Courtney D. DiNardo, MD, MSCE, and Stéphane de Botton, MD, PhD, on AML: New Data on IDH2-Mutant Alleles, Enasidenib, and Conventional Care

2022 ASCO Annual Meeting


Courtney D. DiNardo, MD, MSCE, of The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, and Stéphane de Botton, MD, PhD, of Institut Gustave Roussy, discuss phase III findings from the IDHENTIFY trial, which showed that mutational burden and co-mutational profiles differed between patients with relapsed or refractory acute myeloid leukemia that exhibited IDH2-R140 and IDH2-R172 mutations. Enasidenib improved survival outcomes for patients with IDH2-R172 mutations: median overall survival and 1-year survival rates were approximately double those in the conventional care arm (Abstract 7005).


Disclaimer: This video transcript has not been proofread or edited and may contain errors.
Courtney DiNardo: Well, it is such a pleasure to be joined by you today, my friend and colleague, Dr. Stéphane de Botton. I was hoping you could kind of recap a little bit some of the data that you presented at the ASCO meeting. Stéphane de Botton: Well, thank you first, for the invite. These are the results of the subgroup analyzes of the IDHENTIFYtrial. The first trials that compare enocidnib in elderly population relapse, refractory AML with an IDH2 mutation to convention care regimes or NZDB. So overall these results are very encouraging because response rates were significantly better in NZDB, even for survival was significantly better. Time to treatment failure was significantly better. So we failed to demonstrate any superiority in terms of overall survival. But this is probably related to the high dropout in this study, where we saw, for instance, 20 patients who do not receive the allocated treatment before starting any treatment. So this may hamper what we've done, but globally it's positive.The key question here is about the significance of the two variants. The 142, which represents three quarters of the patients and the 172K. The biology is different, as you know, because the 172K is associated with less mutations and very specific co mutational burden. Great. Therefore, we try to analyze these data as based on the trial, because it'll be probably different at frontline. And first we found that overall, for both mutations, the response rate was significant. I know you're not surprised because you've seen these results. Courtney DiNardo: If I remember they were about the same as what was seen in the original phase one study. Stéphane de Botton: Almost yes. Courtney DiNardo: So about. 20% CR, 30% CR CRH, 40% overall response rates, more or less Stéphane de Botton: Exactly. So, overall the response rates was better. Whatever, the type of variants you have. First, the commutation in burden was different between de novo or newly diagnosed AML and relapse refractory. This is anticipated. And not that with the 172K, 20% add a TB3 mutation, which is high. Courtney DiNardo: Yeah. That is higher than I would've expected otherwise. Stéphane de Botton: Yep. And the higher incidents in both for ranks one, which is less, usually in newly diagnosed. So the pattern of mutations were also different. So the competition burden was higher in the 142 as expected. The median was five as opposed to four in the 172K and different mutation. So in that case, we thought that the results could be different and indeed they are different. With the 142 we are not very confident because the drop out was huge in the study. But with the 172K only one patient did not receive the allocated treatment in their conventional care. I would like to say that we are very confident about the robustness for the 172K of these results. Courtney DiNardo: And just recap again, real quick, the differential. So it was the R 172K patients that seemed to do particularly well with enasidanib? Or how would you describe that? Stéphane de Botton: Ah, so the response rate was really very impressive yeah. In that elderly, very pretreated population. So they achieved an overall response rate above 50%, with more than 30% of CR rates. So it's fairly high, but truly what was really impressive is the overall survival, almost 15 months, median overall survival for the 172K treated with ENA as opposed to those were once receive ENA in which the overall survival was almost eight months. So you double the overall survival. For event free survival was really, also very impressed. More than 10 months, as opposed to less than three. Courtney DiNardo: It really is. So the R 172K IDH2 mutated patients. So that's about a quarter to a third of the IDH2, mutated patients in general, in the relapse setting, single agent, seeing a median survival over a year, about 15 months, it's dramatic. Stéphane de Botton: It's fairly high and it represents a good demonstration that it's a very good target. This is not the monogenic disease, but if the commutation of burden, we previously published together that you increase the response rate and was exactly the same. But here you increase the overall survival in that subpopulation. So again, the tolerance was very good. There's nothing more to say. It's really very impressive. Courtney DiNardo: It's a well tolerated therapy targeted for patients with IDH2. Stéphane de Botton: In the relapse refractory setting. That's that's really something very, very impressive. Courtney DiNardo: Perfect. Well, thank you so much for joining us. This has been a pleasure.

Related Videos

Gynecologic Cancers

Ursula A. Matulonis, MD, and Domenica Lorusso, MD, PhD, on Gynecologic Cancers: New Findings on Trabectedin vs Clinician’s Choice Chemotherapy

Ursula A. Matulonis, MD, of Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, and Domenica Lorusso, MD, PhD, of Italy’s Gemelli University Hospital, discuss phase III data from the MITO23 trial on single-agent trabectedin vs clinician’s choice of chemotherapy in patients with recurrent ovarian, primary peritoneal, or fallopian tube cancers of BRCA-mutated or BRCAness phenotype. Although trabectedin has demonstrated antitumor activity in relapsed platinum-sensitive disease, it does not appear to improve survival outcomes when compared with standard chemotherapy in the BRCA-mutated population (Abstract LBA5504).

Gynecologic Cancers

Benoit You, MD, PhD, on Ovarian Cancer: Who Benefits From Bevacizumab in the First-Line Setting

Benoit You, MD, PhD, of Lyon University hospital (HCL, France) and GINECO group (France), discusses findings from the GOG-0218 trial of patients with ovarian cancer, which appears to confirm earlier data on the link between poor tumor chemosensitivity and benefit from concurrent plus maintenance bevacizumab. In Dr. You’s validation study, patients who derived the most progression-free and overall survival benefit from bevacizumab were those with high-risk disease (stage IV or incompletely resected stage III) associated with an unfavorable KELIM score (CA-125 kinetic elimination rate constant, calculable online) (Abstract 5553).

Kidney Cancer

Jonathan E. Rosenberg, MD, and Thomas Powles, MD, PhD, on Renal Cell Carcinoma: New Data on Pembrolizumab Plus Axitinib vs Sunitinib as First-Line Therapy

Jonathan E. Rosenberg, MD, of Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, and Thomas Powles, MD, PhD, of Barts Health NHS Trust, Queen Mary University of London, discuss phase III findings from the KEYNOTE-426 trial, which appear to support the long-term benefit of pembrolizumab plus axitinib for first-line treatment of patients with advanced clear cell renal cell carcinoma (Abstract 4513).

Pancreatic Cancer

Alfredo Carrato, MD, PhD, on Pancreatic Cancer: Nab-Paclitaxel, Gemcitabine, and FOLFOX for Metastatic Disease

Alfredo Carrato, MD, PhD, of Alcala de Henares University in Spain, discusses phase II results from the SEQUENCE trial, which showed that nab-paclitaxel, gemcitabine, and modified FOLFOX showed significantly higher clinical activity than the standard nab-paclitaxel and gemcitabine in the first-line setting of patients with untreated metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (Abstract 4022).

Breast Cancer

Stephanie Walker on Increasing the Participation of Black Women With Metastatic Breast Cancer in Clinical Trials

Stephanie Walker, a former nurse and current activist with the Metastatic Breast Cancer Alliance, discusses findings from the BECOME project (Black Experience of Clinical Trials and Opportunities for Meaningful Engagement). They show that, even though Black patients comprise between 4% and 6% of all clinical trial participants, Black women with metastatic breast cancer are willing to consider taking part if steps were taken to increase their awareness, build trust through clear communication with health-care providers, involve people of shared racial/ethnic identity and health experience, and help patients find and access trials (Abstract 1014).