Real World Study on the Best CPX-351 Treatment Duration and Timing for Allogeneic Stem Cell Transplantation
- PMID: 40990091
- DOI: 10.1002/ajh.70083
Real World Study on the Best CPX-351 Treatment Duration and Timing for Allogeneic Stem Cell Transplantation
Abstract
In the registration clinical trial 301 (NCT01696084), CPX-351 has shown to be superior to conventional 3 + 7 in secondary AML (s-AML). However, the optimal duration of treatment, the best timing for allogeneic stem cell transplantation (allo-HSCT), and the activity of CPX-351 in specific s-AML subgroups are unclear. To evaluate these aspects, a total of 513 s-AML patients (median age 65.6 years, 19-79) treated with CPX-351 were retrospectively analyzed. Complete remission (CR) rate after induction was 297/513 (58%), increasing to 340/513 (66%) after cycle 2. Among the 340 responding patients, 118 (34.7%), 137 (40.3%), and 85 (25%) received none, one, or two consolidation cycles of CPX-351, respectively. Overall, 230/513 patients (48.8%) received allo-HSCT. Median follow up was 23.66 months and median overall survival (OS) was 16.23 months. Patients with mutated NPM1 or with ELN 2017 favorable risk (p < 0.05) had a significantly longer OS (p < 0.05). In a landmark analysis, receiving allo-HSCT was associated with a longer survival (Median OS not reached vs. 16.3 months for patients receiving or not receiving allo-HSCT, p < 0.05). Completion of all allowed CPX-351 cycles was beneficial only in patients not proceeding to transplant (p < 0.05), whereas in transplanted patients additional CPX-351 cycles did not improve outcome. Our analysis suggests that also s-AML patients with NPM1 mutations and those belonging to the ELN 2017 favorable risk category benefit from CPX-351. In eligible patients, allo-HSCT should be performed as soon as a CR is achieved, whereas patients not undergoing transplant benefit from a complete CPX-351 schedule.
Keywords: CPX‐351; acute myeloid leukemia; allogeneic stem cell transplantation; drug optimization.
© 2025 The Author(s). American Journal of Hematology published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.
References
-
- L. S. Granfeldt Østgård, B. C. Medeiros, H. Sengeløv, et al., “Epidemiology and Clinical Significance of Secondary and Therapy‐Related Acute Myeloid Leukemia: A National Population‐Based Cohort Study,” Journal of Clinical Oncology 1, no. 31 (2015): 3641–3649, https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2014.60.0890.
-
- L. Fianchi, L. Pagano, A. Piciocchi, et al., “Characteristics and Outcome of Therapy‐Related Myeloid Neoplasms: Report From the Italian Network on Secondary Leukemias,” American Journal of Hematology 90, no. 5 (2015): E80‐5, https://doi.org/10.1002/ajh.23966.
-
- L. Fianchi, M. Criscuolo, E. Fabiani, et al., “Therapy‐Related Myeloid Neoplasms: Clinical Perspectives,” Oncotargets and Therapy 17, no. 11 (2018): 5909–5915, https://doi.org/10.2147/OTT.S101333.
-
- M. Heuser, “Therapy‐Related Myeloid Neoplasms: Does Knowing the Origin Help to Guide Treatment?,” Hematology. American Society of Hematology. Education Program 2016, no. 1 (2016): 24–32, https://doi.org/10.1182/asheducation‐2016.1.24.
-
- S. A. Strickland and N. Vey, “Diagnosis and Treatment of Therapy‐Related Acute Myeloid Leukemia,” Critical Reviews in Oncology/Hematology 171 (2022): 103607, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.critrevonc.2022.103607.
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources