N. Engl. J. Med.
Azacitidine and Venetoclax in Previously Untreated Acute Myeloid Leukemia.
Abstract
Background
Older patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) have a dismal prognosis, even after treatment with a hypomethylating agent. Azacitidine added to venetoclax had promising efficacy in a previous phase 1b study.
Methods
We randomly assigned previously untreated patients with confirmed AML who were ineligible for standard induction therapy because of coexisting conditions, because they were 75 years of age or older, or both to azacitidine plus either venetoclax or placebo. All patients received a standard dose of azacitidine (75 mg per square meter of body-surface area subcutaneously or intravenously on days 1 through 7 every 28-day cycle); venetoclax (target dose, 400 mg) or matching placebo was administered orally, once daily, in 28-day cycles. The primary end point was overall survival.
Results
The intention-to-treat population included 431 patients (286 in the azacitidine-venetoclax group and 145 in the azacitidine-placebo [control] group). The median age was 76 years in both groups (range, 49 to 91). At a median follow-up of 20.5 months, the median overall survival was 14.7 months in the azacitidine-venetoclax group and 9.6 months in the control group (hazard ratio for death, 0.66; 95% confidence interval, 0.52 to 0.85; P<0.001). The incidence of complete remission was higher with azacitidine-venetoclax than with the control regimen (36.7% vs. 17.9%; P<0.001), as was the composite complete remission (complete remission or complete remission with incomplete hematologic recovery) (66.4% vs. 28.3%; P<0.001). Key adverse events included nausea of any grade (in 44% of the patients in the azacitidine-venetoclax group and 35% of those in the control group) and grade 3 or higher thrombocytopenia (in 45% and 38%, respectively), neutropenia (in 42% and 28%), and febrile neutropenia (in 42% and 19%). Infections of any grade occurred in 85% of the patients in the azacitidine-venetoclax group and 67% of those in the control group, and serious adverse events occurred in 83% and 73%, respectively.
Conclusions
In previously untreated patients who were ineligible for intensive chemotherapy, overall survival was longer and the incidence of remission was higher among patients who received azacitidine plus venetoclax than among those who received azacitidine alone. The incidence of febrile neutropenia was higher in the venetoclax-azacitidine group than in the control group. (Funded by AbbVie and Genentech; VIALE-A ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02993523.).
Related Questions
In your practice, would you consider the all-oral option of decitabine-cedazuridine + venetoclax for an elderly, unfit AML patient, based on the ASCERTAIN-V trial results?
I see the combination of oral decitabine-cedazuridine (ASTX727) + venetoclax as largely being an appropriate option for any patient with newly diagnosed AML that would be otherwise considered for azacitidine + venetoclax. The inclusion criteria for ASCERTAIN-V (Roboz et al., PMID 42235013) and VIALE...
What are your top takeaways from ASH 2023?
Gene therapy for sickle cell disease and beta thalassemia. This was the first approval of CRISPR/Cas-based therapy in humans. Ex-vivo engineering of isologous hematopoietic stem cells followed by their reinfusion after myeloablative conditioning led to induction of 40-50% fetal hemoglobin in patient...
Do you offer enasidenib with azacitadine in AML with an IDH2 mutation for patients ineligible for intensive induction chemotherapy?
I typically do not give enasidenib with azacitidine upfront for patients with AML with IDH2 mutation and ineligible for intensive induction chemotherapy. Based on the results of the VIALE-A study (DiNardo et al, NEJM 2020), I usually give venetoclax with azacitidine to those patients. In addition to...