Patients with TP53-Mutated Acute Myeloid Leukemia Receiving Intensive Induction Therapy Have Superior Outcomes Due to a Higher Rate of Salvage Therapy: A Single Institution, Retrospective Study

Le résumé fourni par la source

Background: TP53 mutations (TP53m) define the most treatment-refractory acute myeloid leukemia (AML) subtype. Optimal treatment approaches have not been established in this setting. We reviewed our institutional experience to identify therapy sequencing, treatment response, and survival patterns in these patients. Methods: This study was a single-center, retrospective cohort analysis. Results: Our cohort includes 86 TP53m and 337 TP53 wild-type (TP53wt) adult AML patients. TP53m AML patients presented with lower bone marrow and peripheral blasts; none presented with hyperleukocytosis. Patients who received intensive treatment up front demonstrated superior overall survival (OS) over those receiving first-line non-intensive therapy (2-year OS 22% versus 7%; p = 0.02). However, the complete remission (CR) rates among the first-line intensive and non-intensive therapy groups were comparable (21.9% and 29.4%, respectively, p = 0.49). The improved OS is therefore attributed to superior cumulative CR in the intensive group. First-line intensively treated patients were more likely to receive and respond to salvage, leading to a cumulative CR rate of 65.7% (versus 29.4%, p = 0.003). Achieving CR at any point is strongly associated with superior survival outcomes with 2-year OS of 31% versus 0% for those not achieving CR ever (p < 0.01). Conclusions: We find that TP53m AML rarely presents with oncological emergencies, suggesting that clinical trial enrollment is feasible in this group. Additionally, in our cohort, intensive induction therapies lead to superior survival outcomes attributed to successful salvage therapy. These data suggest that strategic therapy sequencing and salvage therapy may be important in optimizing outcomes for TP53m AML patients.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.