4.7 Article

Cytogenetics and gene mutations influence survival in older patients with acute myeloid leukemia treated with azacitidine or conventional care

Journal

LEUKEMIA
Volume 32, Issue 12, Pages 2546-2557

Publisher

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/s41375-018-0257-z

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Celgene Corporation - Celgene Corporation
  2. MRC [MC_U137961146, MC_UU_12009/11, G1000729, MC_UU_00016/11, MR/L008963/1] Funding Source: UKRI

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Older patients with newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia (AML) in the phase 3 AZA-AML-001 study were evaluated at entry for cytogenetic abnormalities, and a subgroup of patients was assessed for gene mutations. Patients received azacitidine 75 mg/m(2)/day x7 days (n - 240) or conventional care regimens (CCR; n - 245): intensive chemotherapy, low-dose cytarabine, or best supportive care only. Overall survival (OS) was assessed for patients with common (occurring in >= 10% of patients) cytogenetic abnormalities and karyotypes, and for patients with recurring gene mutations. There was a significant OS improvement with azacitidine vs CCR for patients with European LeukemiaNet-defined Adverse karyotype (HR 0.71 [95% CI 0.51-0.99]; P - 0.046). Azacitidine-treated patients with -5/5q-, -7/7q-, or 17p abnormalities, or with monosomal or complex karyotypes, had a 31-46% reduced risk of death vs CCR. The most frequent gene mutations were DNMT3A (27%), TET2 (25%), IDH2 (23% [R140, 15%; R172, 8%]), and TP53 (21%). Compared with wild-type, OS was significantly reduced among CCR-treated patients with TP53 or NRAS mutations and azacitidine-treated patients with FLT3 or TET2 mutations. Azacitidine may be a preferred treatment for older patients with AML with Adverse-risk cytogenetics, particularly those with chromosome 5, 7, and/or 17 abnormalities and complex or monosomal karyotypes. The influence of gene mutations in azacitidine-treated patients warrants further study.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available