent blasts did not predict outcomes, venetoclax should be studied in all t‐MN phenotypes.

Keeping up with venetoclax for leukemic malignancies: key findings, optimal regimens and clinical considerations

INTRODUCTION

Venetoclax has transformed the treatment landscape in hematologic malignancies, especially in elderly population. With high rates of remission, deep and durable responses, and safe toxicity profile, venetoclax in combination therapy has been extremely effective, garnering accelerated approval and becoming standard of care in lymphoid and myeloid malignancies.

AREAS COVERED

The role of venetoclax in the intrinsic apoptotic pathway is covered. This includes preclinical and clinical experience of venetoclax monotherapy and combination therapy in relapsed/refractory and frontline CLL, AML, ALL and high-risk MDS, with an emphasis on key clinical trials and efficacy of combination regimens in distinct mutational landscapes. Strategies to mitigate myelosuppression, manage dose adjustments and infectious complications are addressed.

EXPERT OPINION

Targeting BCL-2 offers a safe and highly effective adjunct to available therapies in hematologic malignancies. Despite success and frequent utilization of venetoclax, several resistance mechanisms have been elucidated, prompting development of novel combinatorial strategies. Further, on-target myelosuppression of venetoclax is a key obstacle in clinical practice, requiring diligent monitoring and practice-based knowledge of dose modifications. Despite these limitations, venetoclax has gained tremendous popularity in hematologic-oncology, becoming an integral component of numerous combination regimes, with ongoing plethora of clinical trials encompassing standard chemotherapy, targeted agents and immune-based approaches.