A prospective study of all-trans retinoic acid plus venetoclax and azacitidine in newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia.
Authors: Gu Chengyuan , Wang Ruju , Kang Huizhu , He Xuefeng , Chen Jun , Lin Zhihong , Liu Yuejun , Yang Ting , Wu Depei , Han Yue 
Published: June 2024

6545

Background: Over the decade, anthracycline and cytarabine-based intensive chemotherapy remains the standard of care for acute myeloid leukemia (AML) but is hampered by serious toxicities like myelosuppression, increased transfusion requirement and disappointing clinical outcomes among the so-called poor-prognosis AML subsets. BCL-2 inhibitor plus azacitidine (AZA) has become a preferred treatment for AML, but the remission rate and overall survival (OS) are suboptimal. Apart from hematologic toxicities, 70.0% of patients were RBC transfusion dependent and 58.6% were platelet transfusion dependent. At present, all-trans retinoic acid (ATRA) is used as a differentiation drug, and there is no combination regimen with BCL-2 inhibitor. This study aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of ATRA plus venetoclax and AZA for newly diagnosed AML. Methods: This study enrolled 35 patients (≥18 years) with newly diagnosed AML between 2022 and 2023. For induction, patients received AZA (75 mg/m²) from Day 1 to 7, venetoclax at a target dose of 400 mg/d from Day 2 to 10, and ATRA (45 mg/m²/d) from Day 12 to 28 of each 28-day cycle for up to 2 cycles or until disease progression. Patients who achieved complete remission (CR) after two cycles of induction therapy received bone marrow transplantation or consolidation at their own discretion. For consolidation, patients received ATRA (45 mg/m²/d) from Day 1 to 21 and AZA (75 mg/m²) from Day 1 to 7 of each 28-day cycle for up to 4 cycles or until disease progression. For maintenance, patients received ATRA (45 mg/m²/d) for 21 days per cycle plus AZA (75 mg/m²). Maintenance therapy was given every 3 months until disease progression and ATRA was provided during intermissions. The primary endpoint was the composite CR rate (CR and CR with incomplete hematologic recovery) at the end of cycle 1 of inductive therapy. Results: As of now, the composite CR rate reached 74% (26/35) and the objective response rate reached 91% (32/35). The composite CR was 73% (11/15) in the adverse risk group and 75% (15/20) in the favorable-intermediate risk group at the end of cycle 1. Thirty-three patients entered cycle 2. The cumulative composite CR rate reached 91%(30/33) after 2 cycles of induction therapy. The median event-free survival was 390 days, and the median OS was 573 days. Platelet transfusion independence occurred in 17% (6/35) patients in cycle 1 and 73% (24/33) in cycle 2. Furthermore, 20% (7/35) and 73% (24/33) patients were RBC transfusion independent in cycle 1 and 2, respectively. Any-grade infections occurred in 74% (26/35) patients, including 12 before admission. Conclusions: The treatment regimen achieved a high composite CR rate and was well tolerated, with reduced hematologic toxicities in cycle 2 of induction therapy. Both adverse risk and favorable-intermediate risk patients benefited from the regimen, which holds promise for treating AML in adult patients. Clinical trial information: NCT05654194 .