This research is being done to assess the therapeutic activity of a promising combination (azacitidine and venetoclax) versus conventional cytotoxic chemotherapy in induction-eligible patients with acute myeloid leukemia. This study involves the following: * Venetoclax and azacitidine (investigational combination) * Cytarabine and idarubicin or daunorubicin (per standard of care) or Liposomal daunorubicin and cytarabine (per standard of care)
This is an open-label, multicenter, phase II randomized clinical trial to compare the therapeutic activity of conventional induction chemotherapy (7+3 regimen or liposomal daunorubicin and cytarabine) to the combination of venetoclax and azacitidine among fit, traditionally induction-eligible adults with newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia (AML). The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved the combinations of liposomal daunorubicin and cytarabine as well as cytarabine and idarubicin or daunorubicin as treatment options for acute myeloid leukemia (AML) The FDA has approved the combination of venetoclax and azacitidine for people with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) that are over the age of 75 or who have comorbidities that preclude intensive induction chemotherapy. Venetoclax may interact with BCL-2 (a protein that initiates tumor growth, disease progression, and drug resistance) and inhibit BLC-2 which can lead to cancer cell death. Azacitidine may cause cell death in rapidly dividing cells, which may lead to cancer cell death since cancer cells do not grow at a normal rate. Induction Chemotherapy which includes the drugs idarubicin or daunorubicin, cytarabine, and liposomal daunorubicin and cytarabine is the standard of care chemotherapy treatment for someone with acute myeloid leukemia (AML). The research study procedures include screening for eligibility and study treatment, including evaluations and follow up visits. Participants will receive study treatment for as long as they and their doctor believe they are benefitting from the study drugs. Participants will then be followed for 3 years or until they withdraw their consent to be contacted. It is expected that about 172 people will take part in this research study. AbbVie, a biopharmaceutical company, is supporting this research study by providing funding for the study, including one of the study drugs.
Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE
Enrollment
172
Intravenous infusion
Intravenous infusion
Intravenous infusion
City of Hope
Duarte, California, United States
Stanford Cancer Center
Palo Alto, California, United States
University of California - Davis
Sacramento, California, United States
Event free survival
Primary endpoint is event-free-survival of patients treated with venetoclax and azacitidine compared to patients treated with standard induction with either 7+3 regimen or liposomal daunorubicin and cytarabine Events are described in the protocol and will include * Progressive Disease as defined above * Any change in therapy due to leukemic persistence. * Transition to hospice * Relapse following CR, CRi, or CRh * Any death Assessments of differences in EFS between the randomized arms will be made with the log-rank test; modeling will employ the Cox proportional hazards model. We also plan to assess the difference in estimated EFS at one year, using Kaplan-Meier estimates with standard deviation calculated by Greenwood's formula. EFS will be assessed using the Kaplan-Meier method. EFS will be assessed with the log-rank test, and cox proportional hazards model when appropriate.
Time frame: From the time from randomization to time for up to 3 years, per protocol.
Rate of response
Evaluated overall and separately for patients with primary and secondary AML, comparisons will be based on the Fisher exact test. CR and CRi will be assessed. Study also includes CRh as a possible response, CRh aims to describe marrow blast clearance and evidence of partial hematologic recovery not captured by current CR or CRi, criteria.
Time frame: From the time from randomization to time for up to 6 months.
Treatment-related toxicity
Assessed using CTCAE 5
Time frame: Enrollment to end of treatment duration for up to 12 months.
Rate of Minimal Residual Disease (MRD) negativity
Assessed by flow cytometry and next-generation sequencing
Time frame: From time of enrollment until up to the first 6 months.
30-day mortality
Analyzed using the Kaplan Meier method.
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.
Intravenous infusion
Orally by mouth
Intravenous infusion
Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center
Boston, Massachusetts, United States
Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center
Boston, Massachusetts, United States
Dana-Farber Cancer Institute
Boston, Massachusetts, United States
Atrium Health Levine Cancer Institute
Charlotte, North Carolina, United States
Ohio State University Medical Center
Columbus, Ohio, United States
University of Pennsylvania
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States
Time frame: From the time of start of therapy until through the first 30 days.
60-day mortality
Analyzed using the Kaplan Meier method.
Time frame: From the time of start of therapy until through the first 60 days.
Overall survival (OS)
Survival will be summarized using the method of Kaplan Meier, and assessed using the log rank test and Cox proportional hazards when appropriate.
Time frame: Overall Survival (OS) is defined as the time from randomization (or registration) to death due to any cause, or censored at date last known alive, or for up to 3 years.
Rate of stem cell transplantation (SCT) following induction
The proportion of patients that receive a hematopoietic stem cell transplant following induction therapy or consolidation/continuation therapy.
Time frame: From time of enrollment until up to 3 years following start of treatment.
Patient reported quality of life (QOL)
To compare quality of life between the two groups using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Leukemia (FACT-Leuk). the FACT-Leukemia ranges from 0-176 with higher scores indicating better quality of life
Time frame: up to one year
Patient-reported depression symptoms
To compare depression symptoms between the two groups using the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS-Depression). the HADS-depression ranges from 0 (no distress) to 21 (maximum distress) with higher scores indicating worse depression symptoms
Time frame: up to one year
Patient-reported anxiety symptoms
To compare anxiety symptoms between the two groups using the Hospital Anxieyt and Depression Scale (HADS-Anxiety). the HADS-Anxiety ranges from 0 (no distress) to 21 (maximum distress) with higher scores indicating worse anxiety symptoms
Time frame: up to one year
Patient-reported symptom burden
To compare symptom burden between the two groups using the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS-revised). ESAS ranges from 0-100 with higher scores indicating worse symptom burden
Time frame: up to one year
Patient-reported post-traumatic stress symptoms
To compare post-traumatic stress (PTSD) symptoms between the two groups using the PTSD-Checklist-Civilian Version. The PTSD-Checklist ranges from 17-85 with higher scores indicating worse PTSD symptoms
Time frame: up to one year
Health care utilization - hospitalizations
To compare number of hospitalizations between the two groups using linear regression (and adjusting for any potential imbalances between the groups
Time frame: up to 1 year
Health care utilization - days alive and out of the hospital
To compare days alive and out of the hospital between the two groups using linear regression (and adjusting for any potential imbalances between the groups)
Time frame: up to 1 year
Health care utilization - Intensive care unit admissions
To compare intensive care unit admissions (yes vs. no) between the two groups using logistic regression (and adjusting for any potential imbalances between the groups)
Time frame: up to 1 year
Cost of care
To compare cost of care between the two groups using parametric and non-parametric tests based on distribution of the data
Time frame: up to 1 year
Incidence of neutropenic infections
Number of patients that experience neutropenic fever during induction cycles (up to 2 cycles).
Time frame: Up to 8 weeks
100-Day post-transplant mortality
Assessed using the Kaplan Meier method
Time frame: From date of transplantation through 100 days following transplantation.
Incidence of grade 3 or greater acute graft versus host disease (GVHD)
Assessed among patients that receive HSCT following induction.
Time frame: Patients that receive a SCT will be followed post-SCT through up to 100 days.