Clinical Impact of an Accurate Genetic Characterization of Older Acute Myeloid Leukemia Patients: A Report from the Northern Italy Leukemia Group (NILG) Randomized Trial 02/06
Authors: Caprioli Chiara , Intermesoli Tamara , Spinelli Orietta , Salmoiraghi Silvia , Zanghì Pamela , Cavagna Roberta , Michelato Anna , Buklijas Ksenija , Delaini Federica , Oldani Elena , Gianfaldoni Giacomo , Ferrero Dario , Terruzzi Elisabetta , De Paoli Lorella , Cattaneo Chiara , Borlenghi Erika , Cavattoni Irene , Tajana Monica , Scattolin Anna Maria , Mattei Daniele Giovanni , Corradini Paolo , Campiotti Leonardo , Ciceri Fabio , Bernardi Massimo , Todisco Elisabetta , Cortelezzi Agostino , Cortelazzo Sergio , Audisio Ernesta , Marmont Filippo , Bosi Alberto , Falini Brunangelo , Pavoni Chiara , Bassan Renato , Rambaldi Alessandro , Lussana Federico 
Published: October 2019

Introduction

In acute myeloid leukemia (AML) older age is independently associated with poor outcome, due to patient- and disease-related factors. Different genetic profiles characterize AML patients and their frequency varies according to age. Their identification can improve early risk stratification to select the most appropriate therapy, including alternative, not chemotherapy based, treatment modalities, such as hypomethylating and targeted agents (Döhner H et al., Blood 2017). We analyzed the clinical outcome of AML patients aged ≥60 years who were enrolled in the randomized multicentric trial NILG 02/06, and were deeply genetically characterized (Clinical Trials.gov Identifier: NCT00495287).

Patients and Methods

Five hundred seventy-four newly diagnosed AML patients were enrolled into the study and 168 were aged ≥60 years; all patients were randomized to receive conventional induction chemotherapy with idarubicin, cytarabine and etoposide (ICE) or sequential high-dose cytarabine and idarubicin (sHD), followed by consolidation courses with high dose cytarabine (Bassan R et al., annual congress EHA. Jun 9, 2016, abstr S485). Genetic characterization at diagnosis was obtained by conventional cytogenetics and RT-PCR for 145 and 168 patients, respectively, while Next Generation Sequencing was performed for 51 patients with normal karyotype. Patients were re-classified as per the 2017 European Leukemia Net (ELN) guidelines (Döhner H et al., Blood 2017). A myelodysplastic/myeloproliferative (MDS/MPN) related genetic signature was defined according to cytogenetic WHO criteria and/or molecular abnormalities known to be associated with MDS/MPN (Bullinger L et al., J Clin Oncol 2017) and used for outcome correlation.

Results

The characteristics of patients are summarized in Table 1. According to the ELN risk stratification, patients were classified as favorable, intermediate or adverse risk (23%, 38% and 39% of patients, respectively). A genetic MDS/MPN signature was demonstrated in 42% of patients (63/149), which was a higher proportion compared to that of patients with a clinical diagnosis of an antecedent MDS/MPN (19% of patients, 32/168). No significant difference was observed between the induction regimens regarding the achievement of complete remission (CR) (71% for sHD and 61% for ICE, P=0.23) and early death rate (12% and 10.6%, P=0.96). After achieving CR, a median of 2 consolidation courses was administered (range 1-5) within both treatment arms. A limited proportion of patients with high-risk genetic or clinical features (14%) had the opportunity to undergo an allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant (alloHSCT), the majority of them (63%) receiving a reduced intensity conditioning. By intention to treat, 5-years overall survival (OS) and disease- free survival (DFS) on the whole study population were 29% and 32% respectively, without significant differences between the remission induction treatment (for sHD and ICE, OS: 29% and 28%, P=0.88; DFS: 34% and 29%, P=0.90). According to the ELN risk stratification, 5-years OS was 68%, 25% and 7% for favorable, intermediate and adverse groups (P<0.0001), while 3-years DFS was 73%, 28% and 13% (P<0.0001) (Figure 1A). According to the presence or absence of a MDS/MPN signature at diagnosis, 5-years OS was 11% vs 41% (P=0.0001) while 3-years DFS was 12% vs 49% (P<0.0001) (Figure 1B). AlloHSCT was associated with a significant benefit in terms of 5-years OS (57% vs 25%, P=0.0162) and DFS (53% vs 26%, P=0.0363) (Figure 1C). As expected, age had also an impact, with patients aged 60-64 years performing better than patients aged ≥65 years (5-years OS 38% vs 13%, P=0.003; 5-years DFS 43% vs 10%, P=0.002).

Conclusions

Older AML patients with favorable risk features according to ELN benefit from standard chemotherapy. The definition of an adverse genetic risk profile and particularly of a MDS/MPN signature is crucial to identify patients who have a very dismal outcome. These patients should be considered for alternative, innovative treatment options. In high-risk, ≥60 years old AML patients with a good performance status, alloHSCT significantly improves both OS and DFS and should always be considered as the most effective post consolidation treatment.

Disclosures

Cattaneo: GILEAD: Other: Advisory Board. Cortelezzi:janssen: Consultancy; novartis: Consultancy; abbvie: Consultancy; roche: Consultancy. Rambaldi:Italfarmaco: Consultancy; Omeros: Consultancy; Roche: Consultancy; Amgen Inc.: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy.