Improved long-term tolerability with asciminib (ASC) vs investigator-selected (IS) tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) in patients (pts) with newly diagnosed chronic myeloid leukemia in chronic phase (CML-CP): Week 96 exploratory analysis of the phase

Abstract Introduction Long-term CML treatment (Tx) requires assessing adverse event (AE) burden over time to optimize safety, tolerability, and efficacy. ASC4FIRST (NCT04971226) results demonstrated superior efficacy and favorable safety/tolerability of ASC vs IS-TKIs in newly diagnosed CML-CP. A prior report showed a lower risk of discontinuation due to AEs with ASC vs second-generation (2G) TKIs in a time to Tx discontinuation due to AEs (TTDAE) analysis (hazard ratio, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.215-0.997), suggesting better tolerability with ASC. We report exploratory post hoc analyses, including an innovative analysis of AE-free days, further evaluating the tolerability of ASC vs IS-TKI (imatinib [IMA]/2G TKIs) by the wk 96 analysis cutoff (Oct 22, 2024). Methods Adults with newly diagnosed CML-CP were randomized 1:1 to receive ASC or IS-TKI (at label dose), stratified by ELTS risk category and prerandomization IS-TKI (IMA/2G TKIs). Dose modifications occurred per protocol for ASC and at investigator's discretion for IS-TKIs. All reported AEs occurred on Tx or ≤30 days after last dose. Exploratory tolerability analyses included frequency/grade/type of AEs; relative dose intensity; rate of dose adjustment, interruption, or discontinuation; percentage of AE-free days (number of days pt was on Tx without any-grade AEs divided by Tx duration in days, censored at the wk 96 visit; a value of 100% indicates no AEs were experienced on Tx); and pt-reported outcome (PRO) measures (PRO-CTCAE and FACIT GP5). Results Safety analyses included all pts who received Tx in IMA (ASCIMA [n=100]; IS-TKIIMA [n=99]) and 2G TKI (ASC2G [n=100]; IS-TKI2G [n=102]) strata. Median follow-up was similar across groups (ASCIMA [25.1 mo]; IS-TKIIMA [24.3 mo]; ASC2G [28.2 mo]; IS-TKI2G [27.7 mo]). More pts were continuing Tx at cutoff with ASCIMA (83.0%) vs IS-TKIIMA (52.5%) and ASC2G (81.0%) vs IS-TKI2G (69.6%). More pts had relative dose intensity of >90% with ASCIMA (86.0%) vs IS-TKIIMA (79.8%) and ASC2G (88.0%) vs IS-TKI2G (68.6%). The proportion of pts with dose reductions was lower with ASCIMA (n=19, 19.0%) vs IS-TKIIMA (n=23, 23.2%) and ASC2G (n=18, 18.0%) vs IS-TKI2G (n=56, 54.9%). A similar number of pts with ASCIMA (47.0%) vs IS-TKIIMA (47.5%) and fewer pts with ASC2G (46.0%) vs IS-TKI2G (63.7%) had dose interruptions for any reason (included AEs, dosing/dispensing error, physician/pt decision, and technical problems); interruptions due to AEs were fewer with ASC vs IS-TKIs (ASCIMA [33.0%] vs IS-TKIIMA [37.4%]; ASC2G [33.0%] vs IS-TKI2G [51.0%]). Less pts with ASC vs IS-TKIs had dose adjustment and/or interruption (ASCIMA [13.0%] vs IS-TKIIMA [18.2%]; ASC2G [14.0%] vs IS-TKI2G [31.4%]) and discontinuation (ASCIMA [3.0%] vs IS-TKIIMA [6.1%]; ASC2G [1.0%] vs IS-TKI2G [7.8%]) due to grade 1/2 nonhematologic AEs, most common (≥3%) being diarrhea, fatigue, COVID-19, nausea, and pleural effusion. A lower proportion of pts with ASC vs IS-TKIs discontinued due to grade ≥3 nonhematologic AEs (ASCIMA [2.0%] vs IS-TKIIMA [4.0%]; ASC2G [2.0%] vs IS-TKI2G [3.9%]). Dose adjustment and/or interruption due to grade ≥3 nonhematologic AEs occurred in 17.0% vs 8.1% of pts with ASCIMA vs IS-TKIIMA and 11.0% vs 17.6% with ASC2G vs IS-TKI2G. Pts with ASC vs IS-TKIs had a higher median percentage of AE-free days by wk 96 (ASCIMA [15.7%] vs IS-TKIIMA [3.5%]; ASC2G [22.6%] vs IS-TKI2G [4.3%]) and vs individual 2G TKIs (nilotinib [13.5%]; dasatinib [4.2%]; bosutinib [0.1%]) in this arm. Pts with ASC had a higher proportion of symptomatic (nonhematologic, nonlaboratory AEs) AE–free days (ASCIMA [31.2%] vs IS-TKIIMA [9.9%]; ASC2G [34.2%] vs IS-TKI2G [15.7%]; and vs individual 2G TKIs: nilotinib [30.3%]; dasatinib [8.5%]; bosutinib [0.1%]). When analyzing maximum scores in PRO-CTCAE reported from baseline to wk 96, symptoms reported with ASC vs IS-TKIs were generally less frequent and less severe, with a smaller impact on daily life. At wk 96, more pts reported being not at all bothered by Tx side effects with ASC vs IS-TKIs per FACIT GP5 (67.0% vs 46.1%). Conclusions Pts with ASC had more days free from AEs, especially symptomatic AEs, and reported a lower symptom burden. Effective relative dose intensity (>90%) was higher with ASC vs IS-TKIs, with generally fewer pts requiring dose reduction, interruption, or discontinuation. These results from ASC4FIRST further support ASC'sfavorable tolerability vs all current frontline TKIs.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Blood
Published
2025-11-03
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1182/blood-2025-5549
Primary Topic
Chronic Myeloid Leukemia Treatments
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Improved long-term tolerability with asciminib (ASC) vs investigator-selected (IS) tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) in patients (pts) with newly diagnosed chronic myeloid leukemia in chronic phase (CML-CP): Week 96 exploratory analysis of the phase

Jennifer E. Vaughn, Ennan Gu, Jörge E. Cortes, Yeow Tee Goh et al.
Blood
Chronic Myeloid Leukemia Treatments
article

Improved long-term tolerability with asciminib (ASC) vs investigator-selected (IS) tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) in patients (pts) with newly diagnosed chronic myeloid leukemia in chronic phase (CML-CP): Week 96 exploratory analysis of the phase

Jennifer E. Vaughn, Ennan Gu, Jörge E. Cortes, Yeow Tee Goh, David Wei, Andreas Hochhaus, Andrea Damon, Philipp le Coutre, Kathryn E. Flynn, Timothy P. Hughes, Ghayas C. Issa, Felice Bombaci, Gabriel Étienne, Richard A. Larson, Naoto Takahashi, Jianxiang Wang, Gabriel Marquez, Dong‐Wook Kim, In Ho Kim, Gopi Madhav Bommidi, Rajendra Jinwal, Dennis Kim, Jiří Mayer
article en

Abstract

Abstract Introduction Long-term CML treatment (Tx) requires assessing adverse event (AE) burden over time to optimize safety, tolerability, and efficacy. ASC4FIRST (NCT04971226) results demonstrated superior efficacy and favorable safety/tolerability of ASC vs IS-TKIs in newly diagnosed CML-CP. A prior report showed a lower risk of discontinuation due to AEs with ASC vs second-generation (2G) TKIs in a time to Tx discontinuation due to AEs (TTDAE) analysis (hazard ratio, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.215-0.997), suggesting better tolerability with ASC. We report exploratory post hoc analyses, including an innovative analysis of AE-free days, further evaluating the tolerability of ASC vs IS-TKI (imatinib [IMA]/2G TKIs) by the wk 96 analysis cutoff (Oct 22, 2024). Methods Adults with newly diagnosed CML-CP were randomized 1:1 to receive ASC or IS-TKI (at label dose), stratified by ELTS risk category and prerandomization IS-TKI (IMA/2G TKIs). Dose modifications occurred per protocol for ASC and at investigator's discretion for IS-TKIs. All reported AEs occurred on Tx or ≤30 days after last dose. Exploratory tolerability analyses included frequency/grade/type of AEs; relative dose intensity; rate of dose adjustment, interruption, or discontinuation; percentage of AE-free days (number of days pt was on Tx without any-grade AEs divided by Tx duration in days, censored at the wk 96 visit; a value of 100% indicates no AEs were experienced on Tx); and pt-reported outcome (PRO) measures (PRO-CTCAE and FACIT GP5). Results Safety analyses included all pts who received Tx in IMA (ASCIMA [n=100]; IS-TKIIMA [n=99]) and 2G TKI (ASC2G [n=100]; IS-TKI2G [n=102]) strata. Median follow-up was similar across groups (ASCIMA [25.1 mo]; IS-TKIIMA [24.3 mo]; ASC2G [28.2 mo]; IS-TKI2G [27.7 mo]). More pts were continuing Tx at cutoff with ASCIMA (83.0%) vs IS-TKIIMA (52.5%) and ASC2G (81.0%) vs IS-TKI2G (69.6%). More pts had relative dose intensity of >90% with ASCIMA (86.0%) vs IS-TKIIMA (79.8%) and ASC2G (88.0%) vs IS-TKI2G (68.6%). The proportion of pts with dose reductions was lower with ASCIMA (n=19, 19.0%) vs IS-TKIIMA (n=23, 23.2%) and ASC2G (n=18, 18.0%) vs IS-TKI2G (n=56, 54.9%). A similar number of pts with ASCIMA (47.0%) vs IS-TKIIMA (47.5%) and fewer pts with ASC2G (46.0%) vs IS-TKI2G (63.7%) had dose interruptions for any reason (included AEs, dosing/dispensing error, physician/pt decision, and technical problems); interruptions due to AEs were fewer with ASC vs IS-TKIs (ASCIMA [33.0%] vs IS-TKIIMA [37.4%]; ASC2G [33.0%] vs IS-TKI2G [51.0%]). Less pts with ASC vs IS-TKIs had dose adjustment and/or interruption (ASCIMA [13.0%] vs IS-TKIIMA [18.2%]; ASC2G [14.0%] vs IS-TKI2G [31.4%]) and discontinuation (ASCIMA [3.0%] vs IS-TKIIMA [6.1%]; ASC2G [1.0%] vs IS-TKI2G [7.8%]) due to grade 1/2 nonhematologic AEs, most common (≥3%) being diarrhea, fatigue, COVID-19, nausea, and pleural effusion. A lower proportion of pts with ASC vs IS-TKIs discontinued due to grade ≥3 nonhematologic AEs (ASCIMA [2.0%] vs IS-TKIIMA [4.0%]; ASC2G [2.0%] vs IS-TKI2G [3.9%]). Dose adjustment and/or interruption due to grade ≥3 nonhematologic AEs occurred in 17.0% vs 8.1% of pts with ASCIMA vs IS-TKIIMA and 11.0% vs 17.6% with ASC2G vs IS-TKI2G. Pts with ASC vs IS-TKIs had a higher median percentage of AE-free days by wk 96 (ASCIMA [15.7%] vs IS-TKIIMA [3.5%]; ASC2G [22.6%] vs IS-TKI2G [4.3%]) and vs individual 2G TKIs (nilotinib [13.5%]; dasatinib [4.2%]; bosutinib [0.1%]) in this arm. Pts with ASC had a higher proportion of symptomatic (nonhematologic, nonlaboratory AEs) AE–free days (ASCIMA [31.2%] vs IS-TKIIMA [9.9%]; ASC2G [34.2%] vs IS-TKI2G [15.7%]; and vs individual 2G TKIs: nilotinib [30.3%]; dasatinib [8.5%]; bosutinib [0.1%]). When analyzing maximum scores in PRO-CTCAE reported from baseline to wk 96, symptoms reported with ASC vs IS-TKIs were generally less frequent and less severe, with a smaller impact on daily life. At wk 96, more pts reported being not at all bothered by Tx side effects with ASC vs IS-TKIs per FACIT GP5 (67.0% vs 46.1%). Conclusions Pts with ASC had more days free from AEs, especially symptomatic AEs, and reported a lower symptom burden. Effective relative dose intensity (>90%) was higher with ASC vs IS-TKIs, with generally fewer pts requiring dose reduction, interruption, or discontinuation. These results from ASC4FIRST further support ASC'sfavorable tolerability vs all current frontline TKIs.

BloodVol. 146(Supplement 1)
Novartis (Switzerland) (CH), Advocates for Youth (US), The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center (US), Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College (CN), Akita University (JP), Medical College of Wisconsin (US), Eulji University (KR), Singapore General Hospital (SG), Princess Margaret Cancer Centre (CA), Seoul National University Hospital (KR), University of Chicago (US), Augusta University Health (US), Novartis (India) (IN), University Hospital Brno (CZ), Institut Bergonié (FR), Jena University Hospital (DE), South Australian Health and Medical Research Institute (AU), Institute of Hematology & Blood Diseases Hospital (CN), Tris Pharma (United States) (US), The Ohio State University (US), Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin (DE)
Openalex Percentile: Top 45%
Chronic Myeloid Leukemia Treatments
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.