Decitabine Versus Hydroxyurea for Advanced Proliferative Chronic Myelomonocytic Leukemia: Results of a Randomized Phase III Trial Within the EMSCO Network

Author(s): Raphael Itzykson, MD, PhD^1,2,3; Valeria Santini, MD^4,5; Sylvain Thepot, MD^3,6; Lionel Ades, MD, PhD^1,3,7; Cendrine Chaffaut, MSc⁸; Aristoteles Giagounidis, MD^9,10; Margot Morabito, BSc¹¹; Nathalie Droin, PhD¹¹; Michael Lübbert, MD^10,12; Rosa Sapena, PhD³; Stanislas Nimubona, MD^3,13; Jean Goasguen, MD¹⁴; Eric Wattel, MD, PhD^3,15; Gina Zini, MD, PhD^16,17; Jose Miguel Torregrosa Diaz, MD^3,18; Ulrich Germing, MD^10,19; Anna Maria Pelizzari, MD^5,20; Sophie Park, MD, PhD^3,21; Nadja Jaekel, MD^10,22; Georgia Metzgeroth, MD^10,23; Francesco Onida, MD^5,24; Robert Navarro, MD^3,25; Andrea Patriarca, MD^5,26; Aspasia Stamatoullas, MD^3,27; Katharina Götze, MD^10,28; Martin Puttrich, MSc^10,29; Sandra Mossuto, MSc⁵; Eric Solary, MD3,^11,30; Silke Gloaguen, MSc^10,31; Sylvie Chevret, MD, PhD⁸; Fatiha Chermat, DMD³; Uwe Platzbecker, MD^10,31; and Pierre Fenaux, MD, PhD^1,3,7

Source: DOI: 10.1200/JCO.22.00437 Journal of Clinical Oncology 41, no. 10 (April 01, 2023) 1888-1897

Dr. Maen Hussein's Thoughts

While use of Hydroxyurea for CMML may not be common practice, it is an option.

PURPOSE

Hydroxyurea (HY) is a reference treatment of advanced myeloproliferative neoplasms. We conducted a randomized phase III trial comparing decitabine (DAC) and HY in advanced myeloproliferative chronic myelomonocytic leukemias (CMML).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Newly diagnosed myeloproliferative CMML patients with advanced disease were randomly assigned 1:1 to intravenous DAC (20 mg/m2/d days 1-5) or HY (1-4 g/d) in 28-day cycles. The primary end point was event-free survival (EFS), events being death and acute myelomonocytic leukemia (AML) transformation or progression.

RESULTS

One-hundred seventy patients received DAC (n = 84) or HY (n = 86). Median age was 72 and 74 years, and median WBC count 32.5 × 109/L and 31.2 × 109/L in the DAC and HY arms, respectively. Thirty-three percent of DAC and 31% of HY patients had CMML-2. Patients received a median of five DAC and six HY cycles. With a median follow-up of 17.5 months, median EFS was 12.1 months in the DAC arm and 10.3 months in the HY arm (hazard ratio [HR], 0.83; 95% CI, 0.59 to 1.16; P = .27). There was no significant interaction between treatment effect and blast or platelet count, anemia, CMML Prognostic Scoring System, Groupe Francophone des Myelodysplasies, or CMML Prognostic Scoring System–mol risk. Fifty-three (63%) DAC patients achieved a response compared with 30 (35%) HY patients (P = .0004). Median duration of response was similar in both arms (DAC, 16.3 months; HY, 17.4 months; P = .90). Median overall survival was 18.4 months in the DAC arm and 21.9 months in the HY arm (P = .67). Compared with HY, DAC significantly reduced the risk of CMML progression or transformation to acute myelomonocytic leukemia (cause-specific HR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.41 to 0.94; P = .005) at the expense of death without progression or transformation (cause-specific HR, 1.55; 95% CI, 0.82 to 2.9; P = .04).

CONCLUSION

Compared with HY, frontline treatment with DAC did not improve EFS in patients with advanced myeloproliferative CMML (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02214407).

Author Affiliations

¹Service Hématologie Adultes, Hôpital Saint-Louis, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Paris, France²Université de Paris, Génomes, biologie cellulaire et thérapeutique U944, INSERM, CNRS, Paris, France³Groupe Francophone des Myélodysplasies, Paris, France⁴MDS Unit, DMSC;AOU Careggi, University of Florence, Florence, Italy⁵Fondazione Italiana Sindromi Mielodisplastiche (FISiM-ets), Bologna, Italy⁶Hematology Department CHU Angers, Université Angers, Angers, France⁷Service Hématologie Seniors, Hôpital Saint-Louis, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Paris, France⁸SBIM, APHP, Hôpital Saint-Louis, INSERM, UMR-1153, ECSTRA Team, Paris, France⁹Marien Hospital, Klinik für Hämatologie, Onkologie und klinische Immunologie, D-Düsseldorf, Germany¹⁰Deutsche MDS-Studiengruppe, D-04103 Leipzig, Germany¹¹Université Paris Saclay, INSERM U1287, Gustave Roussy Cancer Center, Villejuif, France¹²Department of Hematology, Oncology and Stem Cell Transplantation, Faculty of Medicine—University Medical Center Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany¹³Service Hématologie Clinique adulte, CHU de Rennes, Rennes, France¹⁴Université de Rennes, Rennes, France¹⁵Centre Hospitalier Lyon Sud, Pierre Bénite, France¹⁶Hematology, Università Cattolica del S. Cuore, Rome, Italy¹⁷Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy¹⁸Service d’Hématologie Oncologique et Thérapie Cellulaire, CIC INSERM 1402, University Hospital of Poitiers, Poitiers, France¹⁹Heinrich-Heine University Düsseldorf, Universitätsklinik Düsseldorf, Klinik für Hämatologie, Onkologie und Klinische Immunologie, Düsseldorf, Germany²⁰Hematology Unit, ASST Spedali Civili, Brescia, Italy²¹Université Grenoble Alpes, Hematology Department, CHU Grenoble Alpes, Grenoble, France²²University Hospital Halle, Halle, Germany²³Department of Hematology and Oncology, University Hospital Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany²⁴Fondazione IRCCS Ca’ Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico – University of Milan, Hematology-BMT Unit, Milan, Italy²⁵Service d’Hématologie, CHU Montpellier, Montpellier, France²⁶Hematology Unit, AOU «Maggiore della Carità» and University of Eastern Piedmont, I-28100, Novara, Italy²⁷Centre Henri Becquerel, Rouen, France²⁸Technical University of Munich, Department of Medicine III, Munich, Germany²⁹GWT-TUD GmbH, Dresden, Germany³⁰Department of Hematology, Gustave Roussy Cancer Center, Villejuif, France³¹Clinic and Polyclinic for Hematology, Cellular Therapy and Hemostaseology, University Hospital Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany

Asciminib in Newly Diagnosed Chronic Myeloid Leukemia

Compelling study showing Asciminib vs. investigator’s choice TKi. Asciminib was better tolerated and with deeper molecular responses. This may become a preferred option for many new chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) patients. Cost may be an issue.

Sorafenib plus intensive chemotherapy in newly diagnosed FLT3-ITD AML: a randomized, placebo-controlled study by the ALLG

Sorafenib did not help in newly diagnosed AML (with FLT-ITD) patients as maintenance therapy. MRD testing can also predict survival outcome.

Lineage-specific detection of residual disease predicts relapse in patients with chronic myeloid leukemia stopping therapy

A small number of patients in this study, but it is an interesting test to predict who can be off therapy in CML. Patients who are high risk probably should to be taken off therapy, but this gives us something to build on.

Dabrafenib plus trametinib in patients with relapsed/refractory BRAF V600E mutation–positive hairy cell leukemia

High ORR of 89%in patients with HCL using BRAF/MET combination therapy, MRD-neg in 69%. The adage that we have more drugs than patients with HCL still holds true for most of us.

Zanubrutinib Versus Ibrutinib in Relapsed/Refractory Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia and Small Lymphocytic Lymphoma: Interim Analysis of a Randomized Phase III Trial

Is ibrutininb’s days as a treatment for CLL over? Zanubrutinib is more effective and less toxic.