Outcomes of chronic myeloid leukemia patients after therapeutic failure to conventional tyrosine kinase inhibitors and asciminib

2Citations
Citations of this article
13Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Patients with chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) who have failed conventional tyrosine kinase inhibitors (cTKIs) and asciminib constitute a complex group of patients with few therapeutic options. A retrospective descriptive multicenter observational study was carried out including patients with CML who had presented a therapeutic failure to ≥ 2 cTKIs and asciminib, and had received or were not candidates to ponatinib. Of the 19 patients enrolled, 8 patients failed asciminib due to intolerance and 11 due to resistance. The most common strategy for intolerant patients was to initiate a previously administered cTKI (6/8) with dose adjustments or symptomatic management of adverse events (AEs). Of the patients who failed due to resistance, only patients who underwent progenitor transplantation achieved profound long-term responses. A frequent strategy was to use ponatinib (4/11) in patients previously considered non-candidates, with poor responses in patients in whom dose reductions were used, and severe AEs in patients at standard doses. In the remaining patients, cTKIs and other agents (interferon, hydroxyurea, citarabine, busulfan) were used with poor responses. Patients who progressed to advanced stages had a dismal prognosis. With a median follow-up of 11.2 months, overall survival of the global cohort was 73%; 100% for intolerant patients, 71% for resistant patients and 25% for those who discontinue asciminib in accelerated/blastic phase.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Pérez-Lamas, L., Díaz, A. S., Casterá, E. M., Soto, M. H., Coll, A. P., De las Heras, N., … García-Gutiérrez, V. (2024). Outcomes of chronic myeloid leukemia patients after therapeutic failure to conventional tyrosine kinase inhibitors and asciminib. Annals of Hematology, 103(11), 4537–4544. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00277-024-05906-6

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free