Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Clinical Trial
. 2020 Jun 11;135(24):2137-2145.
doi: 10.1182/blood.2020004856.

Venetoclax plus LDAC for newly diagnosed AML ineligible for intensive chemotherapy: a phase 3 randomized placebo-controlled trial

Andrew H Wei  1   2 , Pau Montesinos  3   4 , Vladimir Ivanov  5 , Courtney D DiNardo  6 , Jan Novak  7   8 , Kamel Laribi  9 , Inho Kim  10 , Don A Stevens  11 , Walter Fiedler  12 , Maria Pagoni  13 , Olga Samoilova  14 , Yu Hu  15 , Achilles Anagnostopoulos  16 , Julie Bergeron  17 , Jing-Zhou Hou  18 , Vidhya Murthy  19 , Takahiro Yamauchi  20 , Andrew McDonald  21 , Brenda Chyla  22 , Sathej Gopalakrishnan  22 , Qi Jiang  22 , Wellington Mendes  22 , John Hayslip  22 , Panayiotis Panayiotidis  23
Affiliations
Clinical Trial

Venetoclax plus LDAC for newly diagnosed AML ineligible for intensive chemotherapy: a phase 3 randomized placebo-controlled trial

Andrew H Wei et al. Blood. .

Abstract

Effective treatment options are limited for patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) who cannot tolerate intensive chemotherapy. Adults age ≥18 years with newly diagnosed AML ineligible for intensive chemotherapy were enrolled in this international phase 3 randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial. Patients (N = 211) were randomized 2:1 to venetoclax (n = 143) or placebo (n = 68) in 28-day cycles, plus low-dose cytarabine (LDAC) on days 1 to 10. Primary end point was overall survival (OS); secondary end points included response rate, transfusion independence, and event-free survival. Median age was 76 years (range, 36-93 years), 38% had secondary AML, and 20% had received prior hypomethylating agent treatment. Planned primary analysis showed a 25% reduction in risk of death with venetoclax plus LDAC vs LDAC alone (hazard ratio [HR], 0.75; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.52-1.07; P = .11), although not statistically significant; median OS was 7.2 vs 4.1 months, respectively. Unplanned analysis with additional 6-month follow-up demonstrated median OS of 8.4 months for the venetoclax arm (HR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.50-0.98; P = .04). Complete remission (CR) plus CR with incomplete blood count recovery rates were 48% and 13% for venetoclax plus LDAC and LDAC alone, respectively. Key grade ≥3 adverse events (venetoclax vs LDAC alone) were febrile neutropenia (32% vs 29%), neutropenia (47% vs 16%), and thrombocytopenia (45% vs 37%). Venetoclax plus LDAC demonstrates clinically meaningful improvement in remission rate and OS vs LDAC alone, with a manageable safety profile. Results confirm venetoclax plus LDAC as an important frontline treatment for AML patients unfit for intensive chemotherapy. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT03069352.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict-of-interest disclosure: A.H.W. has been a consultant for AbbVie, Celgene, Roche, Janssen, Astellas, Novartis, Amgen, MacroGenics, and Servier; has received research funding from AbbVie, Novartis, Celgene, and Servier; and is a former employee of the Walter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research, which receives royalties in relation to venetoclax, and A.H.W. is entitled to a fraction of these payments. P.M. has received grants/research support from Astellas, Celgene, Daiichi Sankyo, Janssen, Karyopharm, Novartis, Pfizer, and Teva; has been a speaker/advisor for AbbVie, Celgene, Daiichi Sankyo, Incyte, Janssen, Karyopharm, Novartis, Pfizer, Teva, and Tolero; and has been a consultant for Agios, Astellas, Celgene, Daiichi Sankyo, Oryzon, and Tolero. V.I., I.K., D.A.S., O.S., Y.H., J.-Z.H., and A.M. have been investigators in AbbVie-sponsored clinical trials. C.D.D. has received grants/research support from AbbVie, Agios, Bayer, Celgene, and MedImmune and been a consultant for Agios. J.N. has been a consultant/advisor for Novartis, Roche, Pfizer, Amgen, and Takeda and received travel expenses from Amgen and Janssen. K.L. has received grants/research support from AbbVie, Novartis, Takeda, Roche, and Sandoz and received honoraria or speaker’s bureau/personal fees from AbbVie, Novartis, Takeda, Roche, Sandoz, Celgene, Jansen, and Amgen. I.K. has been an investigator in AbbVie-sponsored clinical trials. W.F. has served on the board of directors/advisory board for Amgen, ARIAD/Incyte, Pfizer, Novartis, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, and Celgene; received patents/royalties from Amgen; received support for meeting attendance from Amgen, Gilead, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Servier, and Daiichi Sankyo; and received research funding from Amgen and Pfizer; M.P. has been a speaker/advisor for AbbVie, Amgen, Astellas, Genesis, Janssen, Novartis, and Pfizer. A.A. has received institutional research support (clinical trials) from AbbVie, Celgene, Sanofi, Takeda, Amgen, Pharmacyclics, Acerta, and Novartis. J.B. has been a consultant for Pfizer, Jazz, Novartis, Amgen, and Astellas and received travel expenses from Amgen and Novartis. V.M. has provided conference support attendance for Abbvie, Celgene, Novartis, Takeda, and Janssen and been a consultant for Celgene, Novartis, and Janssen. T.Y. has received research support/honoraria or been an advisor for Pfizer, Otsuka, Takeda, Astellas, Solasia, Gilead Sciences, and SymBio. P.P. has received grants/research support from AbbVie, Roche, Novartis, and Genesis and honoraria from AbbVie, Janssen, Roche, Novartis, Gilead, and Genesis. B.C., S.G., Q.J., W.M., and J.H. are employees of AbbVie and may hold stock or have stock options.

Figures

None
Graphical abstract
Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Overall survival. Kaplan-Meier plots showing OS rate of all patients over time, separated by treatment arm; patients at risk at each time point are shown below graph. Tick marks indicate censored data. (A) Preplanned OS analysis. (B) OS analysis with 6 months of additional follow-up. Pbo, placebo; Ven, venetoclax.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Comment in

References

    1. Juliusson G, Antunovic P, Derolf A, et al. . Age and acute myeloid leukemia: real world data on decision to treat and outcomes from the Swedish Acute Leukemia Registry. Blood. 2009;113(18):4179-4187. - PubMed
    1. National Cancer Institute Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program: Cancer stat facts: leukemia—acute myeloid leukemia. Available at: https://seer.cancer.gov/statfacts/html/amyl.html. Accessed 3 September 2019.
    1. Amadori S, Suciu S, Selleslag D, et al. . Gemtuzumab ozogamicin versus best supportive care in older patients with newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia unsuitable for intensive chemotherapy: results of the randomized phase III EORTC-GIMEMA AML-19 trial. J Clin Oncol. 2016;34(9):972-979. - PubMed
    1. Dombret H, Seymour JF, Butrym A, et al. . International phase 3 study of azacitidine vs conventional care regimens in older patients with newly diagnosed AML with >30% blasts. Blood. 2015;126(3):291-299. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Kantarjian HM, Thomas XG, Dmoszynska A, et al. . Multicenter, randomized, open-label, phase III trial of decitabine versus patient choice, with physician advice, of either supportive care or low-dose cytarabine for the treatment of older patients with newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30(21):2670-2677. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

Associated data