Oral Decitabine/Cedazuridine Vs Intravenous Decitabine for Acute Myeloid Leukemia: Final Results of a Randomized, Crossover, Registration-Enabling, Pharmacokinetics Study

Abstract

Background: Parenterally administered hypomethylating agents (HMAs), decitabine (DEC) and azacitidine (AZA), are approved in Europe for adult patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) who are not candidates for standard induction chemotherapy as single agent or in combination with venetoclax. Cedazuridine(C) is a novel, potent, and safe inhibitor of cytidine deaminase (CDA) and when given in combination with decitabine, cedazuridine enables efficient oral availability of decitabine.ASTX727 (DEC-C) is a fixed-dose combination (FDC) tablet of 35 mg DEC and 100 mg cedazuridine, DEC-C has been approved for MDS in the US, Canada, and Australia. Here we present final results using DEC-C in an AML population appropriate for single-agent decitabine treatment. Aims: Describe the final clinical outcomes of patients with AML with additional analysis of genetic profiles. Methods: The ASCERTAIN study used a randomized two-period, two-sequence, two-treatment, crossover study design. Patients were randomized 1:1 to either Sequence A: DEC-C (35 mg DEC/100 mg cedazuridine) in Cycle 1 followed by IV-DEC at 20 mg/m 2 in Cycle 2, or Sequence B: receiving IV-DEC in Cycle 1 followed by DEC-C on Cycle 2 to compare pharmacokinetics (PK) [primary endpoint Area Under the Curve (AUC) equivalence over 5 days of dosing]. All patients received DEC-C from Cycle 3 until treatment discontinuation to assess safety and clinical efficacy. Patients were eligible as per the EMA-approved decitabine label (newly diagnosed AML who are not candidates for standard induction chemotherapy). Clinical responses were assessed according to modified International Working Group (IWG) 2003 response criteria. Pre-treatment peripheral blood was used for DNA isolation from leukocytes, and molecular abnormalities identified using a NGS hematologic malignancy panel. Cox-regression analysis on the various factors (eg binary mutational status, CR, etc.) was used for analyses of risk-factors for overall survival (OS). Results: 89 patients were randomized, of whom 87 were treated. The median age of patients was 78.0 years (range, 61 to 92) with 31 (35.6%) males and 56 (64.4%) females. Cytogenetic risk classification was poor-risk in 33 (37.9%), intermediate-risk in 45 (51.7%), and 9 (10.4%) not evaluated patients. For the primary endpoint, preliminary PK data was available from 69 patients who successfully completed PK assessments for both IV-DEC and DEC-C cycles, and the DEC AUC 0-24 (h*ng/mL) 5-Day geometric mean estimate was 904 for DEC-C and 907 for IV-DEC resulting in an oral/IV geometric LSM AUC ratio of 99.64% (90% CI of 91.23-108.8%). Safety findings were consistent with those anticipated for IV-DEC (related Grade ≥ 3 AEs in more than 10% were thrombocytopenia, neutropenia, anaemia, and febrile neutropenia). As of the database lock (25May2023), median follow up was 24.5 (20.2, 25.0) months (25% of 19.7 and 75% of 25.2 months). The best response was complete response (CR) in 19/87 (21.8%, 95% CI: 13.7, 32.0%); CR with incomplete blood cell count recovery (CRi) in 5 patients (5.7%); and CR with incomplete platelet recovery (CRp) in 2 (2.3%); resulting in composite response rate [CR + CRi] of 27.6%. The median overall survival was approximately 8.9 months (95% CI: 6.0, 13.1).These results obtained with DEC-C are consistent with those observed for IV-DEC. Multiple genes, including ASXL1, TP53, RUNX1, and SRSF2 genes were present in more than 20% of the AML patients. TP53 mutation was associated with worse survival. Summary/Conclusion: This randomized phase 3 study in AML patients not candidates for standard induction chemotherapy demonstrates that Daily X 5 dosing of the oral FDC of DEC-C resulted in an equivalent DEC AUC exposure to IV-DEC at 20 mg/m 2 over 5 days. Pharmacodynamic data showed similar demethylation rates (≤1.1% difference). In addition, safety findings and observed clinical activity (response rates and OS) are consistent with published data from IV-DEC, suggesting that DEC-C has the potential to be an oral alternative to the standard IV-DEC Daily×5 regimen. These findings support the use of DEC-C in patients with AML who are not candidates for standard induction chemotherapy.