2019 EHA: RESULTS OF ASTRAL-1 STUDY, A PHASE 3 RANDOMIZED TRIAL OF GUADECITABINE (G) VS TREATMENT CHOICE (TC) IN TREATMENT NAÏVE ACUTE MYELOID LEUKEMIA (TN-AML) NOT ELIGIBLE FOR INTENSIVE CHEMOTHERAPY (IC)

Click to view presentation:

RESULTS OF ASTRAL-1 STUDY, A PHASE 3 RANDOMIZED TRIAL OF GUADECITABINE (G) VS TREATMENT CHOICE (TC) IN TREATMENT NAÏVE ACUTE MYELOID LEUKEMIA (TN-AML) NOT ELIGIBLE FOR INTENSIVE CHEMOTHERAPY (IC)

 

Background: Guadecitabine is a next generation hypomethylating agent (HMA) given subcutaneously (SC) which provides prolonged in vivo exposure to its active metabolite decitabine, thus offering potential clinical advantages over current HMAs. A multicenter phase 2 study reported a 38% CR rate, and a 54% composite CR (CR+CRp+CRi) rate using 5-day regimen at 60 mg/m2/d SC Q28 days in TN-AML not eligible for IC (Kantarjian et al, Lancet Oncology 2017). This led to ASTRAL-1 study, an international phase 3 randomized trial comparing guadecitabine to TC of azacitidine (AZA), decitabine (DEC) or Low Dose Ara-C (LDAC).
Aims: To report ASTRAL-1 study primary analyses results.
Methods: TN-AML not eligible for IC due to age ≥ 75 y or comorbidities including ECOG PS 3 were randomized 1:1 to either guadecitabine (60 mg/m2/d SC for 5-days Q28 days) or a preselected TC of AZA, DEC, or LDAC at standard regimens. AML diagnosis and response status were assessed by an independent central pathologist blinded to randomization assignment. CR and Overall Survival (OS) were co-primary endpoints.
Results: 815 patients were randomized to guadecitabine (408) or TC (407). Preselected TCs were DEC (43%), AZA (42%), and LDAC (15%). Baseline variables were balanced across the 2 arms. Median age 76 y for both arms, patients ≥75 y were 62% vs 62.4%, PS 2-3 in 50.5% vs 50.4% (including 10.8% vs 8.8% PS 3), poor risk cytogenetics 34.3% vs 34.6%, secondary AML 36.3% vs 36.9%, WBCs ≥20×109/L 15.2% vs 14.3%, and median BM blasts 56% vs 53% for G vs TC respectively. Median follow up was 25.5 m and median number of treatment cycles was 5 for both arms. Many patients (41.6%) received ≤ 3 cycles mainly due to early death or progression with no difference between the 2 arms (42.4% on G, and 40.8% on TC). The co-primary endpoints ITT analyses showed a CR rate of 19.4% vs 17.4% for G vs TC (p = 0.48). The median, 1-y, and 2-y survival were 7.1 m, 37%, and 18% for guadecitabine, and 8.4 m, 36%, and 14% for TC (Figure 1). OS HR was 0.91, 0.98, and 0.96 for G vs AZA, DEC, and LDAC respectively. Landmark survival analyses showed potential benefit of guadecitabine vs TC in patients who received >3 cycles (median, 1-y, and 2-y OS 15.6 m, 60% and 29% on guadecitabine vs 13 m, 52%, and 20% on TC; log-rank p value=0.02, HR 0.78, 95% CI 0.64-0.96), and those who achieved any CR (CR, CRp, or CRi): OS HR 0.72, 95% CI 0.50-1.05. Analyses of predefined clinical, cytogenetics, and molecular genetics variables assessed by PCR (Flt-3 ITD, CEBPA, NPM1, and TP53) did not show significant differences of primary outcomes between guadecitabine and TC in any subgroup except for TP53. Patients with identified baseline TP53 mutations did worse on G vs TC while those without identified TP53 mutations had a more favorable outcome on guadecitabine vs TC. Both treatment arms showed overall similar safety profiles with slightly higher but not significant serious AEs incidence (81% vs 75.5%) and Grade ≥ 3 AEs (91.5% vs 87.5%) on guadecitabine vs TC respectively. There was no difference in AEs leading to death (28.7% for guadecitabine vs 29.8% for TC).
Conclusions/Summary: The trial did not achieve its primary endpoints of statistically significant superiority of guadecitabine vs TC for CR or OS. However due to the large sample size and narrow 95% CI for OS difference, the trial suggests that G is an active drug with an overall similar efficacy and safety profiles to standard therapy. Potential benefit of guadecitabine vs TC was observed in patients who were able to receive adequate treatment (>3 cycles), and those who achieved any CR. The significance of TP53 mutations needs to be further explored.
Figure 1: Kaplan-Meier Survival Plot of guadecitabine vs TC

 

2019 MDSF: Long Term Survival Results and Prognostic Factors Results of Higher Risk MDS and CMML treated with guadecitabine

Click here to view Publication:
Long Term Survival Results and Prognostic Factors Results of Higher Risk MDS and CMML treated with guadecitabine

 

Abstract:

Background: Guadecitabine SC (SGI-110) is a dinucleotide next generation hypomethylating agent (HMA) resistant to degradation by cytidine deaminase resulting in extended in vivo exposure to its active metabolite decitabine.

 Methods: Int, or HR MDS, and CMML patients who were either treatment-naïve (TN) or relapsed/refractory (r/r) to other HMAs were randomized to either 60 mg/m2 or 90 mg/m2 QDx5 every 28 days.

 Results: We randomized 102 patients with a median follow up of 3.2 years: 53 to 60 mg/m2 and 49 patients to 90 mg/m2 QDx5. Of those, 53 patients were TN and 49 patients were r/r MDS/CMML. Median age was 71 and 72 years for TN MDS and r/r respectively. Most baseline patient characteristics were well balanced between the 2 treatment dose groups except that more CMML patients were randomized to the 60 mg/m2 group (28%) vs. 14% in the 90 mg/m2 group, and more patients with baseline BM blasts >5% were in the 90 mg/m2 group (67%) vs. 38% in the 60 mg/m2 group. Most patients were RBC transfusion-dependent at baseline (57%). In the r/r MDS cohort, most patients (77%) received ≥6 months of prior HMA treatment.

In the TN MDS cohort the median Overall Survival (OS) was 23.4 months (25.7 months for 60 mg/m2 dose group and 18.6 months for 90 mg/m2 dose group). In the r/r MDS cohort, the median OS was 11.7 months. No statistically significant difference in response or OS was observed between the 2 dose groups. In the overall population of 102 TN and r/r MDS patients there were no major differences in OS based on DNMT3A or TET2 mutation status while patients with TP53 mutations had worse median OS (7.4 months) compared to those without TP53 mutations (22.6 months). Other baseline prognostic factors associated with worse OS were BM blasts >5%; RBC transfusion-dependence; IPSS High Risk; and ECOG Performance Status of 2 or higher.

Conclusions: The median OS of 23.4 months (25.7 months for the 60 mg/m2 dose group) in TN MDS, and 11.7 months in r/r MDS signals a promising clinical activity of guadecitabine in the treatment of higher risk MDS/CMML. A phase 3 trial (ASTRAL-3) of guadecitabine vs Physician Treatment Choice in r/r MDS and CMML patients previously treated with other HMAs is actively enrolling (ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT02907359).

2018 ASH: Long term results of a randomized phase 2 dose-response study of guadecitabine, a novel subcutaneous (SC) hypomethylating agent (HMA), in 102 patients with Intermediate or High Risk Myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) or Chronic Myelomonocytic Leukemia (CMML)

Click here to for link to article:

Long term results of a randomized phase 2 dose-response study of guadecitabine, a novel subcutaneous (SC) hypomethylating agent (HMA), in 102 patients with Intermediate or High Risk Myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) or Chronic Myelomonocytic Leukemia (CMML)</>

Background: Guadecitabine SC (SGI-110) is a dinucleotide next generation HMA resistant to degradation by cytidine deaminase resulting in extended in vivo exposure to its active metabolite decitabine. A Phase 1 established 60 mg/m2 QDx5 as the biologically effective dose (BED), and 90 mg/m2 QDx5 as the Maximum tolerated dose (MTD) in MDS patients given in 28-day cycles (Issa et al, 2015, Lancet Oncology). Phase 2 is conducted to evaluate dose response between the BED and MTD in both untreated MDS patients, and patients previously treated with other HMAs.

 Methods: Int, or HR MDS, and CMML patients who were either treatment-naïve (TN) or relapsed/refractory to other HMAs (r/r) were randomized to either 60 mg/m2 or 90 mg/m2 QDx5 every 28 days. Efficacy was evaluated by the clinical responses of CR, PR, marrow CR (mCR), and Hematological Improvement (HI) based on the International Working Group Criteria 2006, as well as transfusion-independence, and overall survival (OS). Adverse events (AEs) were graded by the CTCAE v4 criteria.

 Results: The study completed target enrolment with 102 patients: 53 r/r MDS, and 49 TN MDS. Fifty three patients were randomized to 60 mg/m2 and 49 patients to 90 mg/m2 QDx5 with a median follow up of 3.2 years (IQR 2.8-3.5 years). Median age was 72 and 71 years for r/r and TN MDS respectively. Most baseline patient characteristics were well balanced between the 2 treatment dose groups except that more CMML patients were randomized to the 60 mg/m2 group (28%) vs. 14% in the 90 mg/m2 group, and more patients with baseline BM blasts >5% were in the 90 mg/m2 group (67%) vs. 38% in the 60 mg/m2 group. Most patients were RBC transfusion-dependent at baseline (57%). In the r/r MDS cohort, most patients (58%) received their last HMA treatment <3 month before enrolment, and most of them received ≥6 months of prior HMA treatment (77%).

Median number of treatment cycles was 5 for both r/r and TN MDS (range 1-37 in r/r MDS and 1-49 in TN MDS). In the TN MDS cohort CR was achieved in 11 (22%) of patients with no major difference between the 2 dose groups (19% in the 60 mg/m2 group vs 27% in the 90 mg/m2 group). Overall CR+mCR was achieved in 18 patients (37%) in TN MDS patients and median OS was 23.4 months. In the r/r MDS cohort, CR was achieved in 4% of patients in each of the 2 dose groups. Overall CR+mCR in the r/r MDS cohort was achieved in 17 patients (32%), with a median duration of response of 7.9 months, and median OS of 11.7 months. No significant difference in response or OS between the 2 dose groups was observed. In patients who were RBC transfusion-dependent at baseline, transfusion independence for at least 8 weeks was achieved in 42% of TN MDS, and 15% in r/r MDS patients. In the overall population of 102 TN and r/r MDS patients there were no major differences in OS based on DNMT3A or TET2 mutation status while patients with TP53 mutations had worse median OS (7.4 months) compared to those without TP53 mutations (22.6 months). Other baseline prognostic factors for worse OS were BM blasts >5%; RBC transfusion-dependence; IPSS High Risk; and ECOG Performance Status of >1.

Overall incidence of Grade ≥3 AEs regardless of relationship to treatment was reported in 83 vs. 96% for 60 and 90 mg/m2 dose groups respectively. There was a slightly higher but non-significant difference in Grade ≥3 thrombocytopenia (57 vs 41.5%); neutropenia (51 vs 39.6%); febrile neutropenia (43% vs 32%); and pneumonia (32.7 vs. 26.4%) for the 90 mg/m2 compared to 60 mg/m2 dose group. Early 30, 60, and 90-day all-cause mortality was observed in 0, 3.7%, and 5.7% in the 60 mg/m2 dose group respectively; and in 2%, 4%, and 12% in the 90 mg/m2 dose group respectively.

Conclusions: Guadecitabine at both dose groups is a well-tolerated novel HMA with clinical activity in the treatment of both TN and r/r Int and HR MDS, and CMML patients. In TN MDS patient CR rate of 22% and median OS of 23.4 months compare well with first generation HMA efficacy (Fenaux et al, 2009, Lancet Oncology). Activity in r/r MDS who previously failed prior HMAs is particularly promising (CR+mCR in 32% of patients with median duration of response and overall survival of almost 8 and 12 months respectively). A phase 3 trial (ASTRAL-3) of guadecitabine vs Physician Treatment Choice in r/r MDS and CMML patients previously treated with azacitidine or decitabine is actively enrolling (ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT02907359).

2017 ASH: Predictors of Response and Survival in 206 AML Patients Treated with Guadecitabine in a Phase 2 Study

Summary
Background: Guadecitabine is a next generation hypomethylating agent (HMA) resistant to degradation by cytidine deaminase which results in prolonged in vivo exposure to the active metabolite decitabine. We conducted a prospective phase 2 study testing different schedules of guadecitabine in 206 AML patients. We present here the results of multiple logistic regression, and Cox regression analyses of predictors of composite Complete Response or CRc (CR+CRp+CRi) and overall survival (OS).

Methods: Multiple logistic regression analysis of response (CRc), and Cox regression analysis of OS were conducted with inclusion of the following baseline variables: disease state (relapsed/refractory (r/r) vs. treatment naïve (TN) AML); guadecitabine schedule (10day vs. 5day); age (<75 vs. ≥75); ECOG PS (01 vs. ≥2); Cytogenetics (others vs. poor risk); baseline BM blasts (≤40% vs. >40%); baseline Peripheral blood (PB) blasts (≤30% vs. >30%); baseline WBCs count (<20,000/μL vs. ≥20,000/μL); Flt3 ITD, NPM, and TP53 mutations (each present vs. not detected). Cutoff values for blasts % for BM and PB were chosen based on the median or mean values respectively, and cutoff value for WBCs count was chosen as a common cutoff used for proliferative AML. Backward elimination method with alpha =0.05 was used to reach the final models.

Results: We treated 206 AML patients (103 patients each for TN or r/r AML); 101 with 5day schedule and 105 with 10day schedule. There were 91 patients (44%) ≥75 y; 53 (26%) with ECOG PS≥2; 85 (41%) with poor risk cytogenetics; 99 (48%) with baseline BM blasts >40%; 65 (32%) with baseline PB blasts >30%; 20 (9.7%) with WBCs ≥20,000/μL. Flt3, NPM, and TP53 mutations were present in 8%, 9%, and 4% of patients respectively. The final logistic regression model indicated that patients with ECOG PS 01 and those with baseline PB blasts ≤ 30% have twofold higher odds of response than those with ECOG PS ≥2 and PB blasts >30% (Odds ratio 2.18; and 2.03 respectively; p<0.05 for both). Patients with TN AML had fivefold higher odds of response to guadecitabine than r/r AML (Odds ratio of response for r/r AML 0.22; p <0.0001). The final Cox regression model showed that both ECOG PS 01 and PB blasts ≤30% retained their significance for OS (HR 0.69 with p=0.03; and 0.61 with p=0.004 respectively). However disease state (r/r AML vs TN AML) lost significance for OS while cytogenetics risk level (others vs poor risk) became significant with a HR for OS of 0.68, p=0.016.

Summary/Conclusions: In a prospective series of AML patients treated with guadecitabine in a phase 2 study, better ECOG PS 01 and lower baseline PB blasts ≤30% were associated with a significantly higher likelihood of response and a longer OS. Patients with TN AML had significantly higher likelihood of response than those with r/r AML but this was not a significant factor for OS when other factors are present in the model such as ECOG PS, cytogenetics risk and PB blasts. On the other hand, the presence of poor risk cytogenetics did not alter the likelihood of response to guadecitabine but still had shorter survival compared to patients with other cytogenetics risk levels. Other variables such as age, baseline BM blasts %, and baseline WBCs count did not significantly impact response or OS in AML patients treated with guadecitabine when all other factors are present in the models. The analysis of genetic mutations was limited by the small number of patients where these mutations were present. The analysis of the treatment schedule is limited by the different effect of the schedule on r/r AML compared to TN AML where the 10day schedule did better than the 5day schedule in r/r AML but not in TN AML patients.

View further details below
Predictors of Response and Survival in 206 AML Patients Treated with Guadecitabine in a Phase 2 Study

2017 ESH-AML: LINE-1 and P15 Demethylation May Predict Response to Guadecitabine

Summary
Guadecitabine (formerly known as SGI-110) is a next-generation hypomethylating agent (HMA) composed of a dinucleotide of decitabine and deoxyguanosine (Figure 1). Guadecitabine is a dinucleotide resistant to degradation by cytidine deaminase (CDA) resulting in longer in vivo exposure to its active metabolite, decitabine, after a small volume ( ~ 1 mL) subcutaneous (SC) administration. A prospective phase 2 trial in 103 patients with relapsed or refractory AML (r/r AML) investigated 60 mg/m2 and 90mg/m2 doses in a 5-day regimen, and 60 mg/m2 in a 10-day regimen given every 28 days. In that trial, LINE-1 was used to measure general DNA demethylation and P15 gene promotor methylation was used to measure a specific tumor suppressor gene demethylation during Cycle 1 as potential markers of biological activity that may predict clinical response (See Trial Design in Figure 2).

View further details below
2017 ESH-AML: LINE-1 and P15 Demethylation May Predict Response to Guadecitabine

2017 ACCP: Population Pharmacokinetics Analysis for Guadecitabine (SGI-110) and Decitabine after Subcutaneous Dosing with SGI-110 in Patients with Relapsed/Refractory AML and MDS

Summary
Guadecitabine is next-generation HMA formulated as a dinucleotide of decitabine and deoxyguanosine delivered as a low volume and pharmaceutically stable subcutaneous (SC) injection. In vivo conversion to active metabolite decitabine results in longer effective half-life and more extended decitabine exposure window than decitabine IV infusion. The differentiated PK profile may lead to improved biological and clinical activity and safety over currently available HMAs (Issa et al. Lancet Oncology 2015).
SGI-110-01 (NCT01261312) was a phase 1-2, dose escalation, multicenter study of subcutaneous regimens of SGI-110 in subjects with intermediate or high-risk myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) or acute myeloid leukemia (AML). Several dosing regimens were tested. In regimen 1 and its phase 2 expansion, guadecitabine was administered daily for 5 days of a 28-day cycle. In regimens 2a and 2b, it was administered weekly or twice-weekly, respectively, for 3 weeks of a 28-day cycle. In another part of the phase 2 expansion, it was administered daily for 10 days (1-5 and 8-12) of a 28-day cycle.
The PK data included full concentration-time profiles of parent SGI-110 and its active metabolite, decitabine obtained after the first dose and after dose on day 5 (for regimen 1 and expansion), day 8 (for regimen 2a) or day 12 (for expansion 10-day regimen) of cycle 1.
The abstract reported results of the population PK analysis of data from 98 patients. Since the time the abstract was submitted, more data became available, and the model was updated. This poster describes the population PK modeling of data using an updated dataset from 124 patients.

View further details below
2017 ACCP: Population Pharmacokinetics Analysis for Guadecitabine (SGI-110) and Decitabine after Subcutaneous Dosing with SGI-110 in Patients with Relapsed/Refractory AML and MDS

2017 14th Intl. Symposium on MDS: Randomized Phase 2 Study of Guadecitabine in Patients with HMA-Naïve Higher Risk Myelodysplastic Syndromes (MDS) or Chronic Myelomonocytic Leukemia (CMML)

Summary
Guadecitabine (formerly SGI-110) is a next generation subcutaneous (SC) small volume dinucleotide HMA which results in prolonged in vivo exposure to active metabolite decitabine, and clinical activity reported in phase 1 in MDS and AML patients (Issa et al, Lancet Oncology 2015).

View further details below
2017 14th Int. Symposium in MDS: Randomized Phase 2 Study of Guadecitabine in Patients with HMA-Naïve Higher Risk Myelodysplastic Syndromes (MDS) or Chronic Myelomonocytic Leukemia (CMML)

2016 ASH: Genetic Determinants of Response to Guadecitabine (SGI-110) in AML

Summary

Guadecitabine is a next generation hypomethylating drug with improved pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics compared to decitabine and demonstrated clinical activity in both treatment naïve (tn) and relapsed-refractory (rr) AML. Previous studies reported similar response rates to guadecitabine in different cytogenetic subsets but it remains unknown whether this extends to genetic changes.

View further details below

2016 ASH: Genetic Determinants of Response to Guadecitabine (SGI-110) in AML

2016 ASH: Long Term Survival and Clinical Complete Responses of Various Prognostic Subgroups in 103 Relapsed/Refractory Acute Myeloid Leukemia (r/r AML) Patients Treated with Guadecitabine (SGI-110) in Phase 2 Studies

Summary

Guadecitabine (SGI-110) is a novel next-generation hypomethylating agent (HMA) administered as a small volume subcutaneous (SC) injection which results in extended decitabine exposure. Phase 2 study has been conducted in r/r AML patients using two different doses and schedules of guadecitabine. We report here long term survival and clinical complete response rates in various prognostic subgroups of r/r AML patients

View further details below

2016 ASH: Long Term Survival and Clinical Complete Responses of Various Prognostic Subgroups in 103 Relapsed/Refractory Acute Myeloid Leukemia (r/r AML) Patients Treated with Guadecitabine (SGI-110) in Phase 2 Studies

2016 EHA: OS and subgroup results from randomized Phase 2 study of SGI-110 in previously treated MDS

Summary

Guadecitabine (SGI-110) is a next generation hypomethylating agent (HMA) designed as a dinucleotide of decitabine and deoxyguanosine that is resistant to deamination by cytidine deaminase (CDA). This results in a prolonged in vivo exposure to decitabine following small volume subcutaneous (SC) administration of guadecitabine. Safety and clinical activity in resistant MDS and AML have been shown in a Phase 1 trial.

View further details below

2016 EHA: OS and subgroup results from randomized Phase 2 study of SGI-110 in previously treated MDS