Treatment-Free Remission in Chronic Phase Chronic Myeloid Leukemia Patients Treated with Nilotinib Front-Line, in Real-Life Conditions: Influence of Switching to Another TKI Prior to Cessation.

Abstract

Nilotinib (NIL) as front-line therapy in newly diagnosed chronic phase (CP) CML patients (pts) is able to induce high rates of sustained deep molecular response and high possibilities of treatment-free remission (TFR). However, the identification of factors influencing successful TFR in this population remains imprecise. This observational study retrospectively analyzed TFR rates, outcome, and tried to identify factors related to successful TFR in in- and out-study 221 pts treated in this setting with NIL 600 mg, in "real-life" conditions. All pts with newly diagnosed adult CP-CML receiving NIL 300 mg BID alone front-line between 10/2007 and 06/2022, were eligible. Data were retrospectively collected according to the national regulations with pts' information. All pts were assessed and followed according to ELN recommendations 2006→2020 along treatment and to the recommendations of the Fi-LMC (D. Rea et al., Cancer 2018, i. e. 2 years of sustained MR4.5) in case of TFR. In this regard, a TKI was resumed if loss of MMR on one instance. BCR::ABL1 assessments were performed in the 2 reference laboratories, standardised, and expressed in % (IS) with ≥32,000 copies of ABL1 as control. The primary endpoints were the rate of successful TFR on NIL first-line. Secondary endpoints were the kinetics of molecular response, factors influencing outcome, survival, and safety of NIL. Two hundred and one patients were enrolled with 56% males with a median age at diagnosis of 50 (17.5-83) years, and 26% of them had cardiovascular risk factors at onset (tobacco abuse 10%, hypercholesterolemia 9.55%, diabetes 1.36%, none with history of cardiovascular events [CVE]). ELTS scores were high in 13%, intermediate in 30% and low in 53% of pts, unknown in 4% of pts. Twenty-six (12%) pts harboured additional chromosomal abnormalities (ACA) at diagnosis. The median follow-up after NIL initiation was 85.16 (5.72-174) months. After a median of 37.7 months, 119 pts (58%) were not on NIL anymore for toxicities, resistance or TFR. Sixty-eight (31%) pts obtained the TFR criteria and stopped NIL after a median of 66.7 (27-132) months. The median time between first MR4.5 datapoint and TFR was 39 (15.31-120) months. With a median follow-up of 20.3 (0.03-108) months after NIL cessation, the survival without MMR loss after NIL cessation (figure 1.) is 64.38% (95% CI: 53.35- 77.69). Interestingly, no CVE occurred after NIL cessation, as well as no blast crisis. Two patients died in TFR from competitive events (2 solid tumours). We went on comparing the TFR group vs the non-TFR group. The median age at TFR was 56 (30-87) years with no difference at CML diagnosis in terms of age (49 vs 50 years, p=0.096), ELTS (p=0.276), ACA (15% vs 11%, p=0.483) between the 2 groups. In contrast, there was a difference in favour of female vs male gender in the TFR group (56%) vs non-TFR group (39%, p=0.031), and the median time to reach MMR was shorter in the TFR group 5.04 vs 10.2 months, p<0.001; as well as the median time to reach MR4.5 in the TFR group 18.2 vs 36.1 months, p<0.001. We finally compared the successful vs the unsuccessful TFR pts requiring TKI-rechallenge, in univariate analysis and multivariate analyses. The univariate analysis identified pts that have switched to another TKI before TFR for whatever reasons was a risk factor for subsequent loss of MMR [HR: 3.09 (95% CI: 1.30-7.34), Cox p-value=0.011]. This was confirmed by the log-rank survival curves of TFR in patients with or without switch (figure 2., log-rank p=0.008). Surprisingly, neither the duration of NIL before TFR [HR: 0.98 (0.96-1.00), Cox p-value=0.072], nor the duration of MR4.5 prior to NIL cessation [HR: 0.98 (0.95-1.01), Cox p-value=0.15] were found to have an impact. Additionally, the prognostic scores did not influence TFR success on NIL. The multivariate analysis confirmed that switching to another TKI was an unfavourable risk factor for molecular relapse [HR: 2.87 (1.20-6.84), p-value=0.018], and that the lack of impact of the duration of MR4.5 [HR: 0.98 (0.95-1.01), Cox p-value=0.218] had no significant influence. NIL first-line is able to induce high rates of successful TFR in newly diagnosed CP CML patients and switching to another TKI for toxicity and/or resistance, prior to TFR, represents an unfavourable risk factor for the success of TKI cessation. Figure 1View largeDownload PPTFigure 1View largeDownload PPT Close modal