Lenalidomide-Epoetin Alfa Versus Lenalidomide Monotherapy in Myelodysplastic Syndromes Refractory to Recombinant Erythropoietin
Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology. 2021;:Jco2001691
PURPOSE Impaired response to erythropoietin underlies ineffective erythropoiesis and anemia in myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS). We investigated whether treatment with lenalidomide (LEN), which augments erythropoietin receptor signaling in vitro, can restore and improve hemoglobin response to epoetin (EPO) alfa in patients with lower-risk, non-del(5q) MDS who have anemia that is refractory to or have low probability of benefit from treatment with recombinant erythropoietin. METHODS In a phase III, US intergroup trial, we randomly assigned patients to receive either LEN and EPO alfa or LEN alone following stratification by serum erythropoietin concentration and prior erythropoietin treatment. RESULTS A total of 195 evaluable patients were randomly assigned: 99 patients to the LEN-EPO alfa cohort and 96 to LEN alone. After four cycles of treatment, the primary end point of major erythroid response (MER) was significantly higher (28.3%) with the combination compared with LEN alone (11.5%) (P = .004). Among 136 patients who completed 16 weeks of study treatment, 38.9% and 15.6% achieved MER, respectively (P = .004). Additionally, minor erythroid response was achieved in 18.2% and 20.8% of patients, for an overall erythroid response rate of 46.5% versus 32.3%. Among LEN nonresponders, 38 crossed over to the addition of EPO alfa with 10 patients (26.3%) achieving a MER. Responses to the combined treatment were highly durable with a median MER duration of 23.8 months compared with 13 months with LEN alone. CONCLUSION LEN restores sensitivity to recombinant erythropoietin in growth factor-insensitive, lower-risk, non-del(5q) MDS, to yield a significantly higher rate and duration of MER compared with LEN alone (funded by the National Cancer Institute; E2905 ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02048813).
Azacitidine with or without eltrombopag for first-line treatment of intermediate- or high-risk MDS with thrombocytopenia
Azacitidine treatment for (MDS) generally exacerbates thrombocytopenia during the first treatment cycles. SUPPORT, a Phase III, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study (NCT02158936), investigated the platelet supportive effects of eltrombopag given concomitantly with azacitidine. IPSS intermediate-1, intermediate-2 or high-risk MDS patients with baseline platelets <75x10(9)/L were randomized 1:1 to eltrombopag (starting 200 mg/day [East Asians: 100 mg/day], maximum 300 mg/day [East Asians: 150 mg/day]) or placebo, plus azacitidine (75 mg/m(2) sc once daily for 7 days, every 28 days). Primary endpoint was the proportion of patients platelet transfusion-free during cycles 1-4 of azacitidine therapy. Based on planned interim analyses, an independent data monitoring committee recommended stopping the study prematurely as efficacy outcomes crossed the predefined futility threshold, and for safety reasons. At final termination, 28/179 (16%) eltrombopag and 55/177 (31%) placebo patients met the primary endpoint (OR 0.37; 95%CI 0.21, 0.65; two-sided P=0.001). Overall response (IWG criteria; complete, marrow or partial response) occurred in 20% and 35% of eltrombopag and placebo patients, respectively, by investigator assessment (OR 0.51; 95%CI 0.30, 0.86; nominal P=0.005). There was no difference in hematologic improvement in any cell lineage between the two arms. There was no improvement in overall survival (HR 1.42; 95%CI 0.97, 2.08; nominal P=0.164) or progression-free survival (HR 1.47; 95%CI 1.05, 2.07; nominal P=0.060). AEs with greater occurrence (≥10%) in the eltrombopag versus placebo arm were febrile neutropenia and diarrhea. Compared with azacitidine alone, eltrombopag plus azacitidine worsened platelet recovery, with lower response rates and a trend toward increased progression to AML.
Safety and tolerability of eltrombopag versus placebo for treatment of thrombocytopenia in patients with advanced myelodysplastic syndromes or acute myeloid leukaemia: a multicentre, randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind, phase 1/2 trial
The Lancet Haematology. 2015;2((10)):e417-26.
BACKGROUND Patients with myelodysplastic syndrome or acute myeloid leukaemia who are thrombocytopenic and unable to receive disease-modifying therapy have few treatment options. Platelet transfusions provide transient benefit and are limited by alloimmunisation. Eltrombopag, an oral thrombopoietin receptor agonist, increases platelet counts and has preclinical antileukaemic activity. We aimed to assess the safety and tolerability of eltrombopag for the treatment of thrombocytopenia in adult patients with advanced myelodysplastic syndrome, secondary acute myeloid leukaemia after myelodysplastic syndrome, or de-novo acute myeloid leukaemia. METHODS We did this multicentre, randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind, phase 1/2 trial at 37 centres in ten countries in Europe, east Asia, and the Americas. Patients aged 18 years or older who had relapsed or refractory disease or were ineligible for standard treatments; had platelet counts of less than 30 x 10(9) platelets per L; had 10-50% bone-marrow blasts; or were platelet transfusion dependent were randomly assigned (2:1), via a telephone-based interactive voice-response system (GlaxoSmithKline Registration and Medication Ordering System) with a permuted-block randomisation schedule (block size of three), to receive once-daily eltrombopag or matching placebo dose adjusted from 50 mg to a maximum dose of 300 mg. Randomisation was stratified by presence of poor-prognosis (complex) karyotype (presence of at least three abnormalities, or chromosome 7 abnormalities, vs absence) and bone-marrow blast count (<20% vs >20%). Patients and study personnel were masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was safety and tolerability, including adverse events, non-haematological laboratory grade 3-4 toxic effects, and changes in bone-marrow blast counts from baseline. Analysis was by intention to treat. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00903422. FINDINGS Between May 14, 2009, and May 9, 2013, we randomly assigned 98 patients to receive either eltrombopag (n=64) or placebo (n=34). 63 (98%) patients in the eltrombopag group and 32 (94%) patients in the placebo group had adverse events. The most common adverse events were pyrexia (27 [42%] vs 11 [32%]), nausea (20 [31%] vs 7 [21%]), diarrhoea (19 [30%] vs 6 [18%]), fatigue (16 [25%] vs 6 [18%]), decreased appetite (15 [23%] vs 5 [15%]), and pneumonia (14 [22%] vs 8 [24%]). Drug-related adverse events of grade 3 or higher were reported in six (9%) patients in the eltrombopag group and four (12%) patients in the placebo group. Increases in the proportion of peripheral blasts did not differ significantly between groups. Haemorrhage of grade 3 or higher was reported in ten (16%) patients given eltrombopag and nine (26%) patients given placebo. 21 (33%) patients receiving eltrombopag and 16 (47%) patients receiving placebo died while on treatment. No deaths in patients receiving eltrombopag and two deaths in patients receiving placebo were regarded as treatment related. Post-baseline bone-marrow examinations were done in 40 (63%) patients in the eltrombopag group and 17 (50%) patients in the placebo group. The most common reason for no examination was death before the scheduled 3 month assessment. There were no differences between median bone-marrow blast counts or proportions of peripheral blasts between groups. INTERPRETATION Eltrombopag doses up to 300 mg daily had an acceptable safety profile in patients with advanced myelodysplastic syndrome or acute myeloid leukaemia. The role of eltrombopag in these patients warrants further investigation. FUNDING GlaxoSmithKline.Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.