37
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      European LeukemiaNet recommendations for the management and avoidance of adverse events of treatment in chronic myeloid leukaemia

      review-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Most reports on chronic myeloid leukaemia (CML) treatment with tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) focus on efficacy, particularly on molecular response and outcome. In contrast, adverse events (AEs) are often reported as infrequent, minor, tolerable and manageable, but they are increasingly important as therapy is potentially lifelong and multiple TKIs are available. For this reason, the European LeukemiaNet panel for CML management recommendations presents an exhaustive and critical summary of AEs emerging during CML treatment, to assist their understanding, management and prevention. There are five major conclusions. First, the main purpose of CML treatment is the antileukemic effect. Suboptimal management of AEs must not compromise this first objective. Second, most patients will have AEs, usually early, mostly mild to moderate, and which will resolve spontaneously or are easily controlled by simple means. Third, reduction or interruption of treatment must only be done if optimal management of the AE cannot be accomplished in other ways, and frequent monitoring is needed to detect resolution of the AE as early as possible. Fourth, attention must be given to comorbidities and drug interactions, and to new events unrelated to TKIs that are inevitable during such a prolonged treatment. Fifth, some TKI-related AEs have emerged which were not predicted or detected in earlier studies, maybe because of suboptimal attention to or absence from the preclinical data. Overall, imatinib has demonstrated a good long-term safety profile, though recent findings suggest underestimation of symptom severity by physicians. Second and third generation TKIs have shown higher response rates, but have been associated with unexpected problems, some of which could be irreversible. We hope these recommendations will help to minimise adverse events, and we believe that an optimal management of them will be rewarded by better TKI compliance and thus better CML outcomes, together with better quality of life.

          Related collections

          Most cited references257

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          European LeukemiaNet recommendations for the management of chronic myeloid leukemia: 2013.

          Advances in chronic myeloid leukemia treatment, particularly regarding tyrosine kinase inhibitors, mandate regular updating of concepts and management. A European LeukemiaNet expert panel reviewed prior and new studies to update recommendations made in 2009. We recommend as initial treatment imatinib, nilotinib, or dasatinib. Response is assessed with standardized real quantitative polymerase chain reaction and/or cytogenetics at 3, 6, and 12 months. BCR-ABL1 transcript levels ≤10% at 3 months, 10% at 6 months and >1% from 12 months onward define failure, mandating a change in treatment. Similarly, partial cytogenetic response (PCyR) at 3 months and complete cytogenetic response (CCyR) from 6 months onward define optimal response, whereas no CyR (Philadelphia chromosome-positive [Ph+] >95%) at 3 months, less than PCyR at 6 months, and less than CCyR from 12 months onward define failure. Between optimal and failure, there is an intermediate warning zone requiring more frequent monitoring. Similar definitions are provided for response to second-line therapy. Specific recommendations are made for patients in the accelerated and blastic phases, and for allogeneic stem cell transplantation. Optimal responders should continue therapy indefinitely, with careful surveillance, or they can be enrolled in controlled studies of treatment discontinuation once a deeper molecular response is achieved.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Dasatinib versus imatinib in newly diagnosed chronic-phase chronic myeloid leukemia.

            Treatment with dasatinib, a highly potent BCR-ABL kinase inhibitor, has resulted in high rates of complete cytogenetic response and progression-free survival among patients with chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) in the chronic phase, after failure of imatinib treatment. We assessed the efficacy and safety of dasatinib, as compared with imatinib, for the first-line treatment of chronic-phase CML. In a multinational study, 519 patients with newly diagnosed chronic-phase CML were randomly assigned to receive dasatinib at a dose of 100 mg once daily (259 patients) or imatinib at a dose of 400 mg once daily (260 patients). The primary end point was complete cytogenetic response by 12 months, confirmed on two consecutive assessments at least 28 days apart. Secondary end points, including major molecular response, were tested at a significance level of 0.0001 to adjust for multiple comparisons. After a minimum follow-up of 12 months, the rate of confirmed complete cytogenetic response was higher with dasatinib than with imatinib (77% vs. 66%, P=0.007), as was the rate of complete cytogenetic response observed on at least one assessment (83% vs. 72%, P=0.001). The rate of major molecular response was higher with dasatinib than with imatinib (46% vs. 28%, P<0.0001), and responses were achieved in a shorter time with dasatinib (P<0.0001). Progression to the accelerated or blastic phase of CML occurred in 5 patients who were receiving dasatinib (1.9%) and in 9 patients who were receiving imatinib (3.5%). The safety profiles of the two treatments were similar. Dasatinib, administered once daily, as compared with imatinib, administered once daily, induced significantly higher and faster rates of complete cytogenetic response and major molecular response. Since achieving complete cytogenetic response within 12 months has been associated with better long-term, progression-free survival, dasatinib may improve the long-term outcomes among patients with newly diagnosed chronic-phase CML. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00481247.) 2010 Massachusetts Medical Society
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Nilotinib versus imatinib for newly diagnosed chronic myeloid leukemia.

              Nilotinib has been shown to be a more potent inhibitor of BCR-ABL than imatinib. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of nilotinib, as compared with imatinib, in patients with newly diagnosed Philadelphia chromosome-positive chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) in the chronic phase. In this phase 3, randomized, open-label, multicenter study, we assigned 846 patients with chronic-phase Philadelphia chromosome-positive CML in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive nilotinib (at a dose of either 300 mg or 400 mg twice daily) or imatinib (at a dose of 400 mg once daily). The primary end point was the rate of major molecular response at 12 months. At 12 months, the rates of major molecular response for nilotinib (44% for the 300-mg dose and 43% for the 400-mg dose) were nearly twice that for imatinib (22%) (P<0.001 for both comparisons). The rates of complete cytogenetic response by 12 months were significantly higher for nilotinib (80% for the 300-mg dose and 78% for the 400-mg dose) than for imatinib (65%) (P<0.001 for both comparisons). Patients receiving either the 300-mg dose or the 400-mg dose of nilotinib twice daily had a significant improvement in the time to progression to the accelerated phase or blast crisis, as compared with those receiving imatinib (P=0.01 and P=0.004, respectively). No patient with progression to the accelerated phase or blast crisis had a major molecular response. Gastrointestinal and fluid-retention events were more frequent among patients receiving imatinib, whereas dermatologic events and headache were more frequent in those receiving nilotinib. Discontinuations due to aminotransferase and bilirubin elevations were low in all three study groups. Nilotinib at a dose of either 300 mg or 400 mg twice daily was superior to imatinib in patients with newly diagnosed chronic-phase Philadelphia chromosome-positive CML. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00471497.) 2010 Massachusetts Medical Society
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Leukemia
                Leukemia
                Leukemia
                Nature Publishing Group
                0887-6924
                1476-5551
                August 2016
                28 April 2016
                03 June 2016
                : 30
                : 8
                : 1648-1671
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Servicio de Hematologia y Grupo 44 IIS-IP, Hospital Universitario de la Princesa , Madrid, Spain
                [2 ]Department of Hematology and Oncology ‘L. and A. Seràgnoli', St Orsola University Hospital , Bologna, Italy
                [3 ]Department of Cellular Biotechnologies and Hematology, Sapienza University , Rome, Italy
                [4 ]Servicio de Hematologia, Hospital Virgen de la Salud , Toledo, Spain
                [5 ]Servicio Hematología y Hemoterapia, Hospital Universitario Ramón y Cajal , Madrid, Spain
                [6 ]Hematology/Oncology, Universitätsklinikum Jena , Jena, Germany
                [7 ]Seoul St Mary's Hospital, Leukemia Research Institute, The Catholic University of Korea , Seoul, South Korea
                [8 ]Medizinische Klinik mit Schwerpunkt Onkologie und Hämatologie, Campus Charité Mitte, Charité—Universitätsmedizin Berlin , Berlin, Germany
                [9 ]Department of Hematology and Medical Oncology, Winship Cancer Institute of Emory University , Atlanta, GA, USA
                [10 ]Department of Internal Medicine, Hematology and Oncology, Masaryk University Hospital Brno , Brno, Czech Republic
                [11 ]Department of Haematology Imperial College, Hammersmith Hospital , London, UK
                [12 ]Department of Hematology, Helsinki University Hospital Comprehensive Cancer Center, Helsinki , Finland
                [13 ]Hematology Research Unit, University of Helsinki , Helsinki, Finland
                [14 ]Service d'Hématologie Adulte, Hôpital Saint-Louis, APHP , Paris, France
                [15 ]III. Med. Klinik Medizinische Fakultät Mannheim der Universität Heidelberg , Mannheim, Germany
                [16 ]Medizinische Fakultät Mannheim der Universität Heidelberg , Mannheim, Germany
                [17 ]Department of Molecular and Clinical Cancer Medicine, University of Liverpool , Liverpool, UK
                Author notes
                [* ]Servicio de Hematologia y Grupo 44 IIS-IP, Hospital de la Princesa , Diego de León 62, Madrid 28006, Spain. E-mail: jlsteegmann.hlpr@ 123456salud.madrid.org or jlsteegmann@ 123456gmail.com
                Article
                leu2016104
                10.1038/leu.2016.104
                4991363
                27121688
                c27345ee-8b3c-4e6b-b4a6-6b3093989e0e
                Copyright © 2016 Macmillan Publishers Limited

                This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 International License. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in the credit line; if the material is not included under the Creative Commons license, users will need to obtain permission from the license holder to reproduce the material. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/

                History
                : 29 February 2016
                : 18 April 2016
                Categories
                Review

                Oncology & Radiotherapy
                Oncology & Radiotherapy

                Comments

                Comment on this article