Discontinuation of imatinib in patients with chronic myeloid leukaemia who have maintained complete molecular remission for at least 2 years: the prospective, multicentre Stop Imatinib (STIM) trial.
Imatinib treatment significantly improves survival in patients with chronic myeloid leukaemia (CML), but little is known about whether treatment can safely be discontinued in the long term. We aimed to assess whether imatinib can be discontinued without occurrence of molecular relapse in patients in complete molecular remission (CMR) while on imatinib.
In our prospective, multicentre, non-randomised Stop Imatinib (STIM) study, imatinib treatment (of >2 years duration) was discontinued in patients with CML who were aged 18 years and older and in CMR (>5-log reduction in BCR-ABL and ABL levels and undetectable transcripts on quantitative RT-PCR). Patients who had undergone immunomodulatory treatment (apart from interferon α), treatment for other malignancies, or allogeneic haemopoietic stem-cell transplantation were not included. Patients were enrolled at 19 participating institutions in France. In this interim analysis, rate of relapse was assessed by use of RT-PCR for patients with at least 12 months of follow-up. Imatinib was reintroduced in patients who had molecular relapse. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00478985.
100 patients were enrolled between July 9, 2007, and Dec 17, 2009. Median follow-up was 17 months (range 1-30), and 69 patients had at least 12 months follow-up (median 24 months, range 13-30). 42 (61%) of these 69 patients relapsed (40 before 6 months, one patient at month 7, and one at month 19). At 12 months, the probability of persistent CMR for these 69 patients was 41% (95% CI 29-52). All patients who relapsed responded to reintroduction of imatinib: 16 of the 42 patients who relapsed showed decreases in their BCR-ABL levels, and 26 achieved CMR that was sustained after imatinib rechallenge.
Imatinib can be safely discontinued in patients with a CMR of at least 2 years duration. Imatinib discontinuation in this setting yields promising results for molecular relapse-free survival, raising the possibility that, at least in some patients, CML might be cured with tyrosine kinase inhibitors.
Mahon FX
，Réa D
，Guilhot J
，Guilhot F
，Huguet F
，Nicolini F
，Legros L
，Charbonnier A
，Guerci A
，Varet B
，Etienne G
，Reiffers J
，Rousselot P
，Intergroupe Français des Leucémies Myéloïdes Chroniques
... -
《-》
Molecular monitoring of imatinib in chronic myeloid leukemia patients in complete cytogenetic remission: does achievement of a stable major molecular response at any time point identify a privileged group of patients? A multicenter experience in Argentina
Monitoring minimal residual disease (MRD) by real-time quantitative polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) in chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) patients is mandatory in the era of tyrosine kinase inhibitors. Achieving a major molecular response (MMR) at 12 and 18 months predicts a better progression and event-free survival.
The objective of this prospective, multicentric study was to evaluate MRD by standardized RT-PCR in 178 patients with chronic-phase CML who were treated with imatinib at different institutions in Argentina and Uruguay and to determine if achievement of a stable MMR (BCR-ABL transcript levels < 0.1%) identifies a low-risk cytogenetic relapse group. The median age of the patients was 50 years, and 55% of them had received imatinib as first-line therapy. BCR-ABL transcript levels were measured after achievement of complete cytogenetic remission (CCyR) and at 6-month intervals.
MMR was detected in 44% patients at the start of the study. This value increased to 79% at month 36 of evaluation. Complete molecular response (CMR) also increased from 24% to 52% of patients. Not achieving a stable MMR determined a higher risk of cytogenetic relapse (9% of MMR patients not achieving an MMR vs. 1% of patients who achieved MMR). Patients with sustained MMR had a significantly better cytogenetic relapse-free survival at 48 months (97% vs. 87%; P = .008) but showed no differences in overall survival. Patients who did not remain in CCyR changed treatment.
A stable MMR is a strong predictor for a durable CCyR. Standardized molecular monitoring could replace cytogenetic analysis once CCyR is obtained. These results emphasize the validity and feasibility of molecular monitoring in all standardized medical centers of the world.
Pavlovsky C
，Giere I
，Moiraghi B
，Pavlovsky MA
，Aranguren PN
，García J
，Fernandez I
，Bengió R
，Milone J
，Labanca V
，Uriarte R
，Lombardi V
，Reinoso FG
，Magariños AE
，Martinez L
，Murro H
，Lastiri F
，Pavlovsky S
... -
《-》
Nilotinib versus imatinib for the treatment of patients with newly diagnosed chronic phase, Philadelphia chromosome-positive, chronic myeloid leukaemia: 24-month minimum follow-up of the phase 3 randomised ENESTnd trial.
Nilotinib has shown greater efficacy than imatinib in patients with newly diagnosed Philadelphia chromosome-positive chronic myeloid leukaemia (CML) in chronic phase after a minimum follow-up of 12 months. We present data from the Evaluating Nilotinib Efficacy and Safety in clinical Trials-newly diagnosed patients (ENESTnd) study after a minimum follow-up of 24 months.
ENESTnd was a phase 3, multicentre, open-label, randomised study. Adult patients were eligible if they had been diagnosed with chronic phase, Philadelphia chromosome-positive CML within the previous 6 months. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to receive nilotinib 300 mg twice a day, nilotinib 400 mg twice a day, or imatinib 400 mg once a day, all administered orally, by use of a computer-generated randomisation schedule, using permuted blocks, and stratified according to Sokal score. Efficacy results are reported for the intention-to-treat population. The primary endpoint was major molecular response at 12 months, defined as BCR-ABL transcript levels on the International Scale (BCR-ABL(IS)) of 0·1% or less by real-time quantitative PCR in peripheral blood. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00471497.
282 patients were randomly assigned to receive nilotinib 300 mg twice daily, 281 to receive nilotinib 400 mg twice daily, and 283 to receive imatinib. By 24 months, significantly more patients had a major molecular response with nilotinib than with imatinib (201 [71%] with nilotinib 300 mg twice daily, 187 [67%] with nilotinib 400 mg twice daily, and 124 [44%] with imatinib; p<0·0001 for both comparisons). Significantly more patients in the nilotinib groups achieved a complete molecular response (defined as a reduction of BCR-ABL(IS) levels to ≤0·0032%) at any time than did those in the imatinib group (74 [26%] with nilotinib 300 mg twice daily, 59 [21%] with nilotinib 400 mg twice daily, and 29 [10%] with imatinib; p<0·0001 for nilotinib 300 mg twice daily vs imatinib, p=0·0004 for nilotinib 400 mg twice daily vs imatinib). There were fewer progressions to accelerated or blast phase on treatment, including clonal evolution, in the nilotinib groups than in the imatinib group (two with nilotinib 300 mg twice daily, five with nilotinib 400 mg twice daily, and 17 with imatinib; p=0·0003 for nilotinib 300 mg twice daily vs imatinib, p=0·0089 for nilotinib 400 mg twice daily vs imatinib). At 24 months, survival was comparable in all treatment groups, but fewer CML-related deaths had occurred in both the nilotinib groups than in the imatinib group (five with nilotinib 300 mg twice daily, three with nilotinib 400 mg twice daily, and ten with imatinib). Overall, the only grade 3 or 4 non-haematological adverse events that occurred in at least 2·5% of patients were headache (eight [3%] with nilotinib 300 mg twice daily, four [1%] with nilotinib 400 mg twice daily, and two [<1%] with imatinib) and rash (two [<1%], seven [3%], and five [2%], respectively). Grade 3 or 4 neutropenia was more common with imatinib than with either dose of nilotinib (33 [12%] with nilotinib 300 mg twice daily, 30 [11%] with nilotinib 400 mg twice daily, and 59 [21%] with imatinib). Serious adverse events were reported in eight additional patients in the second year of the study (four with nilotinib 300 mg twice daily, three with nilotinib 400 mg twice daily, and one with imatinib).
Nilotinib continues to show better efficacy than imatinib for the treatment of patients with newly diagnosed CML in chronic phase. These results support nilotinib as a first-line treatment option for patients with newly diagnosed disease.
Novartis.
Kantarjian HM
，Hochhaus A
，Saglio G
，De Souza C
，Flinn IW
，Stenke L
，Goh YT
，Rosti G
，Nakamae H
，Gallagher NJ
，Hoenekopp A
，Blakesley RE
，Larson RA
，Hughes TP
... -
《-》
ResearchGate
(全网免费下载)
钛学术
(全网免费下载)
