Treatment of acute myelogenous leukaemia in patients aged 50-65: idarubicin is more effective than zorubicin for remission induction and prolonged disease-free survival can be obtained using a unique consolidation course. The Goelam Group

The effects of idarubicin versus other anthracyclines for induction therapy of patients with newly diagnosed leukaemia

BACKGROUND

Anthracycline combined with cytarabine has been the standard for induction therapy of newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukaemia (AML) for several decades. Due to theoretical advantages, idarubicin (IDA) might be the most effective and tolerable anthracycline. However, there is no evidence that would definitively prove the superiority of IDA over other anthracyclines.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of IDA versus other anthracyclines in induction therapy of newly diagnosed AML.

SEARCH METHODS

We identified relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs) by searching the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library 2014, Issue 8), MEDLINE (from 1946 to 3 August 2014), EMBASE (from 1974 to 3 August 2014), Chinese BioMedical Literature Database (1978 to 3 August 2014), relevant conference proceedings and databases of ongoing trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

RCTs that compared IDA with other anthracyclines in induction therapy of newly diagnosed AML.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed the quality of studies according to methodological standards of the Cochrane Collaboration. We estimated hazard ratios (HRs) for time-to-event data outcomes using the inverse variance method, and risk ratios (RRs) for dichotomous data outcomes using the Mantel-Haenszel method. We adopted a fixed-effect model and repeated the main meta-analysis by a random-effects model in a sensitivity analysis.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 2017 references. Ultimately, 27 RCTs (including 22 two-armed RCTs and five three-armed RCTs) involving 9549 patients were eligible. The consolidation treatments adopted in the studies were comparable and had no impact on the results. Overall, the risk of bias of the studies was unclear to high.Eighteen RCTs (N = 6755) assessed IDA versus daunorubicin (DNR). The main meta-analyses showed that IDA compared with DNR prolonged overall survival (OS) (12 studies, 5976 patients; HR 0.90, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.84 to 0.96, P = 0.0008; high quality of evidence) and disease-free survival (DFS) (eight studies, 3070 patients; HR 0.88, 95% CI 0.81 to 0.96, P = 0.004; moderate quality of evidence), increased complete remission (CR) rate (18 studies, 6692 patients; RR 1.04, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.07, P = 0.009; moderate quality of evidence), and reduced relapse rate (four studies, 1091 patients; RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.80 to 0.98, P = 0.02; moderate quality of evidence), although increased the risks of death on induction therapy (14 studies, 6349 patients; RR 1.18, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.36, P = 0.03; moderate quality of evidence) and grade 3/4 mucositis (five studies, 2000 patients; RR 1.22, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.44, P = 0.02; moderate quality of evidence). There was no evidence for difference in the risks of grade 3/4 cardiac toxicity (six studies, 2795 patients; RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.37, P = 0.91; moderate quality of evidence) and other grade 3/4 adverse events (AEs). None of the studies reported on quality of life (QoL).Eight RCTs (N = 2419) evaluated IDA versus mitoxantrone (MIT). The main meta-analyses showed that there was no evidence for difference between arms in OS (six studies, 2171 patients; HR 0.98, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.08, P = 0.69; high quality of evidence), DFS (four studies, 249 patients; HR 0.88, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.10, P = 0.26; low quality of evidence), CR rate (eight studies, 2411 patients; RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.03, P = 0.32;moderate quality of evidence), the risks of death on induction therapy (five studies, 2055 patients; RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.38, P = 0.39; moderate quality of evidence) and relapse (three studies, 328 patients; RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.22, P = 0.89; moderate quality of evidence). There was no evidence for difference in the risks of grade 3/4 cardiac toxicity (one study, 160 patients; RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.11 to 3.88, P = 0.65; low quality of evidence) and other grade 3/4 AEs. None of the studies reported on QoL.Two RCTs (N = 211) compared IDA with doxorubicin (DOX). Neither study assessed OS. One study showed that there was no evidence for difference in DFS (63 patients; HR 0.62, 95% CI 0.34 to 1.14, P = 0.12; low quality of evidence). The main meta-analysis for CR rate showed an improved CR rate with IDA (two studies, 187 patients; RR 1.28, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.59, P = 0.02; low quality of evidence). Neither study provided data for the risks of death on induction therapy and relapse. One trial showed that there was no evidence for difference in the risk of grade 3/4 cardiac toxicity (one study, 100 patients; RR 0.31, 95% CI 0.01 to 7.39, P = 0.47; very low quality of evidence). Neither study reported on QoL.Two RCTs (N = 1037) evaluated IDA versus zorubicin (ZRB). Neither study assessed OS. One trial showed that there was no evidence for difference in DFS (one study, 155 patients; HR 1.25, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.88, P = 0.29; low quality of evidence). The main meta-analyses for CR and death on induction therapy both showed that there was no evidence for difference (CR rate: two studies, 964 patients; RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.13, P = 0.31; low quality of evidence. risk of death on induction therapy: two studies, 964 patients; RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.50 to 1.13, P = 0.17; moderate quality of evidence). Neither study reported the risks of relapse and grade 3/4 cardiotoxicity. One trial showed that IDA reduced the risk of grade 3/4 mucositis. Neither study reported on QoL.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Compared with DNR in induction therapy of newly diagnosed AML, IDA prolongs OS and DFS, increases CR rate and reduces relapse rate, although increases the risks of death on induction therapy and grade 3/4 mucositis. The currently available evidence does not show any difference between IDA and MIT used in induction therapy of newly diagnosed AML. There is insufficient evidence regarding IDA versus DOX and IDA versus ZRB to make final conclusions. Additionally, there is no evidence for difference on the effect of IDA compared with DNR, MIT, DOX or ZRB on QoL.

Randomized study of intensified anthracycline doses for induction and recombinant interleukin-2 for maintenance in patients with acute myeloid leukemia age 50 to 70 years: results of the ALFA-9801 study

PURPOSE In patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML), induction chemotherapy is based on standard doses of anthracyclines and cytarabine. High doses of cytarabine have been reported as being too toxic for patients older than age 50 years, but few studies have evaluated intensified doses of anthracyclines. PATIENTS AND METHODS In this randomized Acute Leukemia French Association 9801 (ALFA-9801) study, high doses of daunorubicin (DNR; 80 mg/m(2)/d x 3 days) or idarubicin (IDA4; 12 mg/m(2)/d x 4 days) were compared with standard doses of idarubicin (IDA3; 12 mg/m(2)/d x 3 days) for remission induction in patients age 50 to 70 years, with an event-free survival (EFS) end point. After two consolidation courses based on intermediate doses of cytarabine, patients in continuous remission were randomly assigned to receive or not receive maintenance therapy with recombinant interleukin-2 (rIL-2; 5 x 10(6) U/m(2) x 5 days each month) for a total duration of 12 months. A total of 468 patients entered the study (median age, 60 years). Results Overall complete remission rate was 77% with significant differences among the three randomization arms (83%, 78%, and 70% in the IDA3, IDA4, and DNR arms, respectively; P = .04). However, no significant differences were observed in relapse incidence, EFS, or overall survival among the three arms. In the 161 patients randomly assigned for maintenance therapy, no difference in outcome was observed between the rIL-2 and the no further treatment arms. CONCLUSION Neither intensification of anthracycline doses nor maintenance with rIL-2 showed a significant impact on AML course, at least as scheduled in this trial.

Modeling the Pharmacodynamics of Highly Schedule-Dependent Agents: Exemplified by Cytarabine-Based Regimens in Acute Myeloid Leukemia

BACKGROUND

Many agents in antineoplastic chemotherapy are highly schedule dependent. Therefore, variables such as total dose and also the area under the curve (AUC) that are schedule insensitive are generally insufficient to adequately represent treatment strength.

PURPOSE

To establish a descriptor of treatment strength that takes into account the differential contribution of plasma concentrations (C) and exposure times (T) towards the cytotoxic effect and to investigate whether such a pharmacodynamically weighed descriptor is better correlated to the clinical effect than conventional variables.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The paradigm "C(N) x T = constant" (for an isoeffect) incorporates a weighing factor N (concentration coefficient) into the conventional description of the AUC that quantitates the differential contribution of C and T towards the cytotoxic effect. N was to be numerically derived from a multitude of in vitro isoeffect analyses of the major agents in acute myeloid leukemia (AML) therapy from patient samples (n = 57).

RESULTS

For cytarabine, N was 0.45, numerically expressing the substantially higher relevance of T versus C for its cytotoxic effect. In a meta-analysis of 49 study arms involving >10,000 patients, neither total dose, dose intensity, nor AUC was correlated to the clinical effect. However, when AUC was pharmacodynamically weighed (N-weighed AUC, N-AUC = C(0.45) x T), this new descriptor was highly significantly correlated to the clinical effect (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

The N-AUC concept is able to characterize schedule-dependent agents and is the only descriptor of cytarabine treatment strength actually correlated to the clinical effect in AML.

Older adults with acute myeloid leukemia

Acute myeloid leukemia (AML) occurs most frequently in older adults, with a median age range from 65 to 70 years. Both the disease and its treatment are distinct from their counterparts in young patients. Herein we characterize the intrinsic biologic features of AML as it occurs in the older population, review currently available therapeutic approaches, and discuss therapeutic strategies in development.

The challenge of acute myeloid leukemia in older patients

Acute myeloid leukemia is a disease predominantly affecting older adults, with a median age at diagnosis of 65 years. Compared with younger adults or children with AML, older adults have a poor prognosis and represent a discrete population in terms of disease features, treatment-related complications, and overall outcome. Management of AML in this population often includes intensive, anthracycline-based chemotherapy, which can effect a 1.5- to 4-month survival advantage compared with nonintensive therapy but at a cost of early deaths, long length of hospital stay, and substantial transfusional support. Nonintensive therapy or palliative care remains an important option for many patients. Aggressive postremission therapy or the use of hematopoietic growth factor support does not appear to improve survival. Future directions include therapies targeted at immunomodulation, at angiogenesis, and in particular against intracellular signals that promote proliferation at the expense of differentiation.