Prospective assessment of measurable residual disease kinetics in intensively treated patients with Acute Myeloid Leukemia (AML) - results of the PALG-AML1/2016 study
Abstract
Abstract BACKGROUND: Measurable residual disease (MRD) is an important biomarker in AML. Detectable MRD (MRD+) after 2 cycles of intensive chemotherapy, at the end of consolidation and/or before allogeneic stem cell transplantation (alloHSCT) predicts relapse and shorter overall survival (OS) (Short NJ, JAMA Oncol. 2020). However, whether eradicating MRD through subsequent chemotherapy improves outcomes remains an open question. AIM: The aims of this analysis were to evaluate factors predictive of MRD- remission, the kinetics of multiparametric flow cytometry (MFC) MRD during post-remission treatment, and their influence on outcomes. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In the PALG-AML1/2016 phase 3 open-label randomized trial (NCT03257241), patients (pts) with newly-diagnosed, untreated AML, ECOG performance status 0–2 and HCT-CI≤ 3 were randomized to DA-90 (n=220) or DAC (n=219) induction chemotherapy (IC). Pts with >10% blasts in non-aplastic bone marrow at day 14 received early second IC. Pts with CR/CRi/CRp (cCR) were offered IDAC consolidation with or without alloSCT according to predefined risk groups. Serial samples for MRD assessment were collected at cCR after 1 or 2 IC (MRD1), and after each consolidation cycle (MRD2-4). MFC MRD evaluation using LAIP-based analysis was performed by local laboratories (n=16) and subsequently reviewed by an independent central reviewer. MRD was assessed according to ELN recommendations using the threshold of ≥0.1% for MRD positivity. RESULTS: Between 2017 and 2023, 439 pts, median (med) age 47 (18-60) years were enrolled at multiple centers across Poland and at Weill Cornell Medicine in New York City; 428 pts received initial IC and 51 (11.6%) received early second IC per protocol. The overall cCR rate after 1 or 2 IC was 72.4% with no difference between treatment arms (p=0.338). After med follow-up of 55.9m, 5-year OS was 50.6% (48.6% in DA-90 vs. 51.8% in DAC; HR 1.01 [0.77-1.33], p=0.921). Centrally reviewed MRD data were available for 173 (54.4%) pts in cCR after 1 or 2 induction cycles. Reasons for missing data included lack of LAIP (n=22), missing samples (n=9), inaccessible FCS files (n=60), and sample processing issues (n=54). The overall rate of cCR MRD negativity (MRD-) was 89.1% (89.4% vs. 88.9%; p=0.92 for DA-90 and DAC, respectively). 11/174 pts underwent alloSCT after IC and did not have MRD2 evaluation. Centrally reviewed results of both MRD1 and MRD2 were available for 131 pts. After 1st consolidation, 116/131 (89%) pts did not change MRD status; 109 pts remained MRD- and 7 (5.3%) remained MRD+. Conversion from MRD+ to MRD-was noted in 9 pts (6.9%) and from MRD- to MRD+ in 6 (4.6%) pts. FLT3-ITD mutation and complex karyotype were associated with lower probability to achieve MRD1- and MRD2- respectively in uni- and in multivariable analysis. OS was significantly impacted by MRD kinetics, with med OS not reached (NR) in MRD1-/MRD2-; 9.9 mos in MRD1-/MRD2+; NR in MRD1+/MRD2- and 27.8 mos in MRD1+/MRD2+ (p<0.01). MRD1-/MRD2+ conversion was associated with significantly shorter OS compared to other groups. Similarly, med RFS was NR in MRD1-/MRD2-, 3 mos in MRD1-/MRD2+, 14.5 mos in MRD1+/MRD2- and 9 mos in MRD1+/MRD2+ (p<0.001). As expected, significantly shorter RFS was observed in MRD1-/MRD2+ group, compared with MRD1-/MRD2- (p<0.001) and MRD1+/MRD2- (p<0.004) pts. In a multivariable models with time-varying alloSCT status, de novo AML (HR=0.28; p<0.001), higher baseline WBC (HR=1,01; p=0.046), ELN 2022 intermediate-risk group (HR=2.72; p<0.001), and MRD2+ (HR=2.32; p=0.034) were significant predictors of OS, while de novo AML (HR=0.32; p<0.001), baseline WBC (HR=1.01; p=0.005), ELN 2022 high (HR=2.62; p<0.001) or intermediate-risk group (HR=3.42; p<0.001), alloSCT in CR1 (HR=0.42; p<0.001) as well as MRD2+ (HR=2.05; p=0.012) were independent predictors for RFS. CONCLUSIONS: Data from PALG-AML1/2016 confirm the prognostic value of MRD after 1 consolidation for both OS and RFS. Loss of MRD negativity after consolidation 1 (early MRD relapse) is observed in a proportion of patients and is associated with significantly shorter OS and RFS.
Article Details
Authors (44)
Agnieszka Wierzbowska
15Department of Hematology, Medical University of Lodz, Lodz, Poland
Agnieszka Pluta
9Multidisciplinary Provincial Centre of Traumatology and Oncology Nicolas Copernicus in Lodz, Hematology, Łódź, Poland
Anna Czyz
46Clinic of Hematology, Cellular Therapies and Internal Medicine, Wrocław Medical University, Wrocław, Poland
Marta Libura
4Department of Hematology, Oncology and Internal Diseases, Medical University and University Hospital, Warsaw, Poland
Magdalena Czemerska
18Department of Hematology, Medical University of Lodz, Multidisciplinary Provincial Centre of Oncology and Traumatology, Lodz, Poland
Zuzanna Nowicka
2Multidisciplinary Provincial Centre of Traumatology and Oncology, Department of Hematology, Lodz, Poland
Agata Majchrzak
39Department of Experimental Hematology, Copernicus Memorial Hospital, Lodz, Poland
Michał Soin
1Medical University of Lodz, Department of Hematology, Lodz, Poland
Anna Kopińska
Krzysztof Wozniczka
6Medical University of Silesia, Department of Hematology, Katowice, Poland
Martyna Wlodarczyk
6Medical University of Silesia, Department of Hematology, Katowice, Poland
Grzegorz Helbig
Karol Wojcik
7Municipial Specialist Hospital, Department of Hematology, Cracow, Poland
Małgorzata Razny
7Municipial Specialist Hospital, Department of Hematology, Cracow, Poland
Marta Sobas
Donata Szymczak
3Medical University of Wroclaw, Wroclaw, Poland
Tomasz Wróbel
Andrzej Szczepaniak
42Medical University of Poznań, Department of Hematology and Bone Marrow Transplantation, Poznań, Poland
Lidia Gil
Magdalena Dutka
10Medical University of Gdansk, Department of Hematology, Gdansk, Poland
Maria Bieniaszewska
10Medical University of Gdansk, Department of Hematology, Gdansk, Poland
Tomasz Gromek
11Medical University of Lublin, Department of Hematology, Lublin, Poland
Marek Hus
Edyta Cichocka
12Nicolaus Copernicus Municipal Specialist Hospital, Department of Hematology, Torun, Poland
Janusz Hałka
13Municipal Specialist Hospital, Department of Hematology, Olsztyn, Poland
Elżbieta Patkowska
14Institute of Hematology and Transfusion Medicine, Department of Hematology, Warsaw, Poland
Ewa Lech-Maranda
13Institute of Hematology and Transfusion Medicine, Warsaw, Poland
Agata Obara
15Holly Cross Oncology Center, Department of Hematology, Kielce, Poland
Agnieszka Kopacz
16Department of Hematology, Rzeszow, Poland
Katarzyna Dulik
3M2M Med, Chorzów, Poland
Sebastian Giebel
Jerzy Holowiecki
17Maria Sklodowska-Curie Institute of Oncology, Gliwice, Poland, Department of Hematology and Bone Marrow Transplantation, Gliwice, Poland
Krzysztof Gawronski
1812. Department of Clinical Hematology, Military Medical Academy, Warsaw, Poland
Grzegorz Charlinski
19Department of Hematology and Bone Marrow Transplantation, Torun, Poland
Nuria Mencia-Trinchant
20Weill Cornell Medicine and The New York Presbyterian Hospital in New York City, New York, United States
Pinkal Desai
Michael Samuel
20Weill Cornell Medicine and The New York Presbyterian Hospital in New York City, New York, United States
Justin Kaner
20Weill Cornell Medicine and The New York Presbyterian Hospital in New York City, New York, United States
Michal Bar-Natan
20Weill Cornell Medicine and The New York Presbyterian Hospital in New York City, New York, United States
Ellen Ritchie
2Weill Cornell Medical College, Department of Medicine, New York, United States
Jonathan Canaani
20Weill Cornell Medicine and The New York Presbyterian Hospital in New York City, New York, United States
Monica Guzman
1Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, United States
Sylvie Freeman
4University of Birmingham, College of Medicine and Health, Birmingham, United Kingdom
Gail Roboz
3Weill Cornell Medicine and The New York Presbyterian Hospital, New York, United States