Dataset Information

Phase 2, randomized, double-blind study of pracinostat in combination with azacitidine in patients with untreated, higher-risk myelodysplastic syndromes.

ABSTRACT: The prognosis of patients with higher-risk myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) remains poor despite available therapies. Histone deacetylase inhibitors have demonstrated activity in patients with MDS and in vitro synergy with azacitidine.A phase 2 randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial of azacitidine and pracinostat was conducted in patients who had International Prognostic Scoring System intermediate-2-risk or high-risk MDS. The primary endpoint was the complete response (CR) rate by cycle 6 of therapy.Of 102 randomized patients, there were 51 in the pracinostat group and 51 in the placebo group. The median age was 69 years. The CR rate by cycle 6 of therapy was 18% and 33% (P?=?.07) in the pracinostat and placebo groups, respectively. No significant differences in overall survival (median, 16 vs 19 months, respectively; hazard ratio, 1.21; 95% confidence interval, 0.66-2.23) or progression-free survival (11 vs 9 months, respectively; hazard ratio, 0.82; 95% confidence interval, 0.546-1.46) were observed between groups. Grade ?3 adverse events occurred more frequently in the pracinostat group (98% vs 74%), leading to more treatment discontinuations (20% vs 10%).The combination of azacitidine with pracinostat did not improve outcomes in patients with higher-risk MDS. Higher rates of treatment discontinuation may partially explain these results, suggesting alternative dosing and schedules to improve tolerability may be required to determine the potential of the combination. Cancer 2017;123:994-1002. © 2016 American Cancer Society.

SUBMITTER: Garcia-Manero G

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5432122 | biostudies-literature | 2017 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Phase 2, randomized, double-blind study of pracinostat in combination with azacitidine in patients with untreated, higher-risk myelodysplastic syndromes.

Garcia-Manero Guillermo G Montalban-Bravo Guillermo G Berdeja Jesus G JG Abaza Yasmin Y Jabbour Elias E Essell James J Lyons Roger M RM Ravandi Farhad F Maris Michael M Heller Brian B DeZern Amy E AE Babu Sunil S Wright David D Anz Bertrand B Boccia Ralph R Komrokji Rami S RS Kuriakose Philip P Reeves James J Sekeres Mikkael A MA Kantarjian Hagop M HM Ghalie Richard R Roboz Gail J GJ

Cancer 20170117 6

<h4>Background</h4>The prognosis of patients with higher-risk myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) remains poor despite available therapies. Histone deacetylase inhibitors have demonstrated activity in patients with MDS and in vitro synergy with azacitidine.<h4>Methods</h4>A phase 2 randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial of azacitidine and pracinostat was conducted in patients who had International Prognostic Scoring System intermediate-2-risk or high-risk MDS. The primary endpoint was the com ...[more]

PMID: 28094841

Similar Datasets

Project description:Purpose Azacitidine is standard, first-line therapy in higher-risk myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS). Whether azacitidine-based combinations with lenalidomide or vorinostat produce superior overall response rates (ORRs) to azacitidine is not known. Patients and Methods North American Intergroup Study S1117 is a phase II/III trial that randomly assigned patients with higher-risk MDS and chronic myelomonocytic leukemia (CMML) 1:1:1 to azacitidine (75 mg/m2/day on days 1 to 7 of a 28-day cycle); azacitidine plus lenalidomide (10 mg/day on days 1 to 21); or azacitidine plus vorinostat (300 mg twice daily on days 3 to 9). The primary phase II end point was improved ORR. Results Of 277 patients from 90 centers, 92 received azacitidine, 93 received azacitidine plus lenalidomide, and 92 received azacitidine plus vorinostat. Median age was 70 years (range, 28 to 93 years), 85 patients (31%) were female, and 53 patients (19%) had CMML. Serious adverse events were similar across arms, although combination-arm patients were more likely to undergo nonprotocol-defined dose modifications ( P < .001).With a median follow-up of 23 months (range, 1 to 43 months), the ORR was 38% for patients receiving azacitidine, 49% for azacitidine plus lenalidomide ( P = .14 v azacitidine), and 27% for azacitidine plus vorinostat ( P = .16 v azacitidine). For patients with CMML, ORR was higher for azacitidine plus lenalidomide versus azacitidine (68% v 28%, P = .02) but similar for all arms across cytogenetic subgroups, as was remission duration and overall survival. ORR was higher with mutations in DNMT3A and lower for SRSF2, whereas ORR duration improved with fewer mutations. Lenalidomide dose reduction was associated with worse overall survival (hazard ratio, 1.30; P = .05). Conclusion Patients with higher-risk MDS treated with azacitidine-based combinations had similar ORR to azacitidine monotherapy, although patients with CMML benefitted from azacitidine plus lenalidomide. The efficacy of combination regimens may have been affected by dose modifications.

Project description:BackgroundDrug treatments for patients with high-risk myelodysplastic syndromes provide no survival advantage. In this trial, we aimed to assess the effect of azacitidine on overall survival compared with the three commonest conventional care regimens.MethodsIn a phase III, international, multicentre, controlled, parallel-group, open-label trial, patients with higher-risk myelodysplastic syndromes were randomly assigned one-to-one to receive azacitidine (75 mg/m(2) per day for 7 days every 28 days) or conventional care (best supportive care, low-dose cytarabine, or intensive chemotherapy as selected by investigators before randomisation). Patients were stratified by French-American-British and international prognostic scoring system classifications; randomisation was done with a block size of four. The primary endpoint was overall survival. Efficacy analyses were by intention to treat for all patients assigned to receive treatment. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00071799.FindingsBetween Feb 13, 2004, and Aug 7, 2006, 358 patients were randomly assigned to receive azacitidine (n=179) or conventional care regimens (n=179). Four patients in the azacitidine and 14 in the conventional care groups received no study drugs but were included in the intention-to-treat efficacy analysis. After a median follow-up of 21.1 months (IQR 15.1-26.9), median overall survival was 24.5 months (9.9-not reached) for the azacitidine group versus 15.0 months (5.6-24.1) for the conventional care group (hazard ratio 0.58; 95% CI 0.43-0.77; stratified log-rank p=0.0001). At last follow-up, 82 patients in the azacitidine group had died compared with 113 in the conventional care group. At 2 years, on the basis of Kaplan-Meier estimates, 50.8% (95% CI 42.1-58.8) of patients in the azacitidine group were alive compared with 26.2% (18.7-34.3) in the conventional care group (p<0.0001). Peripheral cytopenias were the most common grade 3-4 adverse events for all treatments.InterpretationTreatment with azacitidine increases overall survival in patients with higher-risk myelodysplastic syndromes relative to conventional care.

Dataset Information

Phase 2, randomized, double-blind study of pracinostat in combination with azacitidine in patients with untreated, higher-risk myelodysplastic syndromes.

Publications

Phase 2, randomized, double-blind study of pracinostat in combination with azacitidine in patients with untreated, higher-risk myelodysplastic syndromes.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets