All content on this site is intended for healthcare professionals only. By acknowledging this message and accessing the information on this website you are confirming that you are a Healthcare Professional. If you are a patient or carer, please visit Know AML.
Introducing
Now you can personalise
your AML Hub experience!
Bookmark content to read later
Select your specific areas of interest
View content recommended for you
Find out moreThe AML Hub website uses a third-party service provided by Google that dynamically translates web content. Translations are machine generated, so may not be an exact or complete translation, and the AML Hub cannot guarantee the accuracy of translated content. The AML Hub and its employees will not be liable for any direct, indirect, or consequential damages (even if foreseeable) resulting from use of the Google Translate feature. For further support with Google Translate, visit Google Translate Help.
The AML Hub is an independent medical education platform, sponsored by Daiichi Sankyo, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Kura Oncology, Roche and Syndax and has been supported through a grant from Bristol Myers Squibb. The funders are allowed no direct influence on our content. The levels of sponsorship listed are reflective of the amount of funding given. View funders.
Bookmark this article
Around 20% of patients with myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) or acute myeloid leukemia (AML) and 30–40% of patients with therapy-related myeloid diseases have TP53 mutations.1 These patients have a worse prognosis and very poor outcomes, including inferior overall survival (OS), increased risk of AML transformation, a variant allele frequency (VAF) of >40%, and biallelic mutations. Targeted therapies, such as venetoclax in combination with hypomethylating agents (HMA), show a complete response (CR) rate of about 20%, but survival rates remain low in this molecularly distinct cohort of patients. Eprenetapopt (APR-246), a p53 reactivator, has recently demonstrated promising efficacy and safety in two phase II trials (NCT03072043 and NCT03588078) when combined with azacitidine.1 The MDS Hub has previously reported on these early phase trials.
During the 63rd American Society of Hematology (ASH) Annual Meeting and Exposition, David Sallman1 presented the updated findings from intention-to-treat (ITT) analyses from the combined cohorts of these two phase II trials. Here, we summarize the key findings.
The study comprised ITT analyses of the combined phase II cohorts from the US MDS Clinical Research Consortium and the Groupe Francophone des Myélodysplasies (GFM) trials. Enrolled patients were TP53-mutant with either HMA-naïve MDS, oligoblastic AML (≤30% blasts), or MDS–myeloproliferative neoplasm (MDS–MPN). The US trial excluded patients with ≥30% blasts. The treatment schedule is shown in Figure 1.
The primary endpoint was CR rate according to International Working Group (IWG) 2006 criteria. Secondary endpoints included the following:
Figure 1. Treatment schedule*
APR-246, eprenetapopt; d, day; IV, intravenous; SC, subcutaneous.
*Adapted from Sallman, et al.1
A total of 100 patients were included: 53% were female. Baseline characteristics are shown in Table 1.
Table 1. Baseline characteristics*
Characteristic, % unless otherwise stated |
Total |
MDS |
AML |
MDS–MPN/CMML |
---|---|---|---|---|
Median age, years (range) |
68 (34–87) |
68 (34–87) |
68 (47–85) |
57 (41–79) |
MDS |
74 |
|
|
|
IPSS-R: Intermediate |
- |
7 |
- |
- |
IPSS-R: High |
- |
15 |
- |
- |
IPSS-R: Very high |
- |
78 |
- |
- |
AML |
22 |
- |
- |
- |
MDS–MPN/CMML |
4 |
- |
- |
- |
Therapy related |
22 |
24 |
18 |
0 |
Isolated TP53 mutation |
63 |
64 |
59 |
75 |
Median TP53 VAF, range |
22 (1–83) |
25 (1–83) |
18 (1–66) |
46 (22–47) |
Biallelic and/or complex karyotype |
88 |
88 |
87 |
100 |
AML, acute myeloid leukemia; CMML; chronic myelomonocytic leukemia; IPSS-R, revised International Prognostic Scoring System; MDS, myelodysplastic syndromes; MPN, myeloproliferative neoplasm; VAF, variant allele frequency. *Adapted from Sallman, et al.1 |
Table 2. ITT analysis: best responses*
Response, % unless otherwise stated |
Total (N = 100) |
---|---|
ORR |
69 |
BAT |
|
CR |
43 |
PR |
1 |
mCR + HI |
10 |
mCR/MLFS |
6 |
HI |
9 |
SD |
6 |
NE |
18 |
PD |
7 |
CR/PR |
44 |
Median time to CR/PR, months (range) |
3.1 (2.5–6.7) |
Median DoR, months (95% CI) |
10.6 (8.8–12.3) |
TP53 |
|
NGS negative (5% VAF cutoff) |
40 |
MRD negativity (0.1% cutoff) |
6 |
BAT, best response to therapy; CI, confidence interval; CR, complete response; DoR, duration of response; HI, hematological improvement; mCR, marrow complete response; MLFS, morphological leukemia-free state; MRD, minimal residual disease; NE, not evaluable; NGS, next-generation sequencing; ORR, overall response rate; PD, progressive disease; PR, partial response; SD, stable disease; VAF, variant allele frequency. *Adapted from Sallman, et al.1 |
This ITT analyses from the combined cohort demonstrated the feasibility and efficacy of using eprenetapopt with azacitidine for the treatment of patients with TP53-mutant MDS or AML. Eprenetapopt plus azacitidine showed an encouraging safety profile and promising response rates. The study identified molecular markers associated with CR and validated NGS clearing as a critical biomarker for allo-HSCT outcomes in patients with TP53 mutations. Results from the study support the phase III trial (NCT03745716) comparing eprenetapopt plus azacitidine versus azacitidine alone for the treatment of patients with TP53-mutant MDS. However, this trial did not meet its primary endpoint of significantly improving CR rates.
Your opinion matters
Subscribe to get the best content related to AML delivered to your inbox