Overall survival of myelodysplastic syndrome patients after azacitidine discontinuation and applicability of the North American MDS Consortium scoring system in clinical practice.
azacitidine
myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS)
prognostic scoring system
Journal
Cancer
ISSN: 1097-0142
Titre abrégé: Cancer
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0374236
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
15 06 2021
15 06 2021
Historique:
revised:
07
12
2020
received:
20
10
2020
accepted:
16
12
2020
pubmed:
20
3
2021
medline:
8
3
2022
entrez:
19
3
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Azacitidine (AZA) is the standard treatment for myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS); however, many patients prematurely stop therapy and have a dismal outcome. The authors analyzed outcomes after AZA treatment for 402 MDS patients consecutively enrolled in the Italian MDS Registry of the Fondazione Italiana Sindromi Mielodisplastiche, and they evaluated the North American MDS Consortium scoring system in a clinical practice setting. At treatment discontinuation, 20.3% of the patients were still responding to AZA, 35.4% of the cases had primary resistance, and 44.3% developed adaptive resistance. Overall survival (OS) was better for patients who discontinued treatment while in response because of planned allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT; median OS, not reached) in comparison with patients with primary resistance (median OS, 4 months) or adaptive resistance (median OS, 5 months) or patients responsive but noncompliant/intolerant to AZA (median OS, 4 months; P = .004). After AZA discontinuation, 309 patients (77%) received best supportive care (BSC), 60 (15%) received active treatments, and 33 (8%) received HSCT. HSCT was associated with a significant survival advantage, regardless of the response to AZA. The North American MDS Consortium scoring system was evaluable in 278 of the 402 cases: patients at high risk had worse OS than patients at low risk (3 and 7 months, respectively; P < .001). The score was predictive of survival both in patients receiving BSC (median OS, 2 months for high-risk patients vs 5 months for low-risk patients) and in patients being actively treated (median OS, 8 months for high-risk patients vs 16 months for low-risk patients; P < .001), including transplant patients. Real-life data confirm that this prognostic scoring system for MDS patients failing a hypomethylating agent seems to be a useful tool for optimal prognostic stratification and for choosing a second-line treatment after AZA discontinuation.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Azacitidine (AZA) is the standard treatment for myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS); however, many patients prematurely stop therapy and have a dismal outcome.
METHODS
The authors analyzed outcomes after AZA treatment for 402 MDS patients consecutively enrolled in the Italian MDS Registry of the Fondazione Italiana Sindromi Mielodisplastiche, and they evaluated the North American MDS Consortium scoring system in a clinical practice setting.
RESULTS
At treatment discontinuation, 20.3% of the patients were still responding to AZA, 35.4% of the cases had primary resistance, and 44.3% developed adaptive resistance. Overall survival (OS) was better for patients who discontinued treatment while in response because of planned allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT; median OS, not reached) in comparison with patients with primary resistance (median OS, 4 months) or adaptive resistance (median OS, 5 months) or patients responsive but noncompliant/intolerant to AZA (median OS, 4 months; P = .004). After AZA discontinuation, 309 patients (77%) received best supportive care (BSC), 60 (15%) received active treatments, and 33 (8%) received HSCT. HSCT was associated with a significant survival advantage, regardless of the response to AZA. The North American MDS Consortium scoring system was evaluable in 278 of the 402 cases: patients at high risk had worse OS than patients at low risk (3 and 7 months, respectively; P < .001). The score was predictive of survival both in patients receiving BSC (median OS, 2 months for high-risk patients vs 5 months for low-risk patients) and in patients being actively treated (median OS, 8 months for high-risk patients vs 16 months for low-risk patients; P < .001), including transplant patients.
CONCLUSIONS
Real-life data confirm that this prognostic scoring system for MDS patients failing a hypomethylating agent seems to be a useful tool for optimal prognostic stratification and for choosing a second-line treatment after AZA discontinuation.
Substances chimiques
Antimetabolites, Antineoplastic
0
Azacitidine
M801H13NRU
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
2015-2024Subventions
Organisme : Celgene
Informations de copyright
© 2021 American Cancer Society.
Références
Fenaux P, Mufti GJ, Hellström-Lindberg E, et al. Azacitidine prolongs overall survival compared with conventional care regimens in elderly patients with low bone marrow blast count acute myeloid leukemia. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28:562-569.
Cabrero M, Jabbour E, Ravandi F, et al. Discontinuation of hypomethylating agent therapy in patients with myelodysplastic syndromes or acute myelogenous leukemia in complete remission or partial response: retrospective analysis of survival after long-term follow-up. Leuk Res. 2015;39:520-524.
Prébet T, Gore SD, Esterni B, et al. Outcome of high-risk myelodysplastic syndrome after azacitidine treatment failure. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29:3322-3327.
Prébet T, Thepot S, Gore SD, et al. Outcome of patients with low-risk myelodysplasia after azacitidine treatment failure. Haematologica. 2013;98:e18.
Lee JH, Choi Y, Kim SD, et al. Clinical outcome after failure of hypomethylating therapy for myelodysplastic syndrome. Eur J Haematol. 2015;94:546-553.
Duong VH, Lin K, Reljic T, et al. Poor outcome of patients with myelodysplastic syndrome after azacitidine treatment failure. Clin Lymphoma Myeloma Leuk. 2013;13:711-715.
Jabbour EJ, Garcia-Manero G, Strati P, et al. Outcome of patients with low-risk and intermediate-1-risk myelodysplastic syndrome after hypomethylating agent failure: a report on behalf of the MDS Clinical Research Consortium. Cancer. 2015;121:876-882.
Nazha A, Komrokji RS, Garcia-Manero G, et al. The efficacy of current prognostic models in predicting outcome of patients with myelodysplastic syndromes at the time of hypomethylating agent failure. Haematologica. 2016;101:e224-e227.
Nazha A, Sekeres MA, Komrokji R, et al. Validation of a post-hypomethylating agent failure prognostic model in myelodysplastic syndromes patients treated in a randomized controlled phase III trial of rigosertib vs. best supportive care. Blood Cancer J. 2017;7:644.
Prebet T, Fenaux P, Vey N; Groupe Francophone des Myelodysplasies. Predicting outcome of patients with myelodysplastic syndromes after failure of azacitidine: validation of the North American MDS Consortium scoring system. Haematologica. 2016;101:e427-e428.
Kotsianidis I, Papageorgiou SG, Pappa V, et al. Azacytidine failure revisited: an appraisal based on real-life data from the MDS registry of the Hellenic Myelodysplastic Syndrome Study Group (HMDS). Mediterr J Hematol Infect Dis. 2019;11:e2019045.
Cheson BD, Greenberg PL, Bennett JM, et al. Clinical application and proposal for modification of the International Working Group (IWG) response criteria in myelodysplasia. Blood. 2006;108:419-425.
Vardiman JW, Thiele J, Arber DA, et al. The 2008 revision of the World Health Organization (WHO) classification of myeloid neoplasms and acute leukemia: rationale and important changes. Blood. 2009;114:937-951.
Greenberg P, Cox C, LeBeau MM, et al. International scoring system for evaluating prognosis in myelodysplastic syndromes. Blood. 1997;89:2079-2088.
Musto P, Maurillo L, Spagnoli A, et al. Azacitidine for the treatment of lower risk myelodysplastic syndromes: a retrospective study of 74 patients enrolled in an Italian named patient program. Cancer. 2010;116:1485-1494.
Itzykson R, Thépot S, Quesnel B, et al. Prognostic factors for response and overall survival in 282 patients with higher-risk myelodysplastic syndromes treated with azacitidine. Blood. 2011;117:403-411.
Girmenia C, Candoni A, Delia M, et al. Infection control in patients with myelodysplastic syndromes who are candidates for active treatment: expert panel consensus-based recommendations. Blood Rev. 2019;34:16-25.
DellaPorta MG, Jackson CH, Alessandrino EP, et al. Decision analysis of allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation for patients with myelodysplastic syndrome stratified according to the revised International Prognostic Scoring System. Leukemia. 2017;31:2449-2457.
Varaldo R, Raiola AM, Di Grazia C, et al. Haploidentical bone marrow transplantation in patients with advanced myelodysplastic syndrome. Am J Hematol. 2017;92:E117-E119.
Santini V. How I treat MDS after hypomethylating agent failure. Blood. 2019;133:521-529.
Papaemmanuil E, Gerstung M, Malcovati L, et al. Clinical and biological implications of driver mutations in myelodysplastic syndromes. Blood. 2013;122:3616-3627; quiz 3699.
Bejar R, Stevenson K, Abdel-Wahab O, et al. Clinical effect of point mutations in myelodysplastic syndromes. N Engl J Med. 2011;364:2496-2506.
Crisà E, Kulasekararaj AG, Adema V, et al. Impact of somatic mutations in myelodysplastic patients with isolated partial or total loss of chromosome 7. Leukemia. 2020;34:2441-2450.
Bewersdorf JP, Zeidan AM. Management of higher risk myelodysplastic syndromes after hypomethylating agents failure: are we about to exit the black hole? Expert Rev Hematol. 2020;13:1131-1142.