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
On February 25, 2019, Courtney DiNardo from The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, presented at the Acute Leukemias XVII Biology and Treatment Strategies biennial symposium, in Munich, Germany on isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH) type 1 (IDH1) and IDH type 2 (IDH2) inhibitors in the treatment of acute myeloid leukemia (AML). Dr. DiNardo began by discussing the biology of IDH mutations, moving on to discuss how these have been utilized as therapeutic targets in AML and showing the data that led to the clinical adoption of the IDH inhibitors enasidenib and ivosidenib. The presentation concluded with a summary of ongoing trials of these inhibitors in combination therapies.1
Whilst IDH mutations are not the most commonly occurring in AML, approximately 20% of patients have mutant IDH (mIDH) genes with approximately 8% affecting IDH1 and 12% in IDH2. These mutations are early events, with 20% of IDH1 and 35% of IDH2 occurring at diagnosis. However, these can also be acquired during progression from myelodysplastic syndrome or myeloproliferative neoplasms to AML in 10–15% and 20–25% of cases, respectively.
At a cellular level, IDH1 (in the cytoplasm) and IDH2 (in the mitochondria) usually act to metabolize the reaction of isocitrate to α-ketoglutarate (α-KG). When these genes are mutated, α-KG cannot breakdown D-2-hydroxyglutarate (2-HG), an oncometabolite, causing it to accumulate and inhibit α-KG-dependent dioxygenases. This leads to impaired differentiation, epigenetic changes, and metabolic dysregulation.
Currently, there are two IDH inhibitors approved for the treatment of AML by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). These are AG-120 (ivosidenib, TIBSOVO®) for mIDH1 and AG-221 (enasidenib, IDHIFA®) for mIDH2.2,3 Others under investigation include IDH305 for mIDH1 and AG-881 for both IDH1 and IDH2 inhibition.
Bin Fan et al. identified that ivosidenib effectively inhibits 2-HG in patients with mIDH1 AML with a reduction to normal plasma 2-HG levels in the majority of patients, at all doses. The study also supported once-daily oral dosing (QD).4
In a first-in-human phase I/II study (NCT01915498), patients with advanced myeloid malignancies with IDH2 mutations were enrolled into the dose escalation phase. Patients were given cumulative daily doses of 50–650 mg of enasidenib in continuous 28-day cycles. This identified the optimal dose of 100 mg, daily, with no maximum tolerated dose (MTD) reached. This study then moved into the expansion phase, recruiting patients predominantly with relapsed/refractory (R/R) mIDH2 AML.5 The updated results from this study were presented by Dr. DiNardo and are shown in Table 1 below, in patients with R/R AML.6
Table 1: Efficacy of enasidenib in R/R AML
|
Enasidenib, 100 mg/day (n = 214) |
---|---|
Overall response rate (ORR) |
83 (38.8%) |
Complete remission (CR) + CR with incomplete hematologic recovery/CR with incomplete platelet recovery (CRi/CRp) |
62 (29%) |
Best response: CR CRi/CRp Partial remission (PR) Morphologic leukemia-free state (MLFS) Stable disease (SD) Progressive disease (PD) Not evaluable (NE) |
42 (19.6%) 20 (9.3%) 9 (4.2%) 12 (5.6%) 98 (45.8%) 19 (8.9%) 3 (1.4%) |
Overall survival (OS) (n = 280) Median OS Median OS with CR (n = 42) Median OS with non-CR response Median OS with NR |
8.8 months (7.7–9.6) 22.9 months 10.6 months 5.6 months |
In a paper by Michael D. Amatangelo et al. the impact of co-occurring mutations on response to treatment with enasidenib was investigated. In this study, fewer co-occurring mutations were observed in patients achieving a response (≥PR or CR). The ORR of patients with a low mutational burden (≤ 3 co-occurring mutations) (n = 27) was 70.4% compared to 21.9% in patients with a high mutational burden (≥ 6 co-occurring mutations) (n = 32). Additionally, NRAS mutations were found to be significantly correlated with CR rates (P = 0.0114).7
In the first-in-human phase I study (NCT02074839) of ivosidenib in patients with mIDH1, patients with advanced hematologic malignancies with mIDH were recruited for a dose escalation phase. Patients were treated with 100 mg twice daily (BID) or 300 mg, 500 mg, 800 mg or 1200 mg QD. The MTD was not reached. The optimal dose, however, was found to be 500 mg QD. An expansion cohort of patients with mIDH1 R/R AML, untreated AML or non-AML mIDH1 advanced hematologic malignancies were treated with this dose.8
Table 2 shows the results presented by Dr. DiNardo in patients with R/R AML with a median of 2 prior therapies.1
Table 2: Efficacy of ivosidenib in R/R AML
|
Ivosidenib, 500 mg/day (n = 179) |
---|---|
Overall response rate (ORR) (95% CI) |
75 (41.9%, 34.6–49.5) |
CR + CR with partial hematologic recovery (CRh) (95% CI) |
57 (31.8%, 25.1–39.2) |
Best response: CR CRi/CRp MLFS SD PD Not assessed (NA) |
43 (24.0%) 21 (11.7%) 11 (6.1%) 68 (38.0%) 15 (8.4%) 21 (11.7%) |
OS Median OS Median OS with CR/CRh Median OS with non-CR/CRh responders Median OS in non-responders |
9 months (7–10) 18.8 months 9 months 5 months |
Further studies evaluating the impact of the depth of response have been conducted. These include an investigation by Daniel A. Pollea et al. where patients treated with ivosidenib who had deeper clearance of IDH1, as detected by digital polymerase chain reaction, had an improved OS. In this study, this was not statistically significant due to the small sample size 9
In a study by Lynn Quek et al. clonal heterogeneity was examined in patients with mIDH2 AML treated with enasidenib. At relapse, in patients who had acquired resistance to enasidenib, no second-site IDH2 mutations were detected. However, investigators observed seven patterns of clonal evolution/selection indicating these were the main mechanisms of acquired resistance.
Additionally, by measuring 2-HG levels in sixteen patients at diagnosis and relapse, it was observed that fourteen of these remained suppressed between best response and relapse. In most patients, therefore, relapsed clones did not appear to be dependent upon mIDH2 with enasidenib remaining on-target. In the two patients whose 2-HG levels increased, mutations in IDH1 were observed, which, prior to treatment, were not detectable using next-generation sequencing. This indicated IDH1 mutations were present in mIDH2 clones with isoform switching another relapse mechanism.
Another regimen being investigated is using IDH inhibitors in combination treatments. Current studies utilizing these strategies include ivosidenib/enasidenib with azacitidine or with standard chemotherapy, such as cytarabine and daunorubicin or idarubicin.
Dr. DiNardo presented the results from this study, as shown in Table 3 below.
Table 3: Results of phase Ib studies: the efficacy of IDH inhibitor combination treatments
|
Ivosidenib + AZA (n = 23) |
Enasidenib + AZA (n = 6) |
---|---|---|
ORR |
18 (78%) |
4 (67%) |
CR |
13 (57%) |
3 (50%) |
CRi/CRp |
3 (13%) |
0 (0%) |
PR |
0 (0%) |
0 (0%) |
MLFS |
2 (9%) |
1 (17%) |
Median time to first response |
1.8 months (0.7–3.8) |
- |
Median time to best response |
3.6 months (0.8–6.7) |
- |
Median duration of response |
Not reached |
- |
The ivosidenib cohort has now been progressed into a multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized, phase III study investigating invosidenib versus placebo with AZA in previously untreated patients with AML with IDH1 mutations (AGILE, NCT03173248). The enasidenib phase II study is still currently enrolling.
All data given as ivosidenib versus enasidenib
Dr. DiNardo presented the results from this study, as shown in Table 4 below.
Table 4: Results of phase I study of induction + ivosidenib or enasidenib. Data cut-off 01 Aug 2018.
|
Ivosidenib + chemotherapy (n = 49) |
Enasidenib + chemotherapy (n = 89) |
---|---|---|
CR + CRi/CRp CR CRi/CRp MLFS PT Treatment failure |
39 (80%) 35 (71%) 4 (8%) 3 (6%) 1 (2%) 6 (12%) |
64 (72%) 50 (56%) 14 (16%) 11 (12%) 1 (1%) 13 (15%) |
Measurable residual disease (MRD)-negative (CR/CRi/CRp best response group) |
15 (88%) (n = 17) |
9 (45%) (n = 20) |
Median follow-up (months) |
9.4 |
11.2 |
Estimated 12-month OS after induction day 1 (%) |
79 |
75 |
Median OS (months) |
Not estimable |
Not estimable |
A phase III study, HOVON 150/ AMLSG 29-18, stratifying patients by mIDH status aims to recruit approximately a thousand patients with AML who are eligible for intensive chemotherapy at the end of 2018. The study will determine the efficacy of enasidenib or ivosidenib with chemotherapy versus placebo treatment. The induction treatment is two cycles of 7+3 and enasidenib (mIDH2) or ivosidenib (mIDH1) versus 7+3 and placebo. This is followed by consolidation chemotherapy (1 or 3 cycles) and allo- or auto-hematopoeitic stem cell transplant (HSCT). The maintenance phase will be enasidenib (mIDH2) or ivosidenib (mIDH1) versus placebo.14
A phase Ib/II study investigating the combination of ivosidenib and venetoclax with and without AZA. The primary endpoints of the study will be safety, tolerability, MTD and recommended phase II dose of ivosidenib + venetoclax +/- AZA. Ivosidenib (500 mg QD) will be administered continuously from day 15 with the venetoclax dose as per protocol, on days 1–14 per 28-day cycle and AZA (75 mg/m2 on days 1–7) as per protocol. In the phase I cohort, dosing will be:
Patients with IDH1 or IDH2 mutant R/R AML can be treated with the oral agents, ivosidenib, and enasidenib, which are safe and effective as single-agent therapy. However, it is expected that combining these with other regimens, such as 7+3 and AZA, will improve responses and durability. Studies combining these with targeted therapies, such as FLT3i, will also be undertaken, or are ongoing, to investigate any additional benefit.
Your opinion matters
Subscribe to get the best content related to AML delivered to your inbox