Dataset Information

Acadesine for patients with relapsed/refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL): a multicenter phase I/II study.

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

Acadesine has shown in vitro to selectively induce apoptosis in B cells from chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) patients. We conducted a phase I/II open-label clinical study, to determine the safety and tolerability of acadesine given intravenously as a 4-h infusion to CLL patients.

Methods

Patient population included CLL patients with relapsed/refractory disease who had received one or more prior lines of treatment including either a fludarabine or an alkylator-based regimen. Twenty-four patients were included: eighteen in Part I treated at single doses of 50-315 mg/kg, and six in Part II, three with two doses at 210 mg/kg and three with five doses at 210 mg/kg.

Results

A manageable and predictable safety profile was demonstrated for acadesine at single doses between 50 and 210 mg/kg; 210 mg/kg was the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and optimal biological dose (OBD). Grade ≥2 hyperuricemia occurred commonly but was not clinically significant and resolved with the administration of prophylactic allopurinol. Other adverse events included transient anemia and/or thrombocytopenia (not clinically significant), renal impairment, and transient infusion-related hypotension (clinically significant). Trends of efficacy such as a reduction of peripheral CLL cells and reduction in lymphadenopathy were observed; however, the results were variable due to the small population and the range of doses tested.

Conclusions

A MTD of 210 mg/kg was established with single acadesine dose. Multiple dose administrations at the OBD were tested with an acceptable safety profile, showing that acadesine might be a valuable agent for the treatment of relapsed/refractory CLL patients.

SUBMITTER: Van Den Neste E

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3579463 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Purpose of reviewThere have been significant advances in the treatment of relapsed/refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) over the past two decades. However, the intention of treatment remains control of the disease and delay of progression rather than a cure which remains largely elusive. Considering that CLL is mostly seen in older patients, there are multiple factors that play a role in the selection of CLL beyond the frontline treatment. Here, we review the concept of relapsed CLL, factors that predispose to relapse, and therapeutic options available to this patient population. We also review investigational therapies and provide a framework for selection of therapies in this setting.Recent findingsPlease check if the affiliations are presented correctly.Targeted therapies with continuous BTK inhibitors (BTKi) or fixed duration venetoclax plus anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody therapy have established superiority over chemoimmunotherapy in relapsed CLL and have become the preferred standard of care treatment. The second-generation more selective BTK inhibitors (acalabrutinib and zanubrutinib) have shown improved safety profile compared to ibrutinib. However, resistance to the covalent BTK inhibitors may emerge and is commonly associated with mutations in BTK or other downstream enzymes. The novel non-covalent BTK inhibitors such as pirtobrutinib (Loxo-305) and nemtabrutinib (ARQ 531) are showing promising activities for relapsed CLL refractory to prior covalent BTKi. Other novel therapies such as chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cell therapy have also shown significant activities for relapsed and refractory CLL. Measurable residual disease (MRD) assessment has a growing importance in venetoclax-based limited-duration therapy and there is mounting evidence that MRD negativity improves outcomes. However, it remains to be seen if this will become an established clinically significant endpoint. Further, the optimal sequence of various treatment options remains to be determined. Patients with relapsed CLL now have more options for the treatment of the disease. The choice of therapy is best individualized especially in the absence of direct comparisons of targeted therapies, and the coming years will bring more data on the best sequence of use of the therapeutic agents.