Recent years have witnessed major advances that have improved outcome of adults with acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL). The emergence of the concept of measurable residual disease has fine-tuned our prognostic models and guided our treatment decisions. The treatment paradigms of ALL have been revolutionized with the advent of tyrosine kinase inhibitors targeting BCR-ABL1, monoclonal antibodies targeting CD20 (rituximab), antibody-drug conjugates targeting CD22 (inotuzumab ozogamicin), bispecific antibodies (blinatumomab), and CD19 chimeric antigen receptor T cell therapy (tisagenlecleucel). These highly effective new agents are allowing for novel approaches that reduce reliance on intensive cytotoxic chemotherapy and hematopoietic stem cell transplantation in first remission. This comprehensive review will focus on the recent advances and future directions in novel therapeutic strategies in adult ALL.

Despite promising results with FLT3 inhibitors (FLT3i), response durations remain short. We studied pretreatment and relapse bone marrow samples from patients with FLT3-mutated acute myeloid leukemia (AML) treated with FLT3i-based therapies (secondary resistance cohort), and pretreatment bone marrow samples from patients with no response to FLT3i-based therapies (primary resistance cohort). Targeted next-generation sequencing (NGS) at relapse identified emergent mutations involving on-target FLT3, epigenetic modifiers, RAS/MAPK pathway, and less frequently WT1 and TP53. RAS/MAPK and FLT3-D835 mutations emerged most commonly following type I and II FLT3i-based therapies, respectively. Patients with emergent mutations at relapse had inferior overall survival compared with those without emergent mutations. Among pretreatment RAS-mutated patients, pretreatment cohort-level variant allelic frequencies for RAS were higher in nonresponders, particularly with type I FLT3i-based therapies, suggesting a potential role in primary resistance as well. These data demonstrate distinct pathways of resistance in FLT3-mutated AML treated with type I versus II FLT3i. Significance: Sequential NGS-based mutational analysis at relapse after FLT3i-based therapies showed distinct pathways of secondary resistance between type I and II FLT3i. FLT3 mutations may be lost at relapse after FLT3i-based therapies. Pretreatment RAS/MAPK mutations may also be associated with primary resistance in patients treated with type I FLT3i. See related commentary by Shastri et al., p. 113.

The past decade has witnessed major advances in our understanding of molecular biology, which led to breakthrough novel therapies, importantly including the B-cell lymphoma-2 (BCL-2) inhibitor venetoclax. Notably, venetoclax-based combinations have improved outcomes, including both remission rates and overall survival, of older patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) deemed "unfit" for intensive chemotherapy due to age or comorbidities. This has translated into a rapid and widespread use of venetoclax-based combinations in both academic and community-based settings. Other venetoclax-based combinations are being investigated in AML with the ultimate goal of improving cure rates across many subgroups; frontline and relapsed/refractory, in combination with intensive chemotherapy, in the post-transplant setting, or as maintenance strategy. In this article, we summarize the current available data on venetoclax-based combinations. We also highlight areas of unmet medical need, and we offer practical clinical pearls for management of patients receiving such therapy.

Copyright: Jiang et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License 3.0 (CC BY 3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. ABSTRACT Anti-PD-1/PD-L1 antibodies have been proved one of the most promising treatments against non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC); however, whether anti-PD-1/ PD-L1 antibodies can provide added benefits for pretreated patients with advanced NSCLC and which patients are most likely to benefit from anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy remain controversial. This meta-analysis evaluated the efficacy and safety between anti-PD-1/PD-L1 antibodies and docetaxel in previously treated, advanced NSCLC. PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane library databases were systematically searched for eligible studies. Five studies with a total of 3,025 patients were included. Our results showed that, for all patients, anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy prolonged overall survival (OS) (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.69; 95% CI, 0.63-0.75) and progression-free survival (PFS) (HR = 0.87; 95% CI, 0.80-0.94). For patients with PD-L1 expression ≥1%, anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy had higher objective response rates. In subgroup analysis according to the tumor PD-L1 expression level, anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy was associated with longer OS and PFS in patients with high PD-L1 expression (≥1%, ≥5%, ≥10% and ≥50%), but not in those with low expressions. In subgroup analysis of patients' characteristics, anti-PD-1/PD-L1 antibodies showed OS benefits across most prespecified subgroups, except for patients with EGFR mutation-positive and never smokers. For patients with EGFR mutation, anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy was an unfavorable factor of PFS. The grade 3 or 4 adverse events rates of anti-PD-1/PD-L1 treatment were significantly lower than that of docetaxel. Our results suggest that anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy significantly improves survival compared with docetaxel in patients with previously treated, PD-L1-positive, advanced NSCLC, and has a distinct safety profile from chemotherapy. www.impactjournals.com/oncotarget/

BACKGROUND The achievement of a 3‐month complete molecular response (CMR) is a major prognostic factor for survival in patients with Philadelphia chromosome (Ph)‐positive acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL). However, 25% of patients relapse during therapy with tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). METHODS The authors reviewed 204 patients with Ph‐positive ALL who were treated between January 2001 and December 2018 using the combination of hyper‐CVAD (hyperfractionated cyclophosphamide, vincristine, doxorubicin, and dexamethasone) plus a TKI (imatinib, 44 patients [22%]; dasatinib, 88 patients [43%]; or ponatinib, 72 patients [35%]). Progression‐free survival (PFS) was defined as the time from the start date of therapy to the date of relapse, death, or last follow‐up. Overall survival (OS) was defined as the time from the start date of therapy to the date of death or last follow‐up. RESULTS Overall, a 3‐month CMR was observed in 57% of patients, including 32% of those who received imatinib, 52% of those who received dasatinib, and 74% of those who received ponatinib. The median follow‐up was 74 months (imatinib, 180 months; dasatinib, 106 months; ponatinib, 43 months). Among 84 patients in 3‐month CMR, 17 (20%) proceeded to undergo allogeneic stem cell transplantation (ASCT). The 5‐year PFS and OS rates were 68% and 72%, respectively. By multivariate analysis, ponatinib therapy was the only significant favorable independent factor predicting for progression (P = .028; hazard ratio, 0.388; 95% CI, 0.166‐0.904) and death (P = .042; hazard ratio, 0.379; 95% CI, 0.149‐0.966). ASCT was not a prognostic factor for PFS and OS by univariate analysis. CONCLUSIONS In patients with Ph‐positive ALL, ponatinib is superior to other types of TKIs in inducing and maintaining a CMR, thus preventing disease progression. ASCT does not improve outcome once a 3‐month CMR is achieved.