The 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 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 Astellas, Daiichi Sankyo, Johnson & Johnson, Kura Oncology and Syndax, and has been supported through educational grants from Bristol Myers Squibb and the Hippocrate Conference Institute, an association of the Servier Group. 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.
Now you can support HCPs in making informed decisions for their patients
Your contribution helps us continuously deliver expertly curated content to HCPs worldwide. You will also have the opportunity to make a content suggestion for consideration and receive updates on the impact contributions are making to our content.
Find out moreCreate an account and access these new features:
Bookmark content to read later
Select your specific areas of interest
View aml content recommended for you
Patients over 65 who are newly diagnosed with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) currently have a poor prognosis, due to the toxicity and limited efficacy associated with high-intensity chemotherapy. Alternative treatment strategies for this patient group include the use of hypomethylating agents (HMAs). A previous comparative trial (NCT00260832) demonstrated improved survival using the HMA, decitabine, over conventional chemotherapy approaches; supportive care and low-dose cytarabine (LDAC).1 Since 2011, an adapted semi-intensive regimen from the Programa Español de Tratamientos en Hematología (PETHEMA) group has been used among PETHEMA institutions, with the aim of improving complete remission (CR) and tolerability.2 This regimen, FLUGA, combines oral fludarabine and filgrastim with LDAC.
Susana Vives and colleagues recently published the findings from a multicenter, randomized phase III trial (FLUGAZA; NCT02319135) in Cancer, demonstrating the first comparison of overall survival (OS) in elderly patients with newly diagnosed AML treated with either a FLUGA regimen or the HMA, azacitidine, given as monotherapy. We summarize key findings from this study below.2
Figure 1. Dosing schedule for a 28-day cycle for each treatment arm*
AZA, azacitidine; D, day; FLUGA, fludarabine, cytarabine, and filgrastim; IV, intravenous; SC, subcutaneous.
*Data from Vives et al.2
†D2–5 for patients aged ≥75.
Table 1. Response data for the ITT population over induction and consolidation treatment*
AZA, azacitidine; CR, complete remission; CRi, CR with incomplete blood count recovery; FLUGA, fludarabine, cytarabine, and filgrastim; ITT, intent-to-treat; ORR, overall response rate. |
|||
Response |
AZA |
FLUGA |
p value |
---|---|---|---|
CR after 3 cycles, % |
9 |
18 |
0.038 |
CRi after 3 cycles, % |
13 |
15 |
— |
ORR, % |
|
|
|
Table 2. Primary and secondary endpoint data for AZA and FLUGA treatment arms*
AZA, azacytidine; EFS, event-free survival FLUGA, fludarabine, cytarabine, and filgrastim; OS, overall survival. |
|
|||
Endpoint |
AZA |
FLUGA |
p value |
|
---|---|---|---|---|
OS (%) |
|
|
|
|
EFS (%) |
|
|
|
Table 3. Grade 3–4 AEs reported within treatment arms*
AE, adverse events; AZA, azacitidine; FLUGA, fludarabine, cytarabine, and filgrastim. |
||
Grade 3–4 AEs |
AZA |
FLUGA |
---|---|---|
Total Grade 3–4 AEs, n |
311 |
346 |
Hematological AEs, n (%) |
45 (14) |
81 (23) |
Patients with >1 hematological AE, n (%) |
29 (20) |
35 (25) |
Non-hematological AEs, n (%) |
266 (86) |
265 (77) |
Patients with >1 non-hematological AE, n (%) |
106 (75) |
117 (83) |
Data from this comparative study demonstrated improved OS over 3 years with azacitidine monotherapy, compared to a FLUGA semi-intensive chemotherapy regimen, for older patients with treatment-naïve AML. It is important to note, however, that long-term OS (2- and 3-year) was poor for both treatment arms. Although rates of CR were greater after 3 cycles of the FLUGA regimen, there was no significant difference by Cycle 6.
As such, the authors concluded these data demonstrate potential for the use of azacitidine as a backbone in induction and consolidation therapy combinations for elderly patients with AML, as opposed to LDAC.
References
Please indicate your level of agreement with the following statements:
The content was clear and easy to understand
The content addressed the learning objectives
The content was relevant to my practice
I will change my clinical practice as a result of this content