Use of Azacitidine or Decitabine for the Up-Front Setting in Acute Myeloid Leukaemia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Saiz-Rodriguez M
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8616518 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundThe cytidine nucleoside analogs azacitidine (AZA) and decitabine (DAC) are used for the treatment of patients with myelodysplastic syndromes and acute myeloid leukemia (AML). Few non-clinical studies have directly compared the mechanisms of action of these agents in a head-to-head fashion, and the agents are often viewed as mechanistically similar DNA hypomethylating agents. To better understand the similarities and differences in mechanisms of these drugs, we compared their in vitro effects on several end points in human AML cell lines.Methodology/principal findingsBoth drugs effected DNA methyltransferase 1 depletion, DNA hypomethylation, and DNA damage induction, with DAC showing equivalent activity at concentrations 2- to 10-fold lower than AZA. At concentrations above 1 microM, AZA had a greater effect than DAC on reducing cell viability. Both drugs increased the sub-G1 fraction and apoptosis markers, with AZA decreasing all cell cycle phases and DAC causing an increase in G2-M. Total protein synthesis was reduced only by AZA, and drug-modulated gene expression profiles were largely non-overlapping.Conclusions/significanceThese data demonstrate shared mechanisms of action of AZA and DAC on DNA-mediated markers of activity, but distinctly different effects in their actions on cell viability, protein synthesis, cell cycle, and gene expression. The differential effects of AZA may be mediated by RNA incorporation, as the distribution of AZA in nucleic acid of KG-1a cells was 65:35, RNA:DNA.
| S-EPMC2814859 | biostudies-literature
Project description:FUS-ERG is a chimeric gene with a poor prognosis, found in myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) and acute myeloid leukaemia (AML). It remains unclear whether DNA hypomethylating agents, including azacitidine (Aza), are effective in FUS-ERG-harbouring AML and how FUS-ERG induces chemoresistance. Stable Ba/F3 transfectants with FUS-ERG were repeatedly exposed to Aza for 7 days of treatment and at 21-day intervals to investigate Aza sensitivity. Stable FUS-ERG transfectants acquired resistance acquired resistance after three courses of Aza exposure. RNA sequencing (RNA-seq) was performed when Aza susceptibility began to change; genes with altered expression or transcript variants were identified. Molecular signatures of these genes were analysed using gene ontology. RNA-seq analyses identified 74 upregulated and 320 downregulated genes involved in cell motility, cytokine production, and kinase activity. Additionally, 1321 genes with altered transcript variants were identified, revealing their involvement in chromatin organisation. In a clinical case of AML with FUS-ERG, we compared whole-genome alterations between the initial MDS diagnosis and AML recurrence after Aza treatment. Genes with non-synonymous or near mutations in transcription regulatory areas (TRAs), additionally detected in AML recurrence, were collated with the gene list from RNA-seq to identify genes involved in acquiring Aza resistance in the presence of FUS-ERG. Whole-genome sequencing of clinical specimens identified 29 genes with non-synonymous mutations, including BCOR, and 48 genes located within 20 kb of 54 TRA mutations in AML recurrence. These genes were involved in chromatin organisation and included NCOR2 as an overlapping gene with RNA-seq data. Transcription regulators involved in mutated TRAs were skewed and included RCOR1 in AML recurrence. We tested the efficacy of BH3 mimetics, including venetoclax and S63845, in primary Aza-resistant AML cells treated with FUS-ERG. Primary FUS-ERG-harbouring AML cells acquiring Aza resistance affected the myeloid cell leukaemia-1 (MCL1) inhibitor S63845 but not while using venetoclax, despite no mutations in BCL2. FUS-ERG promoted Aza resistance after several treatments. The disturbance of chromatin organisation might induce this by co-repressors, including BCOR, NCOR2, and RCOR1. MCL1 inhibition could partially overcome Aza resistance in FUS-ERG-harbouring AML cells.
| S-EPMC10475016 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The MDS-IWG and NCCN currently endorse both FAB and WHO classifications of MDS and AML, thus allowing patients with 20-30 % bone marrow blasts (AML20-30, formerly MDS-RAEB-t) to be categorised and treated as either MDS or AML. In addition, an artificial distinction between AML20-30 and AML30+ was made by regulatory agencies by initially restricting approval of azacitidine to AML20-30. Thus, uncertainty prevails regarding the diagnosis, prognosis and optimal treatment timing and strategy for patients with AML20-30. Here, we aim to provide clarification for patients treated with azacitidine front-line.The Austrian Azacitidine Registry is a multicentre database (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01595295). For this analysis, we selected 339 patients treated with azacitidine front-line. According to the WHO classification 53, 96 and 190 patients had MDS-RAEB-I, MDS-RAEB-II and AML (AML20-30: n?=?79; AML30+: n?=?111), respectively. According to the FAB classification, 131, 101 and 111 patients had MDS-RAEB, MDS-RAEB-t and AML, respectively.The median ages of patients with MDS and AML were 72 (range 37-87) and 77 (range 23-93) years, respectively. Overall, 80 % of classifiable patients (?30 % bone marrow blasts) had intermediate-2 or high-risk IPSS scores. Most other baseline, treatment and response characteristics were similar between patients diagnosed with MDS or AML. WHO-classified patients with AML20-30 had significantly worse OS than patients with MDS-RAEB-II (13.1 vs 18.9 months; p?=?0.010), but similar OS to patients with AML30+ (10.9 vs 13.1 months; p?=?0.238). AML patients that showed MDS-related features did not have worse outcomes compared with patients who did not (13.2 vs 8.9 months; p?=?0.104). FAB-classified patients with MDS-RAEB-t had similar survival to patients with AML30+ (12.8 vs 10.9 months; p?=?0.376), but significantly worse OS than patients with MDS-RAEB (10.9 vs 24.4 months; p?<?0.001).Our data demonstrate the validity of the WHO classification of MDS and AML, and its superiority over the former FAB classification, for patients treated with azacitidine front-line. Neither bone marrow blast count nor presence of MDS-related features had an adverse prognostic impact on survival. Patients with AML20-30 should therefore be regarded as having 'true AML' and in our opinion treatment should be initiated without delay.
| S-EPMC4833933 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Older patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) respond poorly to standard induction therapy. B-cell lymphoma 2 (BCL-2) overexpression is implicated in survival of AML cells and treatment resistance. We report safety and efficacy of venetoclax with decitabine or azacitidine from a large, multicenter, phase 1b dose-escalation and expansion study. Patients (N = 145) were at least 65 years old with treatment-naive AML and were ineligible for intensive chemotherapy. During dose escalation, oral venetoclax was administered at 400, 800, or 1200 mg daily in combination with either decitabine (20 mg/m2, days 1-5, intravenously [IV]) or azacitidine (75 mg/m2, days 1-7, IV or subcutaneously). In the expansion, 400 or 800 mg venetoclax with either hypomethylating agent (HMA) was given. Median age was 74 years, with poor-risk cytogenetics in 49% of patients. Common adverse events (>30%) included nausea, diarrhea, constipation, febrile neutropenia, fatigue, hypokalemia, decreased appetite, and decreased white blood cell count. No tumor lysis syndrome was observed. With a median time on study of 8.9 months, 67% of patients (all doses) achieved complete remission (CR) + CR with incomplete count recovery (CRi), with a CR + CRi rate of 73% in the venetoclax 400 mg + HMA cohort. Patients with poor-risk cytogenetics and those at least 75 years old had CR + CRi rates of 60% and 65%, respectively. The median duration of CR + CRi (all patients) was 11.3 months, and median overall survival (mOS) was 17.5 months; mOS has not been reached for the 400-mg venetoclax cohort. The novel combination of venetoclax with decitabine or azacitidine was effective and well tolerated in elderly patients with AML (This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT02203773).
| S-EPMC6318429 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Front-line therapy for elderly or unfit patients with acute myeloid leukaemia (AML) remains unsatisfactory with poor outcomes and excessive toxicity. We studied a new low-intensity regimen of cladribine combined with low-dose cytarabine alternating with decitabine, aimed at improving outcomes in this population. Based on our previous experience, we hypothesised that this combination would be safe and more effective than current approaches with hypomethylating agents. METHODS:In this single-arm, open-label, single-centre phase 2 study, we enrolled patients aged 60 years or older with previously untreated AML or high-risk myelodysplastic syndrome who had adequate organ function and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 2 or less. Patients were treated with cladribine plus low-dose cytarabine for two 28-day cycles alternating with decitabine for two 28-day cycles, for up to 18 cycles. Induction therapy (cycle 1) consisted of cladribine 5 mg/m2 intravenously over 1-2 h on days 1-5 and cytarabine 20 mg subcutaneously twice daily on days 1-10. Patients who had remission during this induction regimen moved on to consolidation therapy (cladribine 5 mg/m2 intravenously over 1-2 h on days 1-3 and cytarabine 20 mg twice daily on days 1-10, alternating with decitabine 20 mg/m2 intravenously on days 1-5). The primary outcome measure was disease-free survival. Secondary outcomes were overall survival, proportion of patients achieving complete response, proportion of patients achieving response, toxicity, and induction mortality. All treated patients were included in the analyses. This trial is ongoing and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01515527. FINDINGS:Between Feb 17, 2012, and July 6, 2017, 118 patients were enrolled and treated, among whom 48 (41%) had an adverse karyotype, 20 (17%) had therapy-related AML, 18 (15%) had treated secondary AML, and 20 (17%) had TP53 mutations. Median disease-free survival was 10·8 months (IQR 5·4-25·9). 80 (68%) patients achieved objective response: 69 (58%) achieved a complete response and 11 (9%) patients had complete response with incomplete count recovery. The median overall survival was 13·8 months (6·9-28·6). The regimen was well tolerated, with one (1%) death within the first 4 weeks and eight (7%) deaths within the first 8 weeks. The most common non-haematological adverse events of grade 3 or worse were infection (88 [75%] patients), elevated total bilirubin (26 [22%] patients), rash (13 [11%] patients), and nausea (13 [11%] patients). INTERPRETATION:The combination of cladribine and low-dose cytarabine alternating with decitabine appears to be a safe and highly effective regimen for the treatment of elderly or unfit patients with newly diagnosed AML. Further testing of this regimen is warranted, and could help to provide a new, effective option for reduced-intensity therapy in this population. FUNDING:Part supported by the National Institutes of Health.
| S-EPMC6775639 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The hypomethylating agents, decitabine (DEC) and azacitidine (AZA), allowed more elderly acute myeloid leukemia (AML) patients to be treated. However, there are little direct comparative data on AZA and DEC. This multicenter retrospective study compared the outcomes of AZA and DEC in terms of response and overall survival (OS). Potential predictors associated with response and OS were also evaluated. A total of 626 AML patients were included (487 treated with AZA and 139 with DEC). Response rates were similar in both groups: CR was 18% with AZA vs. 23% with DEC (p = 0.20), CR/CRi was 20.5% vs. 25% (p = 0.27) and ORR was 32% vs. 39.5% (p = 0.12), respectively. Patients with leukocytes < 10 × 109/L, bone marrow blasts < 50% and ECOG ≥ 2 had higher ORR with DEC than with AZA. OS was similar in both groups: 10.4 months (95% CI: 9.2-11.7) vs. 8.8 months (95% CI: 6.7-11.0, p = 0.455), for AZA and DEC, respectively. Age (≥80 years), leukocytes (≥ 10 × 109/L), platelet count (<20 × 109/L) and eGFR (≥45 mL/min/1.73 m2) were associated with higher OS with AZA compared to DEC. In conclusion, we found no differences in response and OS rates in AML patients treated with AZA or DEC.
| S-EPMC9105404 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background: The hypomethylating agents (HMAs) azacitidine (AZA) and decitabine (DAC) have been widely used in patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) and higher-risk myelodysplastic syndrome (HR-MDS). However, few direct clinical trials have been carried out to compare the efficacy and adverse events (AEs) between these two agents. The clinical choice between them is controversial. A systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) was performed to compare the efficacy, safety, and survival of DAC and AZA in AML and HR-MDS patients. Methods: We systematically searched MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library through March 15, 2021. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on AML or HR-MDS patients comparing the efficacy and safety between DAC and AZA or comparing one of HMAs to conventional care regimens (CCR) were selected. Results: Eight RCTs (n = 2,184) were identified in the NMA. Four trials compared AZA to CCR, and four compared DAC to CCR. Direct comparisons indicated that, compared to CCR, both AZA and DAC were associated with higher overall response (OR) rate (AZA vs. CCR: relative risk (RR) = 1.48, 95% CI 1.05-2.1; DAC vs. CCR: RR = 2.14, 95% CI 1.21-3.79) and longer overall survival (OS) (AZA vs. CCR: HR = 0.64, 95% CI 0.50-0.82; DAC vs. CCR: HR = 0.84, 95% CI 0.72-0.98), and AZA showed higher rate of complete remission with incomplete blood count recovery (CRi) (HR = 2.52, 95% CI 1.27-5). For the indirect method, DAC showed a higher complete remission (CR) rate than AZA in patients with both AML (RR = 2.28, 95% CI 1.12-4.65) and MDS (RR = 7.57, 95% CI 1.26-45.54). Additionally, DAC significantly increased the risk of 3/4 grade anemia (RR = 1.61, 95% CI: 1.03-2.51), febrile neutropenia (RR = 4.03, 95% CI: 1.41-11.52), and leukopenia (RR = 3.43, 95% CI 1.64-7.16) compared with AZA. No statistical significance was found for the other studied outcomes. Conclusion: Compared to CCR, both AZA and DAC can promote outcomes in patients with AML and HR-MDS. DAC showed higher efficacy especially CR rate than AZA (low-certainty evidence), while AZA experienced lower frequent grade 3/4 cytopenia than patients receiving DAC treatment.
| S-EPMC8416074 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe DNA hypomethylating agents (HMAs) decitabine and azacitidine have been widely used in the management of elderly patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML). However, no direct clinical trials have been carried out to compare the two agents. A systematic review and network meta-analysis were performed to indirectly compare the efficacy and safety of decitabine and azacitidine in elderly AML patients.MethodsWe systematically searched PubMed, Medline, Web of Science, Embase and Cochrane Library through May 14, 2019. Randomized controlled trials on elderly AML patients comparing the efficacy and safety between decitabine and azacitidine, or comparing one of HMAs to standard supportive care or placebo were selected. The major outcomes of interest were performed with methods of adjusted indirect comparison and the fixed effect model.ResultsOnly three RCTs including a total number of 1086 patients were identified. Direct comparisons showed that azacitidine significantly reduced mortality (RR = 0.90, 95% CI 0.83-0.97) while decitabine was not significantly associated with lower mortality (RR = 0.97, 95% CI 0.92-1.02) compared to the conventional care regimen (CCR). In addition, for the indirect method, azacitidine significantly reduced mortality compared to decitabine (RR = 0.83 95% CI 0.77-0.90) and was more likely to improve complete response (CR) (RR = 1.66, 95% CI 1.17-2.35, low-certainty evidence). No statistical significance was found for the other studied outcomes.ConclusionsCompared to CCR, decitabine and azacitidine can promote studied outcomes in elderly AML patients. Indirect evidence with low certainty was used to compare these two agents. The superiority of either agent cannot be confirmed, and head-to-head clinical trials are still required.
| S-EPMC7075015 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) inhibitor, DNA damage inducible transcript 4 (DDIT4), has inducible expression in response to various cellular stresses. In multiple malignancies, studies have shown that DDIT4 participates in tumorigenesis and impacts patient survival. We aimed to study the prognostic value of DDIT4 in acute myeloid leukaemia (AML), which is currently unclear. Firstly, The Cancer Genome Atlas was screened for AML patients with complete clinical characteristics and DDIT4 expression data. A total of 155 patients were included and stratified according to the treatment modality and the median DDIT4 expression levels. High DDIT4 expressers had shorter overall survival (OS) and event-free survival (EFS) than the low expressers among the chemotherapy-only group (all P < .001); EFS and OS were similar in the high and low DDIT4 expressers of the allogeneic haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HSCT) group. Furthermore, in the DDIT4high group, patients treated with allo-HSCT had longer EFS and OS than those who received chemotherapy alone (all P < .01). In the DDIT4low group, OS and EFS were similar in different treatment groups. Secondly, we analysed two other cytogenetically normal AML (CN-AML) cohorts derived from the Gene Expression Omnibus database, which confirmed that high DDIT4 expression was associated with poorer survival. Gene Ontology (GO) enrichment analysis showed that the genes related to DDIT4 expression were mainly concentrated in the acute and chronic myeloid leukaemia signalling pathways. Collectively, our study indicates that high DDIT4 expression may serve as a poor prognostic factor for AML, but its prognostic effects could be outweighed by allo-HSCT.
| S-EPMC6933361 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The standard of care for patients with acute promyelocytic leukaemia (APL) relapsing after front-line treatment with arsenic trioxide (ATO)-based regimens remains to be defined. A total of 67 patients who relapsed after receiving ATO-based up-front therapy and were also salvaged using an ATO-based regimen were evaluated. The median (range) age of patients was 28 (4-54) years. While 63/67 (94%) achieved a second molecular remission (MR) after salvage therapy, three (4·5%) died during salvage therapy. An autologous stem cell transplant (auto-SCT) was offered to all patients who achieved MR, 35/63 (55·6%) opted for auto-SCT the rest were administered an ATO + all-trans retinoic acid maintenance regimen. The mean (SD) 5-year Kaplan-Meier estimate of overall survival and event-free survival of those who received auto-SCT versus those who did not was 90·3 (5·3)% versus 58·6 (10·4)% (P = 0·004), and 87·1 (6·0)% versus 47·7 (10·3)% (P = 0·001) respectively. On multivariate analysis, failure to consolidate MR with an auto-SCT was associated with a significantly increased risk of relapse [hazard ratio (HR) 4·91, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1·56-15·41; P = 0·006]. MR induction with ATO-based regimens followed by an auto-SCT in children and young adults with relapsed APL who were treated with front-line ATO-based regimens was associated with excellent long-term survival.
| S-EPMC7894296 | biostudies-literature