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
. 2024 Aug 13;8(15):4209-4220.
doi: 10.1182/bloodadvances.2023012302.

Final phase 1 substudy results of ivosidenib for patients with mutant IDH1 relapsed/refractory myelodysplastic syndrome

Affiliations
Clinical Trial

Final phase 1 substudy results of ivosidenib for patients with mutant IDH1 relapsed/refractory myelodysplastic syndrome

Courtney D DiNardo et al. Blood Adv. .

Abstract

Ivosidenib is a first-in-class mutant isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 (mIDH1) inhibitor with efficacy and tolerability in patients with advanced mIDH1 hematologic malignancies, leading to approval in frontline and relapsed/refractory (R/R) mIDH1 acute myeloid leukemia. We report final data from a phase 1 single-arm substudy of once-daily ivosidenib in patients with R/R mIDH1 myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) after failure of standard-of-care therapies. Primary objectives were to determine safety, tolerability, and clinical activity. The primary efficacy end point was the complete remission (CR) + partial remission (PR) rate. Nineteen patients were enrolled; 18 were included in the efficacy analysis. Treatment-related adverse events occurred in 8 (42.1%) patients, including a grade 1 QT interval prolongation in 1 (5.3%) patient and grade 2 differentiation syndrome in 2 (10.5%) patients. Rates of CR + PR and objective response (CR + PR + marrow CR) were 38.9% (95% confidence interval [CI], 17.3-64.3) and 83.3% (95% CI, 58.6-96.4), respectively. Kaplan-Meier estimates showed a 68.6% probability of patients in CR achieving a remission duration of ≥5 years, and a median overall survival of 35.7 months. Of note, 71.4% and 75.0% baseline red blood cell (RBC)- and platelet-transfusion-dependent patients, respectively, became transfusion independent (TI; no transfusion for ≥56 days); 81.8% and 100% of baseline RBC and platelet TI patients, respectively, remained TI. One (5.3%) patient proceeded to a hematopoietic stem cell transplant. In conclusion, ivosidenib is clinically active, with durable remissions and a manageable safety profile observed in these patients. This trial was registered at www.ClinicalTrials.gov as #NCT02074839.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict-of-interest disclosure: C.D.D. received research funding from AbbVie, Astex, ImmuneOnc, Bristol Myers Squibb, Cleave, Foghorn, Loxo, Rigel, Servier; consulting fees from Amgen, AbbVie, Astellas, Bristol Myers Squibb, GenMab, GlaxoSmithKline, Gilead, Jazz, Schrodinger, Servier, Stemline; honoraria for educational events from AbbVie, Astellas, Bristol Myers Squibb, Jazz, and Servier; meeting support from Servier; and has participated on a GenMab data safety board. G.J.R. has received consulting fees from Janssen, Amgen, Celgene, Novartis, Pfizer, AbbVie, Argenx, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Roche, Daiichi Sankyo, Takeda, GlaxoSmithKline, Bristol Myers Squibb, Blueprint Medicines, bluebird bio, Jasper Pharmaceuticals, Syndax, Molecular Partners, Ellipses Pharma, AstraZeneca, Caribou and Rigel, and research funding from Janssen. J.M.W. has received consulting fees from Rigel, Servier; participated on safety monitoring or advisory boards for Rigel, Servier, Bristol Myers Squibb, Daiichi Sankyo, Aptose, Reven Pharma, and Rafael Pharma; and has received funding from Takeda and Immune Systems Key, Ltd. Y.F.M. has received consulting fees from GERON Pharmaceuticals, Kura Oncology, Blueprint Medicines, OncLive, MD Education, Sierra Oncology, Stemline Therapeutics, MorphoSys, Taiho Oncology, Rigel Pharmaceuticals, and Novartis, and support for attending meetings/travel from Blueprint Medicines, MD Education, and MorphoSys. P.B. has received consulting fees from MBS Pharma and ONO Pharmaceuticals; honoraria from Rigel Pharma and Bristol Myers Squibb; support for meetings/travel from KITE Pharma and Rigel Pharma; and has participated on data safety monitoring/advisory boards for Protagonist Therapeutics and KITE Pharma. S.d.B. has received support from Bristol Myers Squibb; research funding from Auron and Forma; consulting fees from Bristol Myers Squibb, GlaxoSmithKline, Remix, Servier, and Syndax; honoraria for speakers’ bureaus from AbbVie, Astellas, Bristol Myers Squibb, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, and Servier; honoraria from Loxo; and travel expenses from AbbVie and Servier. A.S. participated on speaker bureaus for Amgen and advisory boards for Sanofi and Daiichi-Sankyo. J.M.F. received institutional grants from Actinium, Astellas, Roivant, Celgene, Novartis, Takeda, Sellas, Kura, Pfizer, Servier, and Chordia; consulting fees from CTI Biopharma, Lava, Remix, Bristol Myers Squibb, and MJH LifeSciences; honoraria from Aptitude Health, AmerisourceBergen/IntrinsiQ Specialty Solutions, and MJH LifeSciences; is a member of the NCI Leukemia steering committee; and has stock options in Aurinia. D.A.S. has received consulting fees from AbbVie, Affimed, Gilead, Incyte, Intellisphere, Molecular Partners, PGEN Therapeutics, Takeda, and Zentalis; has participated on advisory boards for AvenCell, bluebird bio, Bristol Myers Squibb, Intellia, Jasper Therapeutics, KITE Pharma, Magenta Therapeutics, Nkarta, Novartis, Shattuck Labs, Servier, Syndax, and Syros; and reports payments from Aprea and Jazz were received by the Moffitt Cancer Center. D.M.M., M.H., X.B., P.A.P., and S.M.K. are employees of Servier, LLC. A.T.F. has received personal fees from Orum, Takeda, Servier, Amgen, Autolus, Rigel, Pfizer, Daiichi Sankyo, Forma, PureTech, EnClear, Genentech, Ipsen, AbbVie, Mablytics, Immunogen, Astellas, Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene, Novartis, Agios, MorphoSys, Kite, Foghorn, Blueprint, Kura, and Trillium; and grants from AbbVie, Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene, and Agios/Servier, outside the submitted work. The remaining authors declare no competing financial interests.

Figures

None
Graphical abstract
Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Treatment duration and response to ivosidenib. Swimmer plot of treatment duration and best overall response in the efficacy analysis set (N = 18)a. aOne patient was excluded from the efficacy analysis because of not meeting an inclusion criterion. IC, intensive chemotherapy; INV, investigational agent; PDis, progressive disease; PT, prior therapy; SD, stable disease.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.
Response rates vs cytogenetic risk categories for the efficacy analysis set. (A-B) Heat map showing IPSS-R, IPSS-M, and IPSS-R cytogenetic risk categories, best overall response, baseline comutations, baseline VAF, and OS in the efficacy analysis set (A; N = 18) and distribution of number of comutated genes with best overall response (B; N = 18). Please note that the numbers within the boxes correspond to the VAF of the alteration. aIf a patient had multiple alterations in a gene, the largest VAF was shown. bThis patient did not have any of the comutations evaluated in the panel but did have a poor-risk karyotype, including monosomy 7. PDis, progressive disease; RTK, receptor tyrosine kinase; SD, stable disease.
Figure 3.
Figure 3.
Red blood cell and platelet transfusion requirements. (A-B) Proportions of patients with postbaseline RBC (A) or platelet transfusion (B) independence (N = 18). aPostbaseline transfusion independence was defined as no transfusion for at least one 56-day period. n, number of patients.
Figure 4.
Figure 4.
IDH1 mutation type, based on central testing (n [% patients]; N = 19).
Figure 5.
Figure 5.
Baseline and longitudinal mIDH1 VAF and clinical response. Association of NGS-assessed baseline mIDH1 VAF with response in the efficacy analysis set (A; N = 18) and longitudinal mIDH1 VAF as measured in BMMCs or PBMCs, stratified by BOR (B; N = 18). For panel A, please note: PB data are only plotted for patients who did not have BM samples available. Of 18 patients, 4 had NGS results available for BM only, 3 had NGS results available for PB only, and the remaining 11 had results available for both sample types. For panel B, please note: baseline mIDH1 VAF is plotted in gray, and the minimum posttreatment mIDH1 VAF is plotted in orange (indicating persistent mIDH1) or cyan (for mIDH1 clearance, defined as having a measured VAF below the validated LOD of the assay, which was 0.02%). Data are stratified by BOR and sample type. Lines connect pretreatment and posttreatment data for patients with data available. BM, bone marrow; BMMCs, bone marrow mononuclear cells; BOR, best overall response; LOD, limit of detection; NGS, next-generation sequencing; PB, peripheral blood; PBMCs, peripheral blood mononuclear cells; PDis, progressive disease; SD, stable disease; Tx, treatment.

Comment in

References

    1. Gangat N, Patnaik MM, Tefferi A. Myelodysplastic syndromes: contemporary review and how we treat. Am J Hematol. 2016;91(1):76–89. - PubMed
    1. Lee P, Yim R, Yung Y, Chu HT, Yip PK, Gill H. Molecular targeted therapy and immunotherapy for myelodysplastic syndrome. Int J Mol Sci. 2021;22(19) - PMC - PubMed
    1. Mishra A, Corrales-Yepez M, Ali NA, et al. Validation of the revised International Prognostic Scoring System in treated patients with myelodysplastic syndromes. Am J Hematol. 2013;88(7):566–570. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Bernard E, Tuechler H, Greenberg PL, et al. Molecular International Prognostic Scoring System for myelodysplastic syndromes. NEJM Evid. 2022;1(7) - PubMed
    1. Ganan-Gomez I, Yang H, Ma F, et al. Stem cell architecture drives myelodysplastic syndrome progression and predicts response to venetoclax-based therapy. Nat Med. 2022;28(3):557–567. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms

Associated data

LinkOut - more resources