Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Guadecitabine vs treatment choice in newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia: A global phase 3 randomized study

  • Pierre Fenaux
  • , Marco Gobbi
  • , Patricia L. Kropf
  • , Jean Pierre J. Issa
  • , Gail J. Roboz
  • , Jiri Mayer
  • , Jörgen Krauter
  • , Tadeusz Robak
  • , Hagop Kantarjian
  • , Jan Novak
  • , Wieslaw W. Jedrzejczak
  • , Xavier Thomas
  • , Mario Ojeda-Uribe
  • , Yasushi Miyazaki
  • , Yoo Hong Min
  • , Su Peng Yeh
  • , Joseph Brandwein
  • , Liana Gercheva-Kyuchukova
  • , Judit Demeter
  • , Elizabeth Griffiths
  • Karen Yee, Konstanze Döhner, Yong Hao, Harold Keer, Mohammad Azab, Hartmut Döhner
  • Université Paris Cité
  • Ospedale Policlino San Martino -University of Genoa
  • Novant Health Cancer Institute
  • Coriell Institute for Medical Research
  • Cornell University
  • Masaryk University
  • Städtisches Klinikum Braunschweig gGmbH
  • Medical University of Łódź
  • University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center
  • Charles University
  • Samodzielny Publiczny Centralny Szpital Kliniczny
  • Hospices civils de Lyon
  • GHR Mulhouse Sud-Alsace
  • Nagasaki University
  • Yonsei University
  • University of Alberta
  • Hospital "st. Marina" EAD
  • Semmelweis University
  • University Health Network
  • Ulm University
  • Astex Pharmaceuticals

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

25 Scopus citations

Abstract

This phase 3 study evaluated the efficacy and safety of the new hypomethylating agent guadecitabine (n = 408) vs a preselected treatment choice (TC; n = 407) of azacitidine, decitabine, or low-dose cytarabine in patients with acute myeloid leukemia unfit to receive intensive induction chemotherapy. Half of the patients (50%) had poor Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (2-3). The coprimary end points were complete remission (19% and 17% of patients for guadecitabine and TC, respectively [stratified P = .48]) and overall survival (median survival 7.1 and 8.5 months for guadecitabine and TC, respectively [hazard ratio, 0.97; 95% confidence interval, 0.83-1.14; stratified log-rank P = .73]). One-And 2-year survival estimates were 37% and 18% for guadecitabine and 36% and 14% for TC, respectively. A large proportion of patients (42%) received >4 cycles of treatment in both the arms. In a post hoc analysis of patients who received ≥4 treatment cycles, guadecitabine was associated with longer median survival vs TC (15.6 vs 13.0 months [hazard ratio, 0.78; 95% confidence interval, 0.64-0.96; log-rank P = .02]). There was no significant difference in the proportion of patients with grade ≥3 adverse events (AEs) between guadecitabine (92%) and TC (88%); however, grade ≥3 AEs of febrile neutropenia, neutropenia, and pneumonia were higher with guadecitabine. In conclusion, no significant difference was observed in the efficacy of guadecitabine and TC in the overall population.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)5027-5037
Number of pages11
JournalBlood Advances
Volume7
Issue number17
DOIs
StatePublished - Sep 12 2023

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Guadecitabine vs treatment choice in newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia: A global phase 3 randomized study'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this