Switch to nilotinib versus continued imatinib in patients (pts) with chronic myeloid leukemia in chronic phase (CML-CP) with detectable BCR-ABL after 2 or more years on imatinib: ENESTcmr 12-month (mo) follow-up.

Authors

null

Jeffrey Howard Lipton

Princess Margaret Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada

Jeffrey Howard Lipton , Timothy P. Hughes , Brian Leber , Carmino De Souza , Pedro E Dorlhiac-Llacer , Juan Luis Steegmann , Agnes Guerci-Bresler , Anthony P. Schwarer , Francisco Cervantes , John Reynolds , LaTonya R Collins , Tomasz K. Szczudlo , Nelson Spector

Organizations

Princess Margaret Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada, SA Pathology, Adelaide, Australia, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada, University of Campinas - Hemocentro, Sao Pablo, Brazil, Hospital das Clinicas FMUSP, Sao Paulo, Brazil, Hospital de la Princesa, Madrid, Spain, CHU de Nancy - Hopitaux de Brabois, Vandoeuvre, France, Alfred Hospital, Melbourne, Australia, Hospital Clínic, Barcelona, Spain, Novartis Oncology, Basel, Switzerland, Novartis Pharmaceuticals, Florham Park, NJ, Novartis Oncology, East Hanover, NJ, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

Research Funding

Pharmaceutical/Biotech Company
Background: Nilotinib induced significantly faster and deeper molecular responses vs imatinib in the ENESTnd trial. Achieving these deeper molecular responses may increase patient eligibility for future TKI discontinuation studies. Methods: CML-CP pts (N = 207) who achieved a complete cytogenetic response but were still BCR-ABL positive by RQ-PCR after ≥ 24 mo on imatinib were randomized 1:1 to receive nilotinib 400 mg BID (n = 104) or to continue their imatinib dose (400 or 600 mg QD [n = 103]). The primary endpoint was confirmed CMR (undetectable BCR-ABL by RQ-PCR with a sample sensitivity of ≥ 4.5 logs in 2 consecutive samples). Other endpoints included molecular responses (MMR ≤ 0.1%IS, MR4 ≤ 0.01%IS, and MR4.5 ≤ 0.0032%IS) and BCR-ABL ratio over time. Results: Rate of confirmed CMR was higher in the nilotinib arm vs imatinib by 12 mo (12.5% vs 5.8%) (Table). Rate of CMR (undetectable BCR-ABL in at least 1 sample) by 12 mo was significantly higher on nilotinib vs imatinib (23.1% vs 10.7%; P = .02). Rates of MMR, MR4, MR4.5, and CMR were also superior in pts switched to nilotinib, and these pts had significantly shorter times to achieve these responses. Imatinib-treated pts had minimal evidence of improvement in molecular response vs a median 0.5-log reduction in BCR-ABL by 12 mo for the nilotinib cohort. With 12-mo follow-up, 84% of pts remained on nilotinib and 96% on imatinib. The nilotinib safety profile was consistent with prior studies. Both drugs were well tolerated. Conclusions: Twice as many pts achieved deeper molecular responses after switching to nilotinib vs staying on imatinib.
Nilotinib
400 mg BID
(n = 104)
Imatinib
400 or 600 mg QD
(n = 103)
Molecular response by 12 mo (ITT population), %
Confirmed CMR 12.5
P = .108*
5.8
CMR 23.1
P = .02*
10.7
Molecular response by 12 mo (in pts without the response at baseline), %
MMR n = 24
75.0
P = .006**
n = 28
35.7
MR4 n = 74
48.6
P = .006**
n = 78
25.6
MR4.5 n = 94
33.0
P = .008**
n = 91
16.5
CMR n = 101
20.8
P = .03**
n = 100
10.0

*Stratified Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test. **Stratified log-rank test.

Disclaimer

This material on this page is ©2024 American Society of Clinical Oncology, all rights reserved. Licensing available upon request. For more information, please contact licensing@asco.org

Abstract Details

Meeting

2012 ASCO Annual Meeting

Session Type

Oral Abstract Session

Session Title

Leukemia, Myelodysplasia, and Transplantation

Track

Hematologic Malignancies—Leukemia, Myelodysplastic Syndromes, and Allotransplant

Sub Track

Leukemia

Clinical Trial Registration Number

NCT00760877

Citation

J Clin Oncol 30, 2012 (suppl; abstr 6505^)

Abstract #

6505^

Abstract Disclosures