Study 1 was a randomized, open-label, controlled trial carried out in 53 U.S. sites compared the safety and efficacy of subcutaneous azacitidine plus supportive care with supportive care alone (“observation”) in adult patients with any of the five FAB subtypes of myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS): refractory anemia (RA), RA with ringed sideroblasts (RARS), RA with excess blasts (RAEB), RAEB in transformation (RAEB-T), and chronic myelomonocytic leukemia (CMMoL). RA and RARS patients were included if they met one or more of the following criteria: required packed RBC transfusions; had platelet counts ≤50.0 x 109/L; required platelet transfusions; or were neutropenic (ANC <1.0 x 109/L) with infections requiring treatment with antibiotics. Patients with acute myelogenous leukemia (AML) were not intended to be included. Supportive care allowed in this study included blood transfusion products, antibiotics, antiemetics, analgesics and antipyretics. The use of hematopoietic growth factors was prohibited. Baseline patient and disease characteristics are summarized in Table 6; the 2 groups were similar.

Azacitidine was administered at a subcutaneous dose of 75 mg/m2 daily for 7 days every 4 weeks. The dose was increased to 100 mg/m2 if no beneficial effect was seen after 2 treatment cycles. The dose was decreased and/or delayed based on hematologic response or evidence of renal toxicity. Patients in the observation arm were allowed by protocol to cross over to azacitidine if they had increases in bone marrow blasts, decreases in hemoglobin, increases in red cell transfusion requirements, or decreases in platelets, or if they required a platelet transfusion or developed a clinical infection requiring treatment with antibiotics. For purposes of assessing efficacy, the primary endpoint was response rate (as defined in Table 7).

Of the 191 patients included in the study, independent review (adjudicated diagnosis) found that 19 had the diagnosis of AML at baseline. These patients were excluded from the primary analysis of response rate, although they were included in an intent-to-treat (ITT) analysis of all patients randomized. Approximately 55% of the patients randomized to observation crossed over to receive azacitidine treatment.

The overall response rate (CR + PR) of 15.7% in azacitidine-treated patients without AML (16.2% for all azacitidine randomized patients including AML) was statistically significantly higher than the response rate of 0% in the observation group (p<0.0001) (Table 8). The majority of patients who achieved either CR or PR had either 2 or 3 cell line abnormalities at baseline (79%; 11/14) and had elevated bone marrow blasts or were transfusion dependent at baseline. Patients responding to azacitidine had a decrease in bone marrow blasts percentage, or an increase in platelets, hemoglobin or WBC. Greater than 90% of the responders initially demonstrated these changes by the 5th treatment cycle. All patients who had been transfusion dependent became transfusion independent during PR or CR. The mean and median duration of clinical response of PR or better was estimated as 512 and 330 days, respectively; 75% of the responding patients were still in PR or better at completion of treatment. Response occurred in all MDS subtypes as well as in patients with adjudicated baseline diagnosis of AML.

Patients in the observation group who crossed over to receive azacitidine treatment (47 patients) had a response rate of 12.8%.

Study 2, a multi-center, open-label, single-arm study of 72 patients with RAEB, RAEB-T, CMMoL, or AML was also carried out. Treatment with subcutaneous azacitidine resulted in a response rate (CR + PR) of 13.9%, using criteria similar to those described above. The mean and median duration of clinical response of PR or better was estimated as 810 and 430 days, respectively; 80% of the responding patients were still in PR or better at the time of completion of study involvement. In Study 3, another open-label, single-arm study of 48 patients with RAEB, RAEB-T, or AML, treatment with intravenous azacitidine resulted in a response rate of 18.8%, again using criteria similar to those described above. The mean and median duration of clinical response of PR or better was estimated as 389 and 281 days, respectively; 67% of the responding patients were still in PR or better at the time of completion of treatment. Response occurred in all MDS subtypes as well as in patients with adjudicated baseline diagnosis of AML in both of these studies. Azacitidine dosage regimens in these 2 studies were similar to the regimen used in the controlled study.

Benefit was seen in patients who did not meet the criteria for PR or better, but were considered “improved.” About 24% of azacitidine-treated patients were considered improved, and about 2/3 of those lost transfusion dependence. In the observation group, only 5/83 patients met criteria for improvement; none lost transfusion dependence. In all 3 studies, about 19% of patients met criteria for improvement with a median duration of 195 days.

Study 4 was an international, multicenter, open-label, randomized trial in patients with MDS with RAEB, RAEB-T or modified CMMoL according to FAB classification and Intermediate-2 and High risk according to IPSS classification. Of the 358 patients enrolled in the study, 179 were randomized to receive azacitidine plus best supportive care (BSC) and 179 were randomized to receive conventional care regimens (CCR) plus BSC (105 to BSC alone, 49 to low dose cytarabine and 25 to chemotherapy with cytarabine and anthracycline). The primary efficacy endpoint was overall survival.

The azacitidine and CCR groups were comparable for baseline parameters. The median age of patients was 69 years (range was 38-88 years), 98% were Caucasian, and 70% were male. At baseline, 95% of the patients were higher risk by FAB classification: RAEB (58%), RAEB-T (34%), and CMMoL (3%). By IPSS classification, 87% were higher risk: Int-2 (41%), High (47%). At baseline, 32% of patients met WHO criteria for AML.

Azacitidine was administered subcutaneously at a dose of 75 mg/m2 daily for 7 consecutive days every 28 days (which constituted one cycle of therapy). Patients continued treatment until disease progression, relapse after response, or unacceptable toxicity. Azacitidine patients were treated for a median of 9 cycles (range 1 to 39), BSC only patients for a median of 7 cycles (range 1 to 26), low dose cytarabine patients for a median of 4.5 cycles (range 1 to 15), and chemotherapy with cytarabine and anthracycline patients for a median of 1 cycle (range 1 to 3, i.e. induction plus 1 or 2 consolidation cycles).

In the Intent-to-Treat analysis, patients treated with azacitidine demonstrated a statistically significant difference in overall survival as compared to patients treated with CCR (median survival of 24.5 months vs. 15.0 months; stratified log-rank p=0.0001). The hazard ratio describing this treatment effect was 0.58 (95% CI: 0.43, 0.77).

Kaplan-Meier Curve of Time to Death from Any Cause: (Intent-to-Treat Population)

Key: AZA = azacitidine; CCR = conventional care regimens; CI = confidence interval; HR = Hazard Ratio

Azacitidine treatment led to a reduced need for red blood cell transfusions (see Table 9). In patients treated with azacitidine who were RBC transfusion dependent at baseline and became transfusion independent, the median duration of RBC transfusion independence was 13.0 months.

Pediatric use information is approved for Celgene Corporation's Vidaza (azacitidine for injection). However, due to Celgene Corporation's marketing exclusivity rights, this drug product is not labeled with that information.