Abstract
Background: Second generation TKI have shown preclinical activity against most imatinib resistant BCR-ABL KD mutations with the exception of T315I. Clinical efficacy has been demonstrated across all phases of CML after imatinib failure.
Study Aims: We investigated whether in vitro sensitivity of KD mutation correlates with outcome of pts receiving 2nd generation TKI.
Study Groups: We analyzed 169 pts with imatinib failure, who were treated with 2nd generation TKI, for detection of mutations in the entire KD of BCR-ABL. Median age was 50 years (yr) (11–96). They received imatinib for a median of 30 months (mo) (2–70) and were followed for a median of 23 mo (3–38) from the start of therapy with 2nd generation TKI.
Results: After imatinib failure, 81 pts (40 CP, 24 AP, 17 BP) received dasatinib (D) and 88 pts (19 CP, 47 AP, 22 BP) received nilotinib (N). KD mutations were detected prior to TKI switch in 42 pts (52%) treated with D and 45 pts (51%) treated with N. The IC50 values for each drug for in vitro kinase inhibition for each mutation (
Conclusions: 2nd generation TKI are capable of inducing hematologic and cyogenetic responses in a significant proportion of imatinib resistant pts across all phases. Outcome depends on the type of mutation, with mutations with predicted intermediate levels of sensitivity having decreased probability of response and EFS, particularly in CP. The correlation with IC50 is less evident in advanced phases suggesting more complex mechanisms of resistance.
. | . | . | percent . | 2-year (%) . | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Phase . | IC50 . | N . | MCyR . | CCyR . | EFS . | OS . |
EFS=Event-free survival; OS=Overall survival | ||||||
CP | Low | 18 | 84 | 74 | 78 | 88 |
Intermediate | 9 | 25 | 25 | 29 | 70 | |
P-value | 0.006 | 0.03 | 0.007 | 0.05 | ||
AP | Low | 29 | 41 | 38 | 39 | 75 |
Intermediate | 8 | 9 | 9 | 20 | 60 | |
P-value | 0.01 | 0.07 | 0.52 | 0.81 | ||
BP | Low | 7 | 29 | 14 | 20 | 14 |
Intermediate | 7 | 14 | 14 | 0 | 14 | |
P-value | 0.46 | 0.9 | 0.65 | 0.34 |
. | . | . | percent . | 2-year (%) . | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Phase . | IC50 . | N . | MCyR . | CCyR . | EFS . | OS . |
EFS=Event-free survival; OS=Overall survival | ||||||
CP | Low | 18 | 84 | 74 | 78 | 88 |
Intermediate | 9 | 25 | 25 | 29 | 70 | |
P-value | 0.006 | 0.03 | 0.007 | 0.05 | ||
AP | Low | 29 | 41 | 38 | 39 | 75 |
Intermediate | 8 | 9 | 9 | 20 | 60 | |
P-value | 0.01 | 0.07 | 0.52 | 0.81 | ||
BP | Low | 7 | 29 | 14 | 20 | 14 |
Intermediate | 7 | 14 | 14 | 0 | 14 | |
P-value | 0.46 | 0.9 | 0.65 | 0.34 |
Disclosure:Research Funding: Hk and JC received research grants from Novartis oncology and BMS. Membership Information: EJ is a member on Speakers Bureau for Novartis oncology and BMS.