This study enrolled 472 participants, aged 55 or older, with a diagnosis of de novo acute myeloid leukemia (AML) or AML secondary to prior myelodysplastic disease or chronic myelomonocytic leukemia (CMML), and who have achieved first complete remission (CR)/ complete remission with incomplete blood count recovery (CRi) following induction with or without consolidation chemotherapy. The study is amended to include an extension phase (EP). The EP allows participants who are currently receiving oral azacitidine and who are demonstrating clinical benefit as assessed by the investigator, to continue receiving oral azacitidine after unblinding by sponsor until the participant meets the criteria for study discontinuation or until oral azacitidine becomes commercially available and reimbursed. In addition, all participants in the placebo arm and participants who had been discontinued from the treatment phase (irrespective of randomization arm) and continuing in the follow-up phase will be followed for survival in the EP.
This is an international, multicenter, placebo-controlled, Phase 3 study with a double-blind, randomized, parallel-group design in subjects with de novo AML or AML secondary to prior diagnosis of myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) or chronic myelomonocytic leukemia (CMML) aged ≥ 55 years, who are in first CR/CRi following induction therapy with or without consolidation chemotherapy. The study consists of 3 phases; the pre-randomization phase (screening phase), the treatment phase, and the follow-up phase. The study is amended to include an extension phase (EP). The EP allows participants who are currently receiving oral azacitidine and who are demonstrating clinical benefit as assessed by the Investigator, to continue receiving oral azacitidine after unblinding by sponsor until they meet the criteria for study discontinuation or until oral azacitidine becomes commercially available and reimbursed. In addition, all participants in the placebo arm and participants who had been discontinued from the treatment phase (irrespective of randomization arm) and continuing in the follow-up phase will be followed for survival in the EP.
Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
QUADRUPLE
Enrollment
472
300 mg oral azacitidine on days 1 to 14 of each 28-day treatment cycle.
Identically matching placebo tablets on days 1 to 14 of each 28-day treatment cycle.
Arizona Oncology Associates, P.C.
Phoenix, Arizona, United States
Providence St Joseph Medical Center Cancer Center
Burbank, California, United States
City Of Hope
Duarte, California, United States
University of California San Francisco Fresno Campus
Fresno, California, United States
University of Southern California Norris Cancer Center
Los Angeles, California, United States
Kaplan-Meier (K-M) Estimate for Overall Survival (OS)
Overall survival was defined as time from randomization to death from any cause; participants surviving at the end of the follow-up period, or who withdraw consent, or who were lost to follow up were censored at the date last known alive.
Time frame: Day 1 (randomization) up to data cut off date of 15 July 2019; median follow-up for OS estimated by the reverse K-M method was 41.2 months for all participants.
Kaplan-Meier Estimate of Relapse Free Survival (RFS)
RFS was defined as the time from the date of randomization to the date of documented relapse or death from any cause, whichever occurred first. Participants who were still alive without documented relapse, or who were lost to follow-up or withdrew consent without documented relapse, were censored at the date of their last bone marrow assessment, prior to receiving any other therapy for AML. Documented relapse was defined as the earliest date of the following: • ≥ 5% bone marrow blasts (myeloblasts) from Central Pathology report, or • appearance of \> 0% blasts in the peripheral blood with a later bone marrow confirmation (bone marrow blast \[myeloblasts\] ≥ 5%) within 100 days, or • at least 2 peripheral blasts ≥ 5% within 30 days.
Time frame: From day 1 (randomization) up to data cut off date of 06 August 2024; approximately 135.5 months
Kaplan-Meier Estimate of Time to Relapse
Time to relapse was defined as the interval (in months) from the date of randomization to the date of documented relapse. Estimates of relapse rate were based on the cumulative incidence function from a competing risk analysis with death as a competing risk for relapse from complete remission (CR)/ complete remission with incomplete blood count recovery (CRi). Documented relapse was defined as, the earliest date of the following: • ≥ 5% bone marrow blasts (myeloblasts) from Central Pathology report, or • appearance of \> 0% blasts in the peripheral blood with a later bone marrow confirmation (bone marrow blast \[myeloblasts\] ≥ 5%) within 100 days, or • at least 2 peripheral blasts ≥ 5% within 30 days.
Time frame: From day 1 (randomization) up to data cut off date of 06 August 2024; approximately 135.5 months
Kaplan-Meier Estimates of Time to Discontinuation From Treatment
Time to discontinuation from treatment was assessed and defined as the interval from the date of randomization to the date of discontinuation from study drug. Participants who were receiving treatment at the time of study closure were censored at the date of last visit. Estimates of relapse rate were based on the cumulative incidence function from a competing risk analysis with death as a competing risk for relapse from CR/ CRi.
Time frame: From day 1 (randomization) up to data cut off date of 06 August 2024; approximately 135.5 months
Number of Participants With Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs)
TEAEs include AEs that started between first dose date and 28 days after the last dose of study drug. A serious adverse event (SAE) is: • Death • Life-threatening event • Inpatient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization • Persistent or significant disability or incapacity • Congenital anomaly or birth defect • Other important medical event The severity of AEs were assessed by the investigator according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) Version 4.0: Grade 1 (Mild): asymptomatic/mild symptoms; clinical or diagnostic observations only; intervention not indicated. Grade 2 (Moderate): minimal, local or noninvasive intervention indicated; limiting age-appropriate activities of daily living. Grade 3: Severe or medically significant but not immediately life-threatening; hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization indicated; disabling; limiting self care Grade 4: Life-threatening; urgent intervention indicated. Grade 5: Death due to AE.
Time frame: From day 1 (randomization) up to data cut off date of 06 August 2024; approximately 135.5 months
Mean Change in the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT-Fatigue Scale V 4.0) Score From Baseline
The functional assessment of chronic illness therapy (FACIT-Fatigue Scale V 4.0) is a subscale of the FACIT-F and has been validated in the oncology setting. The FACIT-Fatigue Scale is a short, 13-item, self-administered tool that measures the level of fatigue in an individual during usually daily activities over the past week. The level of fatigue is measured on a 5-point Likert scale (0 = not at all; 4 = very much. The scores range from 0 to 52, with higher scores indicating less fatigue. If there were missing items, but the participant answered at least 50% of the items, then subscores were prorated.
Time frame: From day 1 (randomization) up to data cut off date of 06 August 2024; approximately 135.5 months
Mean Change in the European Quality of Life-Five Dimensions-Three Levels (EQ-5D-3L) Score From Baseline
The EQ-5D-3L is a self-administered questionnaire consisting of 5 questions, pertaining to specific health dimensions (ie, mobility, self-care, pain, usual activities, and anxiety/depression) and a health status scale. Each question has 3 levels of severity, corresponding to no problems, moderate problems and severe problems. Canadian population sample weights were used to derive health utility scores. A higher utility score represents a better health state. A clinically meaningful improvement or worsening was defined as at least 0.08 points of improvement or 0.10 points of worsening from baseline, respectively, for the EQ-5D-3L Health Utility Index. The instrument is scored using the United Kingdom (UK) index ranges from -0.594 to 1, where 0 equates to death and 1 equates to full health; -0.594 is considered 'worse than death'.
Time frame: From day 1 (randomization) up to data cut off date of 06 August 2024; approximately 135.5 months
Time to Definitive Clinically Meaningful Deterioration for ≥ 2 Consecutive Visits as Measured Using the EQ-5D HRQoL Scale
Clinically meaningful deterioration was defined at least 0.10 point of deterioration from baseline for at least 2 consecutive visits for the EQ-5D Health Utility Index. The EQ-5D-3L is a self-administered questionnaire consisting of 5 questions, pertaining to specific health dimensions (ie, mobility, self-care, pain, usual activities, and anxiety/depression) and a health status scale. Each question has 3 levels of severity, corresponding to no problems, moderate problems and severe problems. Canadian population sample weights were used to derive health utility scores. A higher utility score represents a better health state. A clinically meaningful improvement or worsening was defined as at least 0.08 points of improvement or 0.10 points of worsening from baseline, respectively, for the EQ-5D-3L Health Utility Index. The EQ-5D-3L is scored using the UK index ranges from -0.594 to 1, where 0 equates to death and 1 equates to full health; -0.594 is considered 'worse than death'.
Time frame: From day 1 (randomization) up to data cut off date of 15 July 2019; approximately 74 months
Healthcare Resource Utilization (HRU): Rate of Hospital Events Per Person Year
HRU is defined as any consumption of healthcare resources directly or indirectly related to the treatment of the patient. HRU is a key component to understand treatment costs and budget impact of new treatments from a provider perspective.
Time frame: From day 1 (randomization) up to data cut off date of 06 August 2024; approximately 135.5 months
Healthcare Resource Utilization (HRU): Number of Days Hospitalized Per Person-Year
HRU is defined as any consumption of healthcare resources directly or indirectly related to the treatment of the patient. HRU is a key component to understand treatment costs and budget impact of new treatments from a provider perspective.
Time frame: From day 1 (randomization) up to data cut off date of 06 August 2024; approximately 135.5 months
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.
Local Institution - 006
Los Angeles, California, United States
Local Institution - 050
Orange, California, United States
Sharp Memorial Hospital
San Diego, California, United States
Stanford Cancer Center
Stanford, California, United States
Innovative Clinical Research Institute
Whittier, California, United States
...and 213 more locations