Adult Acute Myeloid Leukemia, Secondary Acute Myeloid Leukemia, Therapy-Related Acute Myeloid Leukemia
Conditions
Brief summary
Acute myeloid leukemia (AML) is among the most common hematologic malignancies in adults and accounts for approximately 10,000 deaths in the United States every year. AML is commonly diagnosed in sixth or seventh decades of life. The management of AML is complex in older patients because of associated comorbidities, intolerance to high-dose chemotherapy and high-risk tumor biology. In real world practice, over one-third of patients aged 60 years and older do not receive initial chemotherapy for AML, consequently, only 10-20% of patients are alive at 3-5 years. Longer-term survival has not improved significantly in last few decades. Poor survival of older patients with AML may be improved with refined risk-stratification and therapy selection strategies, integration of principles of geriatric medicine, and use of effective but low intensity and novel therapies. This study will examine the impact of clinicogenetic risk-stratified management on outcomes of acute myeloid leukemia in older participants (≥ 60 years) with newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia who receive clinicogenetic risk-stratified therapy allocation. Participants will receive standard of care intensive or low-intensity induction based on cytogenetic and geriatric assessment-based risk stratification. Participants will be evaluated for disease status, survival, quality of life and neurocognitive status for 90 days and then followed for a total of 2 years for survival data.
Detailed description
Acute myeloid leukemia (AML) is among the most common hematologic malignancies in adults and accounts for approximately 10,000 deaths in the United States every year. AML is commonly diagnosed in sixth or seventh decades of life. The management of AML is complex in older patients because of associated comorbidities, intolerance to high-dose chemotherapy and high-risk tumor biology. The current approach for therapy selection is largely subjective based on chronological age, performance status and/or comorbidities, and does not clearly identify patients who should undergo or forego intensive chemotherapy. The outcomes of older patients with high-risk AML can improve with enhanced risk-stratification and therapy selection strategies, and with the use of low intensity combination chemotherapy in patients who are not fit to receive intensive chemotherapy. Comprehensive geriatric assessment offers a thorough assessment of multiple health domains including comorbidities, polypharmacy, cognitive, nutritional, psychological, functional and social status. Such multidimensional assessment based on geriatric principles is an important tool that can improve risk-stratification and therapy selection in older patients. This approach provides a deeper understanding of the biological age and physical fitness of patients, and anticipated tolerance to chemotherapy. In older patients with AML, previous studies have demonstrated that comprehensive geriatric assessment uncovers significant functional impairments and predicts toxicities and overall survival. Hence, geriatric assessment is considered superior to therapy allocation based on assessment of age and performance status. Up to 75 participants newly diagnosed with AML or AML equivalents, such as myeloid sarcoma, myelodysplastic syndrome in transition to AML or high-grade treatment-related myeloid neoplasm will be enrolled and assigned to one of two groups based on cytogenetic and geriatric assessment-based risk stratification. Group I will receive intensive induction and consolidation therapy. Participants will receive cytarabine and idarubicin or liposome-encapsulated daunorubicin-cytarabine to which gemtuzumab or midostaurin will be added for one course of treatment in the absence of disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Participants who go into remission will then receive either cytarabine or liposome-encapsulated daunorubicin-cytarabine, depending on induction therapy, for up to 4 or 8 courses in the absence of disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Group II will receive low-intensity induction and consolidation therapy. Participants will receive oral venetoclax and azacitidine, decitabine or alternate standard of care low-intensity therapies up to four courses in the absence of disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Participants who achieve complete remission will then receive the above treatments for three or more courses in the absence of disease progression, unacceptable toxicity or receipt of allogeneic stem cell transplant. All participants are followed up for up to 2 years after completion of treatment. Study objectives include determining the rate of complete remission and mortality at 90 days in participants who receive clinicogenetic risk-stratified therapy allocation, determining the rate of complete remission and mortality in participants who receive intensive versus low-intensity chemotherapy, determining proportion of participants with impairments detected by geriatric assessment, determining the percentage of older participants receiving allogeneic stem cell transplant during the study, and to assessing the overall survival at 1-year for the entire cohort of participants.
Interventions
Given IV
Given IV
Given IV
Given IV
Correlative studies
Ancillary studies
Ancillary studies
Given by infusion
oral tablet
oral tablet
Sponsors
Study design
Eligibility
Inclusion criteria
* New diagnosis of de novo, secondary or treatment-related acute myeloid leukemia (AML), other AML equivalent such as myeloid sarcoma, myelodysplastic syndrome in transformation to AML, or high-grade treatment-related myeloid neoplasm * 60 years of age or older * Karnofsky Performance Status ≥60% * Able and willingly give signed informed consent
Exclusion criteria
* Acute promyelocytic leukemia (APL). Participants with brief exposure to all-trans retinoic acid (ATRA), arsenic trioxide (ATO) or similar product for suspected APL, who later turn out not to have APL, are eligible. * Relapsed or refractory acute myeloid leukemia (AML) requiring salvage therapy * Prior exposure to decitabine or azacitidine (exclusion criterion for use of decitabine or azacitidine) * Participants requiring urgent initiation of chemotherapy for leukemia-related emergencies such as leukostasis or disseminated intravascular coagulopathy Participants will not be excluded solely based on current or prior use of debulking agent (e.g., hydroxyurea or cyclophosphamide). Prior or current use of leukapheresis will be allowed. * Uncontrolled serious infection at enrollment. Infections are considered controlled if appropriate therapy has been instituted and, at enrollment, participants do not have signs of infection progression (e.g., hemodynamic instability attributable to sepsis, new symptoms, worsening physical signs or radiographic findings attributable to infection). Persistent fever without other signs or symptoms will not be interpreted as progressing infection. * Uncontrolled clinically significant arrhythmia, myocardial ischemia or congestive heart failure within the past 2 weeks, that is considered a contraindication for initiation of chemotherapy by the treating physician * Ejection fraction \< 45% will be an exclusion criterion for intensive chemotherapy. These participants may receive low intensity therapy. * Clinically significant kidney (e.g., glomerular filtration rate (GFR) ≤ 45ml/minute or creatinine of ≥2 mg/dl) or liver dysfunction \[e.g., aspartate aminotransferase (AST)/alanine aminotransferase (ALT) and/or bilirubin ≥2 times upper limit of normal (ULN)\] at enrollment that may prevent safe use of chemotherapy. These participants may be allowed to receive low-intensity chemotherapy. Participants with elevated bilirubin secondary to Gilbert syndrome will not be excluded. * Any other condition that may not allow safe use of chemotherapy based on clinical judgment of treating oncologist
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Rate of Complete Remission and Mortality in the Entire Cohort of Older Patients | At 90 days | All analyses will be performed based on intent-to-treat principle. The method of inversion will be used to generate an interval estimate for the proportion of 90-day mortality. |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Rate of Complete Remission (CR) or CR With Incomplete Count Recovery (CRi) and Mortality in Subsets of Older Patients Who Receive Intensive and Low-intensity Chemotherapy | At 90 days | All analyses will be performed based on intent-to-treat principle. The method of inversion will be used to generate an interval estimate for the proportion of 90-day mortality. |
| Mortality at 90 Days | Up to 90 days from diagnosis | Mortality at 90 days will be calculated from date of diagnosis to date of death due to any cause within 90 days from diagnosis. |
| To Asses the Impact of Treatment Intensity on Early Mortality in Older Patients, Who Receive Risk Stratified Therapy. | 30 and 90 days | To asses the impact of treatment intensity on early mortality in older patients, who receive risk stratified therapy at 1-month and 3-month. |
| To Determine Proportion of Patients With Impairments Detected by Geriatric Assessments. | Baseline | To determine proportion of patients with impairments detected by geriatric assessments (Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation Comorbidity Index score (HCL CI \>=3), Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB=9or less), MoCA (Score of 25 or less), Activities of daily living, Instrumental activities of daily living, Depression screen (PHQ-9 \>= 10), nutritional screen (MNA\<=11) |
Countries
United States
Contacts
University of Nebraska
Participant flow
Pre-assignment details
2 participants ineligible
Participants by arm
| Arm | Count |
|---|---|
| Group I INTENSIVE INDUCTION THERAPY: Patients receive cytarabine intravenously (IV) on days 1-7 and idarubicin over 10-15 minutes on days 1-3 (7+3), or liposome-encapsulated daunorubicin-cytarabine IV over 90 minutes on days 1, 3 and 5. Gemtuzumab or midostaurin are added to 7+3 as per the standard of care. Treatment continues for 1 course in the absence of unacceptable toxicity.
INTENSIVE CONSOLIDATION THERAPY: Patients who go into remission, receive cytarabine IV over 1-3 hours twice daily (BID) on days 1, 3, and 5. Treatment repeats every 4 weeks for 2-4 courses in the absence of disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Patients treated with liposome-encapsulated daunorubicin-cytarabine receive liposome-encapsulated daunorubicin-cytarabine IV over 90 minutes on days 1 and 3. Treatment repeats every 5-8 weeks for 2 courses in the absence of disease progression, unacceptable toxicity.
Cytarabine: Given IV
Idarubicin: Given IV
Laboratory Biomarker Analysis: Correlative studies
Liposome-encapsulated Daunorubicin-Cytarabine: Given IV
Quality-of-Life Assessment: Ancillary studies
Questionnaire Administration: Ancillary studies | 8 |
| Group II LOW-INTENSITY: Patients receive venetoclax in combination with azacitidine or decitabine or other standard of care low-intensity therapy such as azacitidine or decitabine alone or in combination with FLT3 inhibitor such as midostaurin, low-dose cytarabine in combination with glasdegib.
Venetoclax dose varies depending on drug interaction with antifungal agents. Given daily continuous for \>= 3 months orally. Glasdegib dose is 100 mg oral daily.
Decitabine IV over 1-3 hours daily for 5-10 days. Treatment repeats every 4-5 weeks for \>= 3 courses in the absence of disease progression, unacceptable toxicity or receipt of allogeneic stem cell transplant. Azacitidine IV infusion over 10 to 40 minutes days 1 -7. Treatment repeats every 4-5 weeks for \>= 3 courses in the absence of disease progression, unacceptable toxicity or receipt of allogeneic stem cell transplant.
Decitabine: Given IV
Laboratory Biomarker Analysis: Correlative studies
Quality-of-Life Assessment: Ancillary studies
Questionnaire Administration: Ancillary studies
Azacitidine: Given by infusion
Venetoclax: oral tablet
glasdegib: oral tablet | 65 |
| Total | 73 |
Baseline characteristics
| Characteristic | Group I | Group II | Total |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age, Categorical <=18 years | 0 Participants | 0 Participants | 0 Participants |
| Age, Categorical >=65 years | 3 Participants | 48 Participants | 51 Participants |
| Age, Categorical Between 18 and 65 years | 5 Participants | 17 Participants | 22 Participants |
| Baseline Functional Status | 90 score (0-100 scale) | 80 score (0-100 scale) | 80 score (0-100 scale) |
| Baseline Functional Status Measure by Geriatric Assessment Katz ADL Index | 6 units on a scale | 6 units on a scale | 6 units on a scale |
| Baseline Functional Status Measure by Geriatric Assessment Lawton IADL Index | 8 units on a scale | 8 units on a scale | 8 units on a scale |
| Baseline Functional Status Measure by Geriatric Assessment SPPB | 11 units on a scale | 7 units on a scale | 7 units on a scale |
| Ethnicity (NIH/OMB) Hispanic or Latino | 1 Participants | 3 Participants | 4 Participants |
| Ethnicity (NIH/OMB) Not Hispanic or Latino | 7 Participants | 61 Participants | 68 Participants |
| Ethnicity (NIH/OMB) Unknown or Not Reported | 0 Participants | 1 Participants | 1 Participants |
| Neurocognitive Status by MoCA at Baseline | 28 units on a scale | 23 units on a scale | 23 units on a scale |
| Quality of Life as Measured by EORTC QLQ-C30 Version 3.0 at Baseline | 75 Units on a scale | 50 Units on a scale | 50 Units on a scale |
| Race (NIH/OMB) American Indian or Alaska Native | 0 Participants | 0 Participants | 0 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) Asian | 0 Participants | 2 Participants | 2 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) Black or African American | 0 Participants | 2 Participants | 2 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) More than one race | 1 Participants | 1 Participants | 2 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander | 0 Participants | 0 Participants | 0 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) Unknown or Not Reported | 0 Participants | 0 Participants | 0 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) White | 7 Participants | 60 Participants | 67 Participants |
| Sex: Female, Male Female | 2 Participants | 34 Participants | 36 Participants |
| Sex: Female, Male Male | 6 Participants | 31 Participants | 37 Participants |
| Symptom Burden | 0 units on a scale | 16.7 units on a scale | 16.7 units on a scale |
Adverse events
| Event type | EG000 affected / at risk | EG001 affected / at risk |
|---|---|---|
| deaths Total, all-cause mortality | 1 / 8 | 15 / 65 |
| other Total, other adverse events | 7 / 8 | 65 / 65 |
| serious Total, serious adverse events | 5 / 8 | 41 / 65 |
Outcome results
Rate of Complete Remission and Mortality in the Entire Cohort of Older Patients
All analyses will be performed based on intent-to-treat principle. The method of inversion will be used to generate an interval estimate for the proportion of 90-day mortality.
Time frame: At 90 days
Population: It was pre-specified to report for the entire cohort as a whole in this Outcome Measure. Results for each Arm/Group are pre-specified to be reported separately in Outcome Measure 2,
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (NUMBER) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Entire Cohort | Rate of Complete Remission and Mortality in the Entire Cohort of Older Patients | 90-Day Mortality | 21.9 percentage of subjects |
| Entire Cohort | Rate of Complete Remission and Mortality in the Entire Cohort of Older Patients | Remission | 52.0 percentage of subjects |
Baseline Functional Status
Will evaluate the influence of baseline functional status on the quality of life and neurocognitive status. The association between categories of functional status and quality of life will be explored using analysis of variance (ANOVA); if assumptions of ANOVA fail, Kruskal Wallis will be used. The association between functional status (fit or vulnerable) and neurocognitive status (\< 25 or 26 or higher) will be explored using a chi-square test. A generalized linear mixed model will be utilized to evaluate changes in quality of life over time. The proportion (and associated 95% confidence interval) of patients with definitely or probably modifiable impairments will be presented.
Time frame: Up to 90 days
Baseline Functional Status Measure by Geriatric Assessment
Will assess the impact of baseline functional status on the rate of complete remission and mortality.
Time frame: At 90 days
Mortality at 90 Days
Mortality at 90 days will be calculated from date of diagnosis to date of death due to any cause within 90 days from diagnosis.
Time frame: Up to 90 days from diagnosis
| Arm | Measure | Value (NUMBER) |
|---|---|---|
| Entire Cohort | Mortality at 90 Days | 1 participants |
| Group II | Mortality at 90 Days | 15 participants |
Neurocognitive Status as Measured by the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA)
The Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) will be given at several time points in follow-up after completion of treatment. The instrument assesses different cognitive domains, including attention, visuospatial skills, executive functions, memory, language, and abstract thinking. Each task has a specific scoring guide, with points awarded based on performance. Composite scores of 26-30 generally indicates normal cognitive function, 18-25 suggests mild cognitive impairment, 10-17 indicates moderate impairment, and scores below 10 point to severe cognitive impairment.
Time frame: Several time points after completion of treatment, up to 2 years
Quality of Life as Measured by European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Core Quality of Life Questionnaire
The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Core Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30), Version 3.0, will be given at several time points in follow-up after completion of treatment. The instrument assesses cancer patients' physical, psychological and social functions. The questionnaire is composed of multi-item scales and single items. A linear transformation is used to standardise the raw score, so that scores range from 0 to 100; a higher score represents a higher (better) level of functioning, or a higher (worse) level of symptoms. The scores will be utilized to determine quality of life status will be used to evaluate changes in quality of life over time.
Time frame: Several time points after completion of treatment, up to 2 years
Rate of Complete Remission and Mortality in Subsets of Older Patients Who Receive Intensive and Low-intensity Chemotherapy
All analyses will be performed based on intent-to-treat principle. The method of inversion will be used to generate an interval estimate for the proportion of 90-day mortality.
Time frame: At 90 days
Symptom Burden
Symptom burden will be determined using the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire C-30 (EORTC QLQ-C30) at four time points. This instrument asks 28 questions about symptoms and their effects which are scored 1 to 4. Higher scores indicate worse symptoms and effects. Two additional questions ask about overall health and quality of life during the past week and are scored 1 to 7. Higher scores indicate better weekly health and quality of life.
Time frame: Baseline (diagnosis), 10, 30 and 90 days following initiation of chemotherapy