Venetoclax-based regimens are non-inferior to chemotherapy in core binding factor AML, including AML1-ETO

Y Yu Wu L Lei Zhao (School of Life Sciences, Key Laboratory of Pesticide and Chemical Biology of Ministry of Education, and Hubei Key Laboratory of Genetic Regulation and Integrative Biology, Central China Normal University) Y Yufei Yang X Xinrong Xiang (1west china hospital of sichuan university, department of hematology, chengdu, China)

Abstract

Abstract Background Core binding factor acute myeloid leukemia (CBF-AML) is a favorable-risk molecular subtype defined by the presence of either AML1-ETO (RUNX1::RUNX1T1) or CBFβ-MYH11 (CBFB::MYH11) fusion transcripts. While standard “7+3” induction chemotherapy remains the first-line treatment, venetoclax (VEN) combined with hypomethylating agents (HMAs) or cytotoxic agents has emerged as a promising alternative, particularly for unfit patients. However, recent small-cohort studies have reported suboptimal composite remission rates (CR/CRi <40–65%) with VEN-based regimens in AML1-ETO–positive patients, raising concerns regarding its efficacy in this subgroup. Comprehensive real-world comparisons across fusion subtypes and treatment regimens are lacking. Methods We retrospectively analyzed 203 patients diagnosed with CBF-AML at West China Hospital between 2019 and 2025, all harboring either AML1-ETO (n=115) or CBFβ-MYH11 (n=88) fusion genes. Patients were grouped by induction regimen: standard intensive chemotherapy (CHEM; n=123) or VEN-based therapy (VEN; n=80), including VEN+HMA or VEN+chemotherapy. Efficacy outcomes included composite complete remission (CR/CRi), partial remission (PR), and non-response (NR). Overall survival (OS) was estimated using the Kaplan–Meier method and compared via the log-rank test. The majority were newly diagnosed AML cases; only 19 patients (9.4%) were relapsed or refractory at VEN initiation. Results In the overall CBF-AML cohort, the CR/CRi rate was 82.3% in the VEN group and 71.0% in the CHEM group (p=0.187).Among AML1-ETO–positive patients, VEN resulted in a CR/CRi rate of 75.0% vs 66.2% with CHEM (p=0.406).Among CBFβ-MYH11–positive patients, CR/CRi rates were 89.1% with VEN vs 84.1% with CHEM (p=0.728). No significant differences in OS were observed between VEN and CHEM in the overall cohort (p=0.45), AML1-ETO subgroup (p=0.42), or CBFβ-MYH11 subgroup (p=0.61). Notably, several AML1-ETO patients who failed chemotherapy achieved remission after switching to VEN, highlighting its potential utility as a salvage regimen. Conclusion This real-world study demonstrates that VEN-based regimens achieve comparable remission and survival outcomes to standard chemotherapy in patients with molecularly defined CBF-AML. Importantly, even in the AML1-ETO subgroup-previously considered less responsive to VEN-favorable outcomes were observed, including in relapsed/refractory settings. These findings support VEN as a viable alternative or salvage option in CBF-AML and warrant further validation through prospective randomized trials.

Article Details

Journal Blood
Volume / Issue Vol. 146, Issue Supplement 1
Published November 03, 2025
Pages 6965-6965
ISSN 0006-4971
Publisher Elsevier BV

Journal Info

Blood

Elsevier BV

ISSN: 0006-4971 Health Sciences

Authors (4)

Y

Yu Wu

L

Lei Zhao

School of Life Sciences, Key Laboratory of Pesticide and Chemical Biology of Ministry of Education, and Hubei Key Laboratory of Genetic Regulation and Integrative Biology, Central China Normal University

Y

Yufei Yang

X

Xinrong Xiang

1west china hospital of sichuan university, department of hematology, chengdu, China