Efficacy and Safety of Gilteritinib versus Sorafenib as Post-Transplant Maintenance in Patients With FLT3-ITD Acute Myeloid Leukemia

Jason Yeh, Oren Pasvolsky, Rima M. Saliba, Bradley Figgins, Christopher Wang, Zhou Fang, Sairah Ahmed, Musa Yilmaz, Naval Daver, Farhad Ravandi, Courtney DiNardo, Nicholas J. Short, Tapan Kadia, Gheath Al-Atrash, May Daher, David Marin Costa, Uday Popat, Richard Champlin, Elizabeth Shpall, Betül Oran*

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

1 Scopus citations

Abstract

Background: FLT3-ITD AML is associated with an increased risk of relapse, leading many patients to receive an allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (alloHCT) after induction. Unfortunately, relapse rate after alloHCT remains high and strategies are needed to improve outcomes. Materials and Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of adult patients with FLT3-ITD AML who received alloHCT from 6/1/2016 to 12/31/2020 and received gilteritinib (GILT) or sorafenib (SORA)as post-transplant maintenance, outside of a clinical trial. Results: A total of 55 patients were treated with either GILT (n = 27) or SORA (n = 29) for post-HCT maintenance. One patient was treated with SORA after first alloHCT and GILT after second alloHCT. Patient characteristics were comparable between groups. FLT3 inhibitors were utilized in pre-alloHCT therapy in all but 1 patient. The median duration of time that patients remained on GILT was 385 days (range, 10-804) and on SORA 315 days (range, 3-1777). 1-year PFS and relapse incidence were similar between GILT and SORA; PFS was 66% versus 76% (P = .4) and relapse incidence was 19% versus 24% (P = .6), respectively.Both groups had high incidence of Grade 3-4 hematological toxicity, including neutropenia (45% GILT and 34% SORA) and thrombocytopenia (30% GILT and 52% SORA). Only 44% and 14% patients who received GILT and SORA did not discontinue maintenance, respectively. Conclusion: Our results revealed comparable PFS and a similar toxicity profile when SORA and GILT are used as post- HCT maintenance therapy.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)e819-e826
JournalClinical Lymphoma, Myeloma and Leukemia
Volume24
Issue number11
DOIs
StatePublished - Nov 2024
Externally publishedYes

Keywords

  • AML
  • FLT3 inhibitors
  • FLT3-ITD
  • Maintenance
  • Stem cell transplant

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Efficacy and Safety of Gilteritinib versus Sorafenib as Post-Transplant Maintenance in Patients With FLT3-ITD Acute Myeloid Leukemia'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this