Venetoclax combined with induction chemotherapy in patients with newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukaemia: a post-hoc, propensity score-matched, cohort study.

backgroundVenetoclax combined with intensive chemotherapy has been shown to be safe with promising activity in fit patients with newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukaemia. The aim of this study was to compare the activity of venetoclax plus intensive chemotherapy with intensive chemotherapy alone.

methodsThis was a post-hoc propensity score matched analysis of prospective clinical trials (NCT03214562, NCT02115295, and NCT01289457) in patients at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Texas, USA between March 29, 2010, and June 15, 2021. Eligible patients were aged 18 years and older, and had newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukaemia or high-risk myelodysplastic syndrome, and were treated within trials incorporating purine analogues with an anthracycline and cytarabine either with venetoclax plus intensive chemotherapy or with intensive chemotherapy alone. Patients in the venetoclax plus intensive chemotherapy cohort were matched with patients in the intensive chemotherapy cohort. Morphological response and measurable residual disease (MRD) was assessed using bone marrow aspiration and biopsy and eight-colour multiparameter flow cytometry. The primary objectives were rate of MRD negative composite complete response and cumulative incidence of transition to allogeneic haematopoietic stem-cell transplantation (HSCT). All patients who had response within two treatment cycles (induction and re-induction) were included in the analyses. Secondary objectives included assessment of event-free and overall survival.

findingsThe propensity matched cohort included 279 patients (median age 49 years [IQR 39-57]; 131 [47%] were men and 148 [53%] were women); 85 in the venetoclax plus intensive chemotherapy cohort and 194 in the intensive chemotherapy cohort. After a median follow up of 30 months (95% CI 26-36), 64 (86%) of 74 patients in the venetoclax plus intensive chemotherapy cohort had an MRD-negative composite complete response rate compared with 86 [61%] of 140 patients in the intensive chemotherapy cohort (odd ratio 3·2 [95% CI 1·5-6·7]; p=0·0028). The overall cumulative incidence of allogeneic HSCT in responding patients was higher with venetoclax plus intensive chemotherapy than intensive chemotherapy (79% [95% CI 67-88] vs 57% [49-65]; hazard ratio [HR] 1·52 [95% CI 1·11-2·08]; p=0·012). Venetoclax plus intensive chemotherapy improved event-free survival (median not reached [NR; 95% CI NR-NR] vs 14·3 months [10·7-33·5]; HR 0·57 [95% CI 0·34-0·95]; p=0·030), but overall survival did not significantly differ between the two cohorts (median NR [95% CI 24-NR] vs 32 months [19-NR]; HR 0·63 [95% CI 0·35-1·1], p=0·13). INTERPRETATIONS: Venetoclax combined with intensive induction chemotherapy induced deep MRD-negative remissions, allowing transition to allogeneic HSCT in first remission, and improvement in event-free survival. These results highlight the incremental benefit of venetoclax added to intensive induction chemotherapy across European LeukemiaNet risk groups, and serve as a benchmark to inform enrolment on future confirmatory prospective clinical trials.

fundingNone.