Next Article in Journal
Biocatalysis: “A Jack of all Trades...”
Next Article in Special Issue
A Screening of Antineoplastic Drugs for Acute Myeloid Leukemia Reveals Contrasting Immunogenic Effects of Etoposide and Fludarabine
Previous Article in Journal
FOXC2 Disease Mutations Identified in Lymphedema Distichiasis Patients Impair Transcriptional Activity and Cell Proliferation
Previous Article in Special Issue
The Bone’s Role in Myeloid Neoplasia
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
IJMS
Volume 21
Issue 14
10.3390/ijms21145114
ijms-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Cutting Edge Molecular Therapy for Acute Myeloid Leukemia

by
Kenichi Miyamoto
and
Yosuke Minami
*
Department of Hematology, National Cancer Center Hospital East, Kashiwa 277-8577, Japan
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2020, 21(14), 5114; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms21145114
Submission received: 31 May 2020 / Revised: 9 July 2020 / Accepted: 14 July 2020 / Published: 20 July 2020
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Genetics, Biology, and Treatment of Acute Myeloid Leukemia 2.0)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Recently, whole exome sequencing for acute myeloid leukemia (AML) has been performed by a next-generation sequencer in several studies. It has been revealed that a few gene mutations are identified per AML patient. Some of these mutations are actionable mutations that affect the response to an approved targeted treatment that is available for off-label treatment or that is available in clinical trials. The era of precision medicine for AML has arrived, and it is extremely important to detect actionable mutations relevant to treatment decision-making. However, the percentage of actionable mutations found in AML is about 50% at present, and therapeutic development is also needed for AML patients without actionable mutations. In contrast, the newly approved drugs are less toxic than conventional intensive chemotherapy and can be combined with low-intensity treatments. These combination therapies can contribute to the improvement of prognosis, especially in elderly AML patients who account for more than half of all AML patients. Thus, the treatment strategy for leukemia is changing drastically and showing rapid progress. In this review, we present the latest information regarding the recent development of treatment for AML.

1. Introduction

Acute myeloid leukemia (AML) is a genetically heterogeneous malignancy of hematopoietic stem cells. Conventionally, the prognosis of AML is determined based on chromosomal abnormalities and fusion genes. Intensive chemotherapy, such as 7 days of cytarabine + 3 days of anthracycline (7 + 3) or high-dose cytarabine, are standard treatments for younger AML patients, and the indication of transplantation is considered based on the prognosis of AML. In contrast, more than half of the patients with newly diagnosed AML are elderly [1] and ineligible for intensive chemotherapy. As a result, the elderly patients (older than 65 years of age) with AML have a short survival (5-year survival estimates (<10%) [2,3], and there is a large unmet need for treatment.
Recently, whole exome sequencing for AML has been performed by a next-generation sequencer in several studies [4,5]. It was revealed that a few gene mutations are identified per AML patient [4,5]. Among them, FLT3 (28%), NPM1 (27%), DNMT3A (26%), and IDH1/2 (20%) mutations are observed in 20% to 30% of cases, but the frequency of more than 10 other types of mutations is less than 10% [5]. Some of these low-frequency mutations are actionable mutations, which are defined as genetic aberrations in the DNA and would be expected to elicit a response to an approved targeted treatment that is available for off-label treatment or available in clinical trials [6]. Since 2017, four new drugs targeting gene mutations (midostaurin, giltertinib, ivosidenib, and enasidenib) have been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for AML (Table 1). The era of precision medicine for AML has arrived, and it is extremely important to detect actionable mutations relevant to treatment decision-making.
However, the percentage of actionable mutations found in AML is about 50% at present [5], and therapeutic development is also needed for AML patients without actionable mutations. Indeed, the FDA has approved four drugs (venetoclax, CPX-351, mylotarg, and glasdegib) except for agents targeting actionable mutations. In addition, these newly approved drugs are less toxic than the conventional intensive chemotherapy and can be combined with a low-intensity treatment such as low-dose cytarabine or azacitidine. Therefore, it is expected that these combination therapies will contribute to the improvement of prognosis, especially in elderly AML patients who account for more than half of all AML patients.
Thus, the treatment strategies for leukemia are drastically changing with the rapid development of new drugs. In this review, we provide the latest information regarding the recent developments in AML treatment, including small molecule drugs targeting mutant genes, small molecule drugs targeting signal pathways, drugs targeting epigenetic regulation, antibody therapy, immune checkpoint inhibitors, and adoptive therapy (Figure 1).
Abbreviation; AML, acute myeloid leukemia; ADC, antibody drug conjugate; α-KG, a-ketoglutarate; BAK, BCL-2 antagonist/killer; BAX, BCL-2-associated X protein; BCL2, B-cell leukemia/lymphoma 2; BET, bromodomain and extra-terminal motif; BiTE, bispecific T cell engagers; BRD, bromodomain; CAR, chimeric antigen receptor; CDK, cyclin dependent kinase; CTLA-4, cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4; DART, dual affinity retargeting molecules; DNMT, DNA methyltransferase; DOT1L, disruptor of telomeric silencing-1-like histone methyltransferase; FLT3, FMS-like tyrosine kinase 3; GLI, glioma-associated oncogene; IDH, isocitrate dehydrogenases; IL15R, interleukin 15 receptor; LSD1, lysine-specific histone demethylase 1; MCL1, myeloid cell leukemia 1; NAE, NEDD8-activating enzyme; PD-1, programmed cell death 1; PD-L1, programmed death-ligand 1; PTCH, Patched-1; SMO, smoothened; TriKE, trispecific killer cell engagers; 2HG, R-2-hydroxyglutarate

2. Small Molecule Drugs Targeting Mutant Genes

2.1. Drugs Targeting fms-Like Tyrosine Kinase 3 Mutation

FMS-like tyrosine kinase 3 (FLT3) belongs to a cytokine receptor (CD135) tyrosine kinase family and regulates the proliferation and differentiation of early hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells [7]. FLT3 mutations are found in approximately 30% of patients with AML, and two types of mutations in the FLT3 gene are well-known. FLT3 internal tandem duplications (ITDs) of the juxtamembrane domain occurs in around 25% of AML patients [8], and point mutations in the activation loop of the tyrosine kinase domain (TKD) occurs in about 5–10% of AML patients [8]. FLT3-ITD is a poor prognostic factor based on the FLT3-ITD to wild-type (WT) allelic ratio [9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16]. Moreover, a high FLT3-ITD to WT allelic ratio (FLT3-ITDhigh, ≥0.5) is associated with poor prognosis, but a low FLT3-ITD to WT allelic ratio (FLT3-ITDlow, <0.5) is not associated with poor prognosis [17].
First-generation FLT3 tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs), such as midostaurin and sorafenib, were not designed to target FLT3 kinase [18]. However, these inhibitors can show activity against KIT, PDGFR, and VEGFR as multikinase inhibitors [18].
Midostaurin with intensive chemotherapy prolonged the overall survival (OS) (4-year survival rate of 51% vs. 44%, hazard ratio (HR) 0.78; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.63–0.96; one-sided p = 0.009) and event-free survival (EFS) (4-year EFS rate of 28% vs. 21% HR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.66–0.93; one-sided p = 0.002) compared with a placebo with intensive chemotherapy in a randomized placebo-controlled phase III trial in 717 patients (<60 years old) with newly diagnosed FLT3-mutated AML (FLT3-ITD and FLT3-TKD) (RATIFY) [19]. In this study, midostaurin with intensive chemotherapy showed a better efficacy in OS and EFS irrespective of FLT3 mutation status (FLT3-ITDhigh, ≥0.7; FLT3-ITDlow, <0.7; or FLT3-TKD) [19]. Accordingly, midostaurin was approved in combination with standard chemotherapy by the FDA in 2017.
Sorafenib is another first-generation multi-kinase inhibitor and was approved for several solid tumors. Although the addition of sorafenib to intensive chemotherapy did not show clinical benefits in a phase II trial [20], several studies demonstrated the efficacy of sorafenib as a maintenance therapy post-allogeneic stem cell transplantation for FLT3-ITD-positive AML [21,22,23]. In a Sormain trial, a 2-year relapse-free survival of 85% was shown in the sorafenib group vs. a 2-year RFS of 53.3% in the placebo (HR 0.39, 95% CI; 0.18–0.85; p = 0.0135) as maintenance therapy post-allogeneic stem cell transplantation for FLT3-ITD-positive AML [23]. In settings other than allogeneic stem cell transplantation, sorafenib showed clinical activity in combination with a lower-intensity chemotherapy such as azacitidine (overall response rate (ORR) 46%, complete response (CR) 16%) in patients with FLT3-ITD-positive relapsed or refractory AML [24].
Second-generation FLT3 TKIs such as quizartinib, crenolanib, and gilteritinib have a more selective inhibition of FLT3 than first-generation FLT3 TKIs. Quizartinib is designed to target FLT3 and a highly selective FLT3-ITD inhibitor, but the inhibitory activity against FLT3-TKD is low [25,26]. In contrast, quizartinib does not show activity against FLT3D835-mutated AML [27]. Notable side effects of quizartinib include QT interval prolongation. The frequency of QT interval prolongation was reduced by the administration of lower dose rates (30–60 mg/day) compared with higher doses (90–135 mg/day) while maintaining efficacy [28,29]. In a phase II trial, quizartinib showed single-agent activity (cCR rate of 50% (CR 3% + CRi 47%)) in FLT3-ITD-positive relapsed/refractory (R/R) AML patients [30]. There was a high frequency of CR with incomplete hematologic recovery in this study. Poor blood cell recovery may occur due to inhibition against KIT by quizartinib [30]. In a phase III trial (QuANTUM-R study, n = 367), quizartinib showed a survival benefit versus (vs.) salvage chemotherapy (median OS of 6.2 months vs. 4.7 months; HR 0.76; 95% CI, 0.58–0.98; p = 0.02), with a manageable safety profile in R/R FLT3-ITD-positive AML patients [31]. Quizartinib was approved for R/R AML patients with FLT3-ITD in Japan but not the USA in 2019.
Crenolanib shows inhibitory activity against both FLT3-ITD and FLT3-TKD, including D835 [32]. In a phase II trial of 65 FLT3-ITD-positive R/R AML patients treated with crenolanib as a single agent, there was an ORR of 50% (CRi 39%, partial remission (PR) 11%) among 18 patients who had not received prior FLT3 inhibitors and 31% (CRi 17%, PR 14%) among 36 patients who had received prior FLT3 inhibitors [32]. Crenolanib in combination with intensive chemotherapy showed a cCR rate of 83% (24/29) in younger FLT3-mutated (ITD and TKD) AML patients (<60 years) [33]. A phase II trial comparing crenolanib vs. midostaurin in combination with induction chemotherapy and consolidation therapy in newly diagnosed AML patients (≤60 years) with the FLT3 mutation is ongoing (NCT03258931).
Gilteritinib is a highly selective FLT3 TKI; it also inhibits AXL, which is another receptor tyrosine kinase that promotes proliferation and activates AML cells [34,35]. Gilteritinib showed a cCR rate of 41% and a CR rate of 11% in 169 patients with an FLT3 ITD or TKD mutation in a phase II trial including 252 R/R AML patients [36]. Gilteritinib as a single agent demonstrated a higher cCR rate (34.0% vs. 15.3%) and longer survival (median OS of 9.3 months vs. 5.6 months; HR for death, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.49–0.83; p < 0.001) compared with salvage chemotherapy in the phase III ADMIRAL trial including 247 R/R FLT3-mutated AML patients [37]. Based on the results of an interim analysis of this study, gilteritinib was approved by the FDA in 2018. Furthermore, a randomized trial evaluating the additional effect of gilteritinib on midostaurin in combination with intensive chemotherapy in untreated patients (≤65 years) with FLT3-mutated AML has been initiated (NCT03836209). Moreover, gilteritinib is currently being studied as an upfront treatment vs. midostaurin in combination with intensive chemotherapy and as a maintenance therapy following induction/consolidation treatment in first remission (NCT02236013 and NCT 02927262). Gilteritinib is also being studied as a maintenance therapy following allogeneic stem cell transplantation for patients with FLT3-ITD-positive AML in the phase III setting (NCT02997202).

2.2. Drugs Targeting Isocitrate Dehydrogenase Mutation

Isocitrate dehydrogenases (IDH) are enzymes that catalyze the oxidative decarboxylation of isocitrate to a-ketoglutarate (α-KG) [38]. The IDHs are divided into three types. IDH1 is expressed in the cytoplasm and IDH2/3 in the mitochondria. Mutant IDH acquires a new function and produces an oncometabolite called R-2-hydroxyglutarate (2-HG) from α-KG [39]. This conversion reduces the normal α-KG and α-KG-dependent ten-eleven translocation-2 (TET2) function deteriorates. As a result, histone demethylation is not performed correctly, and disorders of cell differentiation occur. 2-HG contributes to cancer by inhibiting various enzymes such as TET and histone demethylase. IDH1 or IDH2 mutations occur in 15% to 20% of AML patients, and are more prevalent in AML patients with a normal karyotype [5,40].
Enasidenib inhibits both R140Q- and R172K-mutated IDH2 [41]. In a phase I/II trial, 100 mg/d enasidenib showed an ORR of 38.8% with a cCR of 29.0% in 214 patients with R/R IDH2 mutant AML [42]. The median OS for all 214 R/R AML patients who received enasidenib 100 mg/d was 8.8 months (95% CI, 7.7–9.6). Enasidenib was well tolerated in this study. As a special side effect, IDH differentiation syndrome with fever, dyspnoea due to lung infiltrates, pleural effusion, and leukocytosis occurred in 6.4% of the participating patients [42]. The FDA approved enasidenib for R/R AML with IDH2 mutations in 2017. Enasidenib combined with intensive chemotherapy achieved a cCR (CRi or CRp) rate of 72% in an open-label, multicenter, phase I study including 89 patients with newly diagnosed AML with an IDH2 mutation [43]. Currently, a phase III trial evaluating the clinical benefit of enasidenib combined with induction, consolidation, and maintenance therapy for patients with newly diagnosed IDH2-mutated AML is ongoing (NCT03839771).
Ivosidenib is a selective IDH1 mutation inhibitor. Ivosidenib showed an ORR of 41% (CR 22%, CRi 8%) as a single agent in a phase I dose-escalation and dose-expansion study including 258 R/R AML patients with the IDH1 mutation [44]. The median OS of the primary efficacy population was 8.8 months (95% CI, 6.7–10.2). In this study, IDH differentiation syndrome occurred in 3.9% of the patients who started with an ivosidenib dose of 500 mg daily. Based on the results of this study, ivosidenib was approved by the FDA for newly diagnosed AML with the IDH1 mutation in patients who are at least 75 years old or who are unfit for intensive chemotherapy on 2 May, 2019. In the frontline setting, ivosidenib (500 mg daily) in combination with intensive chemotherapy showed clinical efficacy (cCR rate of 80%) in a phase I trial of 60 newly diagnosed AML patients with an IDH1 mutation [43].
Ivosidenib in combinational therapy (intensive or low intensive chemotherapy) is currently being studied in randomized phase III trials investigating previously untreated AML patients with an IDH1 mutation (NCT03839771 and NCT03173248).

2.3. Drugs Targeting TP53 Mutation

The tumor suppressor gene TP53 has been observed in more than 50% of human cancers, whereas only 5–10% of AML cases have TP53 mutations [45,46,47]. The frequency of TP53 mutations is higher in therapy-related AML patients (~30%) and in elderly AML patients with a complex karyotype (~70%) [4,5,48,49]. The TP53 mutation is an independent indicator of poor outcomes [48]. Intensive chemotherapy with cytotoxic agents, such as anthracyclines and cytarabine, could not overcome the poor outcome (CR rate 20–40%, median OS 4–6 months) of AML with a TP53 mutation [50,51]. APR-246 is a reactivator of mutated TP53 [52]. A phase Ib/II study is ongoing to evaluate the safety and efficacy of APR-246 in combination with azacitidine for TP53-mutated myeloid neoplasms, including oligoblastic AML (20–30% myeloblasts) (NCT03072043). The preliminary results of this study showed a CR rate of 50% (n = 8). Arsenic trioxide/Trisenox/ATO is one of the therapeutic agents that configure the standard treatment of acute promyelocytic leukemia [53]. ATO degrades mutant TP53 via the 26S proteasome pathway and also activates wild-type TP53, leading tumor cells to apoptosis [54,55]. A multi-institution phase II trial is ongoing to identify if using decitabine, cytarabine, and ATO as a therapy for AML patients with TP53 mutations has a better relapse-free survival and complete response compared to using decitabine and cytarabine (NCT03381781). Furthermore, the cholesterol-lowering drugs named statins (atorvastatin/lipitor) can induce the degradation of abnormal TP53 proteins and inhibit tumor growth in TP53-mutated tumor cells [56]. A pilot trial to determine if atorvastatin is sufficient for decreasing the level of conformational mutant TP53 in TP53 mutants and TP53 wild-type malignancies, including AML, is ongoing (NCT03560882).

3. Small Molecule Drugs Targeting Signal Pathways

3.1. BCL2 Inhibition

B-cell leukemia/lymphoma 2 (BCL-2), which is one of the BCL-2 family proteins that also include BCL-XL and MCL-1, promotes cell survival. BCL-2 regulates the mitochondrial apoptotic pathway and plays an important role in the chemoresistance and survival of AML blasts [57,58,59]. Venetoclax is a potent selective inhibitor of BCL-2 but not BCL-XL or MCL-1 [60,61]. In a phase II trial, venetoclax showed an ORR of 19% (6/32, CR 6%, CRi 13%) as a single agent in patients with r/r AML or who are unfit for intensive chemotherapy [62]. An international phase Ib/II study evaluated the safety and efficacy of venetoclax in combination with low-dose cytarabine (LDAC) in elderly patients with previously untreated AML ineligible for intensive chemotherapy [63]. In this study, the CR/CRi rate was 54% (CR 26% + CRi 28%, 95% CI, 42–65%), and the median OS was 10.1 months (95% CI, 5.7–14.2 months) in 82 AML patients who received 600 mg of venetoclax. In contrast, a large, multicenter, phase Ib dose-escalation and expansion study was conducted to evaluate the safety and efficacy of venetoclax in combination with azacitidine or decitabine in elderly patients with previously untreated AML ineligible for intensive chemotherapy (n = 145) [64]. The CR/CRi (CR 37%, CRi 30%) rates were 67%, with an ORR of 68% (99/145), and the median OS for all the patients was 17.5 months (95% CI, 12.3 months not reached) in this study. Based on these results, venetoclax was approved in combination with LDAC and hypomethylating agents (HMAs) (azacitidine or decitabine) by the FDA in 2018. In the relapsed and refractory settings, ongoing trials are evaluating the efficacy of venetoclax in combination with FLT3 inhibitors, intensive chemotherapy, or decitabine (NCT03625505, NCT03214562, and NCT03404193). In the front-line setting, several trials assessing the clinical benefit of venetoclax in low intensive or intensive treatments are ongoing (NCT02993523, NCT03069352, NCT03941964, and NCT03709758).

3.2. Smoothened (SMO) Inhibitor

The activation of the hedgehog (HH) signaling pathway is known to be involved in leukemia cell survival and drug resistance. Hedgehog, a secreted protein, activates smoothened (SMO) by binding to the PTCH (Patched-1) receptor. Activated SMO initiates GLI (glioma-associated oncogene) protein activation and increased HH target-genes (BCL2, MYC, and Cyclin-D1) involved in leukemia cell survival and proliferation [65,66]. SMO inhibitors inhibit the HH signaling pathway by binding to SMO. Currently, the FDA approved glasdegib as an oral drug in combination with LDAC for newly diagnosed AML in patients who are 75 years old or older or who have comorbidities that preclude intensive induction chemotherapy. This approval was based on the results of a phase III trial (BRIGHT AML 1003) (n = 115) that showed the efficacy of glasdegib + LDAC compared with LDAC alone (median OS of 8.3 months vs. 4.3 months, HR of 0.46 (95% CI: 0.30–0.71; p = 0.0002)) in newly diagnosed AML patients unfit for intensive chemotherapy [67]. To evaluate the additional effect of glasdegib on intensive chemotherapy, a phase III study comparing intensive chemotherapy + glasdegib with intensive chemotherapy alone in younger patients with previously untreated AML (BRIGHT AML1019) (n = 720) is ongoing (NCT03416179). The other SMO inhibitors (vismodegib and sonidegib) are also being currently investigated in early phase trials (NCT02073838 and NCT01826214, respectively).

3.3. Inhibitor of NEDD8-Activating Enzyme (NAE)

The proper expression and degradation of proteins is essential for tumor cell growth and survival. Anti-tumor effects are expected in AML by inhibiting the proteolytic pathway within the proteasome pathway. Pevonedistat (TAK-924/MLN4924), which is a novel inhibitor of NAE, impairs NEDD8-regulated cullin-RING-type ligase action by inhibiting NEDD8, and causes antiproliferative effects [68]. A phase Ib trial of pevonedistat combined with azacitidine for older patients with AML who were deemed unfit to receive intensive chemotherapy has been conducted [69]. In this study, pevonedistat plus azacitidine showed a 50% ORR (20 CR, 5 CRi, and 7 PR), with a median remission duration of 8.3 months (95% CI, 5.52–12.06 months) [69]. A phase III study is currently underway to confirm the utility of pevonedistat plus azacitidine for MDS and AML with a low blast percentage (NCT03268954).

3.4. CDK9 Inhibitor

A cyclin-dependent kinase 9 (CDK9) is a member of the CDK family which controls cell-cycle progression and gene transcription. Dysregulation in the CDK9 pathway activates the mRNA transcription of target genes including MYC and MCL-1, and this has been observed in AML [70]. Alvocidib is a competitive CDK inhibitor of the ATP-binding site with potent activity against the CDK family, including CDK9. Several clinical studies have investigated alvocidib in combination with cytarabine and mitoxantrone (FLAM) in R/R AML [71,72] and newly diagnosed AML [73,74,75]. Overall, CR rates (CR + CRi) of 67% to 70% were achieved in a few phase II trials in newly diagnosed AML patients. To predict patients who respond to alvocidib, a biomarker-driven phase II study comparing FLAM vs. cytarabine and mitoxantrone in patients with MCL-1-dependent R/R AML is ongoing (NCT02520011). Outside of that, there is an ongoing phase I study which was initiated to explore alvocidib and standard 7 + 3 chemotherapy in patients with newly diagnosed AML (NCT03298984). The other CDK9 inhibitors (BAY 1143572 and TG02) are also being investigated in early phase trials (NCT02345382, NCT01204164).

4. Drugs Targeting Epigenetic Regulation

The system that controls gene expression by chromosomal changes but not changes in the DNA base sequence is called epigenetics. Chromosomal changes refer to chemical modifications, such as the methylation of DNA in nucleosomes, histone acetylation and methylation, and chromatin modification. The Cancer Genome Atlas Research Network reported that, of 200 AML patients, DNA methylation-related genetic mutations occurred in 44% and chromatin modification-related genetic mutations occurred in 30% [5].

4.1. DNA-Hypomethylating Agents

Azacitidine or decitabine, which was the first class of epigenetic drug used as DNA-hypomethylating agents, was approved by the FDA in the 2000s. They inhibit DNA methyltransferase, which suppresses tumor suppressor genes by the methylation of the CpG island in the promoter region. These drugs have been used for the treatment of high-grade myelodysplastic syndrome and AML with a low blast count [76,77,78]. In 2018, the FDA approved azacitidine or decitabine in combination with venetoclax for elderly AML patients ineligible for intensive chemotherapy.
In addition to DNA-hypomethylating agents, chromatin modulators have recently been developed as an epigenetic therapy for AML. The three key targets to inhibit are the function of the epigenetic writers (disruptor of telomeric silencing 1-like histone methyltransferase (DOT1L)), epigenetic erasers (lysine-specific histone demethylase 1 (LSD1)), and epigenetic readers (the bromodomain and extra-terminal motif (BET)) in AML patients.

4.2. DOT1L Inhibitor

DOT1L is a lysine methyltransferase that methylates a specific amino acid on histone H3K79 and activates a cancer-promoting gene via an MLL fusion protein (MLL-AF9) [79,80]. Pinometostat (EPZ-5676) is a first-in-class inhibitor of the histone methyltransferase DOT1L. Pinometostat showed a modest clinical activity in a phase I study including 43 R/R AML patients [81]. In this study, 37 out of 43 AML patients had MLL rearrangements or MLL partial tandem duplication, and only one patient out of the 43 AML patients achieved CR.

4.3. LSD1 Inhibitor

LSD is a lysine demethylase that catalyzes the demethylation of dimethyl and monomethyl forms of H3K4 and regulates gene expression epigenetically. LSD1, one of the LSD isozymes, is involved in the proliferation of various cancer cells [82,83]. Numerous LSD1 inhibitors, such as TCP, INCB059872, and IMG-7289, are currently being investigated in early clinical trials in AML patients (NCT02273102, NCT02261779, NCT02717884, NCT02712905, and NCT02842827).

4.4. BET Inhibitor

BET inhibitors suppress cancer cell growth by inhibiting the binding of bromodomain proteins to histones with acetylation modification. BET inhibitors induce the apoptosis of MLL-fusion leukemia cells [84]. Some clinical trials evaluating the efficacy and safety of BET inhibitors, such as MK-8628-005, FT-1101, and RO6870810/TEN-010, are ongoing (NCT02698189, NCT02543879, and NCT02308761).

5. Antibody Therapy

Monoclonal antibodies (MoAb) play an important role in cancer treatment, and it is believed that treatment strategies using MoAb are reasonable for leukemia because of the accessibility of malignant cells in the blood and bone marrow. Surface antigens targeted by MoAb are limited for leukemia, because most of the suitable antigens on AML for MoAb are also found on healthy myeloid precursors, which can easily result in severe cytopenia. Most MoAbs target CD33 or CD123 in clinical studies of AML. MoAb conjugated with a toxic agent (antibody drug conjugates; ADC) has been developed, because unconjugated MoAb is ineffective for AML. Furthermore, MoAbs that bind to both immune cells and leukemia cells have been developed as a novel approach. These MoAbs bring cytotoxic T cells (by binding to CD3) in proximity with leukemia cells (by binding to a specific leukemia antigen) and T cell activation and leukemia cell destruction. This includes bispecific T cell engagers (BiTEs), bispecific/trispecific killer cell engagers designed to target CD16 on NK cells (BiKE/TriKE), or dual-affinity retargeting (DART) molecules.

5.1. Antibody Drug Conjugates (ADC)

CD33 is a myeloid differentiation antigen and is expressed in about 90% of leukemic cells [85,86]. Gemtuzumab ozogamicin (GO) is a humanized anti-CD33 antibody conjugated to calicheamicin, which is a cytotoxic agent that causes double-strand DNA breaks. In 2017, the FDA approved GO for the treatment of newly diagnosed CD33-positive AML in adults and for the treatment of R/R CD33-positive AML in adults. This approval is based on the results of ALFA-0701, AML-19, and MyloFrance-1 [87,88,89]. In the ALFA-0701 study, which was a multicenter, randomized, open-label phase III study of 271 patients with newly diagnosed, de novo AML aged 50 to 70 years, the estimated median EFS was 17.3 months in the GO plus chemotherapy group compared with 9.5 months in the chemotherapy-alone group (hazard ratio of 0.56 (95% CI: 0.42–0.76)) [87]. Mylotarg (GO) was reapproved by the FDA for the treatment of adults with newly diagnosed CD33-positive AML and patients aged 2 years and older with R/R CD33-positive AML on 1 September 2017. The FDA extended the indication of mylotarg for newly diagnosed CD33-positive AML to include pediatric patients aged 1 month and older on 16 June 2020.
Another ADC targeting CD33 is vadastuximab talirine (SGN-CD33A) using a pyrrolobenzodiazepine dimer. In a phase I trial (NCT01902329) (n = 131), vadastuximab talirine as monotherapy showed clinical activity (cCR 28% (CR 11% + CRi 17%); 95% CI, 9.5–53.5%, 5 of 18 patients) at the recommended monotherapy dose of 40 µg/kg [90]. In a combination cohort (NCT01902329), vadastuximab talirine and HMA had a composite CRR of 70% (CR 43% + CRi 26%; 95% CI, 55.7–81.7%) in all 53 patients [91]. Furthermore, in a phase Ib combination trial (NCT02326584) (n = 42), vadastuximab talirine and intensive chemotherapy (7 + 3 chemotherapy) showed a promising efficacy, with a 78% CR and CRi rate [92]. 225Ac-lintuzumab (Actimab-A) is a radioimmunoconjugate composed of 225Ac linked to a humanized anti-CD33 monoclonal antibody that is currently being studied in untreated older AML patients unfit for intensive chemotherapy. In a phase II study, 225Ac-lintuzumab showed a 56% CRR (CRp 22% and CRi 34%) in nine patients [93].
CD123 is expressed in over 95% of AML patient samples, and the overexpression of CD123 is a driver of AML proliferation [94]. CSL360 is a monoclonal antibody targeted to CD123, and this antibody did not show clinical activity in a phase I trial (NCT00401739) [95]. However, several phase I/II clinical trials of anti-CD123 ADCs (NCT02848248) are ongoing based on promising results in preclinical studies [96,97,98].

5.2. Antibody-Dependent Cellular Cytotoxicity Therapy

Recently, novel antibody-based immunotherapies, such as a modified antibody designed to crosslink tumor cells with immune cells (T cells or NK cells), have been developed in AML. BiTE is an antibody drug that combines an antibody against a tumor cell surface antigen and an antibody against an antigen expressed on immune cells, such as CD3. BiTE is already being developed as a treatment for patients with B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL). Blinatumomab, which has dual specificity for CD19 and CD3, showed a high response and relapse-free survival in R/R CD19-positive ALL patients [99,100,101]. In AML, the therapeutic development of some BiTEs is underway. Due to promising preclinical data, several CD33/CD3 BiTE antibodies, such as AMG 330, GEM333, AMG 673 (a half-life extended antibody), and AMV564 (in combination with pembrolizumab), are being investigated in phase I clinical trials in AML patients (NCT02520427, NCT03516760, NCT03224819, and NCT03144245).
DART is a dual-affinity re-targeting molecule that incorporates two single-chain variable fragments (scFv) stabilized by a C-terminal disulfide bridge, while BiTE is a small molecule comprising two scFvs linked in tandem [102,103,104]. DART has additional stability from its disulfide bridge, leading to more favorable cross-linking. A few CD123/CD3 DART antibodies (MGD006 or JNJ-63709178) are being investigated in a phase I clinical trial in R/R AML patients (NCT02152956, NCT02715011).
Similar to BiTE and DART antibodies, bi- and tri-specific killer engagers (BiKEs and TriKEs, respectively) against tumor antigens to activate NK cell cytotoxicity have also been developed. GTB-3550 (161533) is a CD16/IL-15/CD33 TriKE antibody. A phase I/II clinical trial of GTB-3550 is currently underway in CD33-expressing myeloid malignancies, including AML patients (NCT03214666).

6. Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor

Immune checkpoint inhibitors have been already approved for several solid tumors by the FDA. In hematologic malignancies, immune checkpoint inhibitors have shown effectiveness in Hodgkin lymphoma and have been approved [105]. Several immune checkpoint pathways, such as cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4 (CTLA-4), programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1), and macrophage checkpoint CD47, can play an important role in the treatment of AML or MDS.

6.1. Anti-CTLA-4

CTLA-4 (CD152) is a protein receptor on T-cells which downregulates immune responses. CTLA-4 acts as an off switch by competing with the costimulatory receptor CD28 for CD80 and CD86 on the surface of antigen-presenting cells, and inhibits T-cell maturation and differentiation [106]. In AML, ipilimumab (anti-CTLA-4 antibody) showed a CR rate of 23% (5/22), with a median 1-year OS rate of 49% in a phase I trial (n = 28), including 12 patients with relapsed AML after allogeneic stem cell transplantation [107]. Several clinical trials evaluating the efficacy and safety of ipilimumab are ongoing in AML patients (NCT02890329).

6.2. Anti-PD-1

PD-1 is a cell surface molecule that inhibits T-cell proliferation, cytokine production, and cytolytic function by binding to its ligands PD-L1 or PD-L2 on the surface of antigen-presenting cells [108]. In a pilot phase II study (n = 14) to evaluate the efficacy of nivolumab maintenance in high-risk AML patients in CR after induction and consolidation chemotherapy, the 6- and 12-month rates of CR duration were 79% and 71%, respectively (NCT02532231) [109]. In a phase I/II study (n = 51), a CR/CRi rate of 18% (6/35) with a median OS of 9.3 months (1.8-14.3 months) was shown in R/R AML patients with poor risk features (secondary AML, poor risk cytogenetics) who received nivolumab (anti-PD-1 antibody) and azacitidine approximately every 4–5 weeks indefinitely [110]. Currently, several clinical trials using PD-1 inhibitors in combination with ipilimumab or hypomethylating agents are ongoing in AML patients (NCT02275533, NCT02532231, NCT02464657, NCT02397720, NCT03092674, NCT02768792, NCT02845297, NCT02996474, NCT02708641, NCT02771197, NCT02775903, NCT02892318).

6.3. Anti-CD47

CD47 is a cell transmembrane protein that inhibits phagocytosis by interacting with signal regulatory protein-α on antigen-presenting cells [111]. The upregulation of CD47 is found in various types of cancer, including AML, and plays a role in immune escape. In AML, there are some ongoing clinical trials to evaluate the efficacy and safety of Hu5F9G4, which is a monoclonal anti-CD47 antibody for R/R AML patients (NCT02678338, NCT03248479).

7. Adoptive Cell Therapy

Chimeric Antigen Receptor (CAR) T-Cell Therapy

Chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) consists of an extracellular domain generated by joining the heavy and light chain variable regions of a monoclonal antibody with a linker to form an scFv molecule. CAR T-cells are genetically engineered to express CARs on autologous T-cells by a retro-, adeno-, or lentiviral vector carrying the CAR gene, and are infused back into the patient. CAR T-cells combine the antibody in its antigen on the surface of target cells and show tumor-lytic activity.
In the setting of B-ALL and non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, many clinical trials to evaluate the efficacy of CAR T-cell therapy have been conducted and have shown remarkable clinical activities [112,113,114]. While CAR T-cell therapy shows a high efficacy when the specific antigens on target cells are clearly identified as B-cell malignancies targeting CD19 and CD20 [113,114,115,116], the development of CAR T-cell therapy in AML may be a challenge because AML cells do not have a specific antigen. Many of the AML-associated antigens such as CD33 and CD123 are to some degree expressed on normal myeloid cells, so myeloablation should occur with the use of CAR T-cell therapy targeting CD33 and CD123 [117]. A few clinical trials could not show a high efficacy despite the promising results of preclinical studies of CAR T-cell therapy [118,119]. Besides myeloablation, severe cytokine release syndrome has been reported frequently in CAR T-cell therapy for AML [119,120].
Although there are some challenges, several early phase trials of CAR T-cell therapy targeting AML-associated antigens such as CD33, CD38, CD56, and CD123 are currently ongoing (NCT03971799, NCT04318678, NCT03222674, NCT03190278, NCT03556982, NCT03114670, NCT02159495).

8. Conclusions

A lot of clinical trials evaluating the efficacy of promising investigational drugs in AML are ongoing (Table 2), and more drugs will go to market than ever before. Several new agents can create overlapping treatment options, especially in elderly, unfit AML patients as well as in R/R AML patients. From now on, how to use these new agents properly is one of the issues in the treatment of AML. Physicians should select an optimal treatment depending on factors such as age, performance status, comorbidities, and genetic mutations. In particular, genome profiling analysis upon new diagnoses will be needed to select an optimal first line treatment.
During treatments such as small molecule drugs targeting mutant genes, leukemia cells acquire secondary resistance (e.g., the acquisition of new gene mutations, secondary mutations in the same gene, and new alterations in signaling pathways) [121,122,123,124,125]. Not only upon new diagnoses but also at relapse or refractory periods, genome profiling analyses should be conducted to detect the secondary resistance of leukemia cells and select an optimal second line treatment in AML patients (Figure 2). In the future, more detailed secondary resistance mechanisms and the frequency of secondary resistance will be revealed [126].
Not only upon new diagnoses but also in relapse or refractory periods, genome profiling analyses should be conducted to detect the secondary resistance of leukemia cells and select an optimal second line treatment in AML patients. Molecular therapy includes small molecule drugs targeting mutant genes detectable by a genome profiling test.

Author Contributions

K.M. wrote the first draft and all the authors revised the manuscript. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

K.M. declares no competing financial interests. Y.M. received research funding from Ono and received honoraria from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Novartis, and Pfizer. This paper was supported by the National Cancer Research and Development expenses grant.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program. 1988–2014 (SEER 13). Available online: https://seer.cancer.gov/faststats/ (accessed on 19 February 2019).
  2. Appelbaum, F.R.; Gundacker, H.; Head, D.R.; Slovak, M.L.; Willman, C.L.; Godwin, J.E.; Anderson, J.E.; Petersdorf, S.H. Age and acute myeloid leukemia. Blood 2006, 107, 3481–3485. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Vasu, S.; Kohlschmidt, J.; Mrózek, K.; Eisfeld, A.; Nicolet, D.; Sterling, L.J.; Becker, H.; Metzeler, K.H.; Papaioannou, D.; Powell, B.L.; et al. Ten-year outcome of patients with acute myeloid leukemia not treated with allogeneic transplantation in first complete remission. Blood Adv. 2018, 2, 1645–1650. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  4. Papaemmanuil, E.; Gerstung, M.; Bullinger, L.; Gaidzik, V.I.; Paschka, P.; Roberts, N.D.; Potter, N.E.; Heuser, M.; Thol, F.; Bolli, N.; et al. Genomic classification and prognosis in acute myeloid leukemia. N. Engl. J. Med. 2016, 374, 2209–2221. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Ley, T.J.; Miller, C.; Ding, L.; Raphael, B.J.; Mungall, A.J.; Robertson, A.G.; Hoadley, K.; Triche, T.J., Jr.; Laird, P.W.; Baty, J.D.; et al. Cancer Genome Atlas Research Network. Genomic and epigenomic landscapes of adult de novo acute myeloid leukemia. N. Engl. J. Med. 2013, 368, 2059–2074. [Google Scholar] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  6. Carr, T.H.; McEwen, R.; Dougherty, B.; Johnson, J.H.; Dry, J.R.; Lai, Z.; Ghazoui, Z.; Laing, N.M.; Hodgson, D.R.; Cruzalegui, F.; et al. Defining actionable mutations for oncology therapeutic development. Nat. Rev. Cancer 2016, 16, 319–329. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Small, D.; Levenstein, M.; Kim, E.; Carow, C.; Amin, S.; Rockwell, P.; Witte, L.; Burrow, C.; Ratajczak, M.Z.; Gewirtz, A.M.; et al. STK-1, the human homolog of Flk-2/Flt-3, is selectively expressed in CD34+ human bone marrow cells and is involved in the proliferation of early progenitor/stem cells. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 1994, 91, 459–463. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  8. Bullinger, L.; Dohner, K.; Dohner, H. Genomics of Acute Myeloid Leukemia Diagnosis and Pathways. J. Clin. Oncol. 2017, 35, 934–946. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Thiede, C.; Steudel, C.; Mohr, B.; Schaich, M.; Schäkel, U.; Platzbecker, U.; Wermke, M.; Bornhäuser, M.; Ritter, M.; Neubauer, A.; et al. Analysis of FLT3-activating mutations in 979 patients with acute myelogenous leukemia: Association with FAB subtypes and identification of subgroups with poor prognosis. Blood 2002, 99, 4326–4335. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  10. Pratcorona, M.; Brunet, S.; Nomdedeu, J.; Ribera, J.M.; Tormo, M.; Duarte, R.; Escoda, L.; Guardia, R.; Paz Queipo de Llano, M.; Salamero, O.; et al. Favorable outcome of patients with acute myeloid leukemia harboring a low-allelic burden FLT3-ITD mutation and concomitant NPM1 mutation: Relevance to post-remission therapy. Blood 2013, 121, 2734–2738. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  11. Gale, R.E.; Green, C.; Allen, C.; Mead, A.J.; Burnett, A.K.; Hills, R.K.; Linch, D.C. The impact of FLT3 internal tandem duplication mutant level, number, size, and interaction with NPM1 mutations in a large cohort of young adult patients with acute myeloid leukemia. Blood 2008, 111, 2776–2784. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  12. Linch, D.C.; Hills, R.K.; Burnett, A.K.; Khwaja, A.; Gale, R.E. Impact of FLT3 (ITD) mutant allele level on relapse risk in intermediate-risk acute myeloid leukemia. Blood 2014, 124, 273–276. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  13. How, J.; Sykes, J.; Gupta, V.; Yee, K.W.L.; Schimmer, A.D.; Schuh, A.C.; Minden, M.D.; Kamel-Reid, S.; Brandwein, J.M. Influence of FLT3-internal tandem duplication allele burden and white blood cell count on the outcome in patients with intermediate-risk karyotype acute myeloid leukemia. Cancer 2012, 118, 6110–6117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Schneider, F.; Hoster, E.; Unterhalt, M.; Schneider, S.; Dufour, A.; Benthaus, T.; Mellert, G.; Zellmeier, E.; Kakadia, P.M.; Bohlander, S.K.; et al. The FLT3 ITD mRNA level has a high prognostic impact in NPM1 mutated, but not in NPM1 unmutated, AML with a normal karyotype. Blood 2012, 119, 4383–4386. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  15. Allen, C.; Hills, R.K.; Lamb, K.; Evans, C.; Tinsley, S.; Sellar, R.; O’Brien, M.; Yin, J.L.; Burnett, A.K.; Linch, D.C.; et al. The importance of relative mutant level for evaluating impact on outcome of KIT, FLT3 and CBL mutations in core-binding factor acute myeloid leukemia. Leukemia 2013, 27, 1891–1901. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Koszarska, M.; Meggyesi, N.; Bors, A.; Batai, A.; Csacsovszki, O.; Lehoczky, E.; Adam, E.; Kozma, A.; Lovas, N.; Sipos, A.; et al. Medium-sized FLT3 internal tandem duplications confer worse prognosis than short and long duplications in a non-elderly acute myeloid leukemia cohort. Leuk. Lymphoma 2014, 55, 1510–1517. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Döhner, H.; Estey, E.; Grimwade, D.; Amadori, S.; Appelbaum, F.R.; Büchner, T.; Dombret, H.; Ebert, B.L.; Fenaux, P.; Larson, R.A.; et al. Diagnosis and management of AML in adults: 2017 ELN recommendations from an international expert panel. Blood 2017, 129, 424–447. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  18. Grunwald, M.R.; Levis, M.J. FLT3 inhibitors for acute myeloid leukemia: A review of their efficacy and mechanisms of resistance. Int. J. Hematol. 2013, 97, 683–694. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  19. Stone, R.M.; Mandrekar, S.J.; Sanford, B.L.; Laumann, K.; Geyer, S.; Bloomfield, C.D.; Thiede, C.; Prior, T.W.; Döhner, K.; Marcucci, G.; et al. Midostaurin plus chemotherapy for acute myeloid leukemia with a FLT3 mutation. N. Engl. J. Med. 2017, 377, 454–464. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Rollig, C.; Serve, H.; Huttmann, A.; Noppeney, R.; Müller-Tidow, C.; Krug, U.; Baldus, C.D.; Brandts, C.H.; Kunzmann, V.; Einsele, H.; et al. Addition of sorafenib versus placebo to standard therapy in patients aged 60 years or younger with newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukaemia (SORAML): A multicentre, phase 2, randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol. 2015, 16, 1691–1699. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Battipaglia, G.; Ruggeri, A.; Massoud, R. Efficacy and feasibility of sorafenib as a maintenance agent after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation for Fms-like tyrosine kinase 3-mutated acute myeloid leukemia. Cancer 2017, 123, 2867–2874. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Chen, Y.B.; Li, S.; Lane, A.A.; Connolly, C.; Del Rio, C.; Valles, B.; Curtis, M.; Ballen, K.; Cutler, C.; Dey, B.R.; et al. Phase 1 trial of maintenance sorafenib after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation for fms-like tyrosine kinase 3 internal tandem duplication acute myeloid leukemia. Biol. Blood Marrow Transplant. 2014, 20, 2042–2048. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  23. Burchert, A.; Bug, G.; Finke, J.; Stelljes, M.; Rollig, C.; Wäsch, R.; Bornhäuser, M.; Berg, T.; Lang, F.; Ehninger, G.; et al. Sorafenib As Maintenance Therapy Post Allogeneic Stem Cell Transplantation for FLT3-ITD Positive AML: Results from the Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Multicentre Sormain Trial. Blood 2018, 132, 661. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Ravandi, F.; Alattar, M.L.; Grunwald, M.R.; Rudek, M.A.; Rajkhowa, T.; Richie, M.A.; Pierce, S.; Daver, N.; Garcia-Manero, G.; Faderl, S.; et al. Phase 2 study of azacytidine plus sorafenib in patients with acute myeloid leukemia and FLT-3 internal tandem duplication mutation. Blood 2013, 121, 4655–4662. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Zarrinkar, P.P.; Gunawardane, R.N.; Cramer, M.D.; Gardner, M.F.; Brigham, D.; Belli, B.; Karaman, M.W.; Pratz, K.W.; Pallares, G.; Chao, Q.; et al. AC220 is a uniquely potent and selective inhibitor of FLT3 for the treatment of acute myeloid leukemia (AML). Blood 2009, 114, 2984–2992. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Levis, M. Quizartinib for the treatment of FLT3-ITD acute myeloid leukemia. Future Oncol. 2014, 10, 1571–1579. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Smith, C.C.; Wang, Q.; Chin, C.S.; Salerno, S.; Damon, L.E.; Levis, M.J.; Perl, A.E.; Travers, K.J.; Wang, S.; Hunt, J.P.; et al. Validation of ITD mutations in FLT3 as a therapeutic target in human acute myeloid leukemia. Nature 2012, 485, 260–263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  28. Cortes, J.E.; Kantarjian, H.; Foran, J.M.; Ghirdaladze, D.; Zodelava, M.; Borthakur, G.; Gammon, G.; Trone, D.; Armstrong, R.C.; James, J.; et al. Phase 1 study of quizartinib administered daily to patients with relapsed or refractory acute myeloid leukemia irrespective of FMS-like tyrosine kinase 3-internal tandem duplication status. J. Clin. Oncol. 2013, 31, 3681–3687. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Schiller, G.J.; Tallman, M.S.; Goldberg, S.L.; Perl, A.E.; Marie, J.-P.; Martinelli, G.; Larson, R.A.; Russell, N.; Trone, D.; Gammon, G.; et al. Final results of a randomized phase 2 study showing the clinical benefit of quizartinib (AC220) in patients with FLT3-ITD positive relapsed or refractory acute myeloid leukemia. J. Clin. Oncol. 2014, 32, 7100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Cortes, J.; Perl, A.E.; Dohner, H.; Kantarjian, H.; Martinelli, G.; Kovacsovics, T.; Rousselot, P.; Steffen, B.; Dombret, H.; Estey, E.; et al. Quizartinib, an FLT3 inhibitor, as monotherapy in patients with relapsed or refractory acute myeloid leukaemia: An open-label, multicentre, single-arm, phase 2 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2018, 19, 889–903. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Cortes, J.E.; Khaled, S.; Martinelli, G.; Perl, A.E.; Ganguly, S.; Russell, N.; Krämer, A.; Dombret, H.; Hogge, D.; Jonas, B.A.; et al. Quizartinib versus salvage chemotherapy in relapsed or refractory FLT3-ITD acute myeloid leukaemia (QuANTUM-R): A multicentre, randomised, controlled, open-label, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2019, 20, 984–997. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Cortes, J.E.; Kantarjian, H.M.; Kadia, T.M.; Borthakur, G.; Konopleva, M.; Garcia-Manero, G.; Daver, N.G.; Pemmaraju, N.; Jabbour, E.; Estrov, Z.; et al. Crenolanib besylate, a type I pan-FLT3 inhibitor, to demonstrate clinical activity in multiply relapsed FLT3-ITD and D835 AML. J. Clin. Oncol. 2016, 34, 7008. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Wang, E.S.; Tallman, M.S.; Stone, R.M.; Walter, R.B.; Karanes, C.; Jain, V.; Collins, R.H. Low Relapse Rate in Younger Patients 60 Years Old with Newly Diagnosed FLT3-Mutated Acute Myeloid Leukemia (AML) Treated with Crenolanib and Cytarabine/Anthracycline Chemotherapy. Blood 2017, 130, 566. [Google Scholar]
  34. Mori, M.; Kaneko, N.; Ueno, Y.; Yamada, M.; Tanaka, R.; Saito, R.; Shimada, I.; Mori, K.; Kuromitsu, S. Gilteritinib, a FLT3/AXL inhibitor, shows antileukemic activity in mouse models of FLT3 mutated acute myeloid leukemia. Investig. New Drugs 2017, 35, 556–565. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  35. Lee, L.Y.; Hernandez, D.; Rajkhowa, T.; Smith, S.C.; Raman, J.R.; Nguyen, B.; Small, D.; Levis, M. Preclinical studies of gilteritinib, a next-generation FLT3 inhibitor. Blood 2017, 129, 257–260. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  36. Perl, A.E.; Altman, J.K.; Cortes, J.; Smith, C.; Litzow, M.; Baer, M.R.; Claxton, D.; Erba, H.P.; Gill, S.; Goldberg, S.; et al. Selective inhibition of FLT3 by gilteritinib in relapsed or refractory acute myeloid leukemia: A multicentre, first-in-human, open-label, phase 1–2 study. Lancet Oncol. 2017, 18, 1061–1075. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Perl, A.E.; Martinelli, G.; Cortes, J.E.; Neubauer, A.; Berman, E.; Paolini, S.; Montesinos, P.; Baer, M.R.; Larson, R.A.; Ustun, C.; et al. Gilteritinib or chemotherapy for relapsed or refractory FLT3-mutated AML. N. Engl. J. Med. 2019, 381, 1728–1740. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Cairns, R.A.; Mak, T.W. Oncogenic isocitrate dehydrogenase mutations: Mechanisms, models, and clinical opportunities. Cancer Discov. 2013, 3, 730–741. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  39. Dang, L.; White, D.W.; Gross, S.; Bennett, B.D.; Bittinger, M.A.; Driggers, E.M.; Fantin, V.R.; Jang, H.G.; Jin, S.; Keenan, M.C.; et al. Cancer-associated IDH1 mutations produce 2-hydroxyglutarate [published addendum appears in Nature. 2010, 465, 966]. Nature 2009, 462, 739–744. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  40. Mardis, E.R.; Ding, L.; Dooling, D.J.; Larson, D.E.; McLellan, M.D.; Chen, K.; Koboldt, D.C.; Fulton, R.S.; Delehaunty, K.D.; McGrath, S.D.; et al. Recurring mutations found by sequencing an acute myeloid leukemia genome. N. Engl. J. Med. 2009, 361, 1058–1066. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  41. Yen, K.; Travins, J.; Wang, F.; David, M.D.; Artin, E.; Straley, K.; Padyana, A.; Gross, S.; DeLaBarre, B.; Tobin, E.; et al. AG-221, a First-in-Class Therapy Targeting Acute Myeloid Leukemia Harboring Oncogenic IDH2 Mutations. Cancer Discov. 2017, 7, 478–493. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  42. Stein, E.M.; DiNardo, C.D.; Fathi, A.T.; Pollyea, D.A.; Stone, R.M.; Altman, J.K.; Roboz, G.J.; Patel, M.R.; Collins, R.; Flinn, I.W.; et al. Molecular remission and response patterns in patients with mutant-IDH2 acute myeloid leukemia treated with enasidenib. Blood 2019, 133, 676–687. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  43. Stein, E.M.; DiNardo, C.D.; Fathi, A.T.; Mims, A.S.; Pratz, K.W.; Savona, M.R.; Stein, A.S.; Stone, R.M.; Winer, E.S.; Seet, C.S.; et al. Ivosidenib or Enasidenib Combined with Induction and Consolidation Chemotherapy in Patients with Newly Diagnosed AML with an IDH1 or IDH2 Mutation Is Safe, Effective and Leads to MRD-Negative Complete Remissions. Blood 2018, 132, 560. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. DiNardo, C.D.; Stein, E.M.; de Botton, S.; Roboz, G.J.; Altman, J.K.; Mims, A.S.; Swords, R.; Collins, R.H.; Mannis, G.N.; Pollyea, D.A.; et al. Durable Remissions with Ivosidenib in IDH1-Mutated Relapsed or Refractory AML. N. Engl. J. Med. 2018, 378, 2386–2398. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  45. Vogelstein, B.; Lane, D.; Levine, A.J. Surfing the p53 network. Nature 2000, 408, 307–310. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  46. Christiansen, D.H.; Andersen, M.K.; Pedersen-Bjergaard, J. Mutations with loss of heterozygosity of p53 are common in therapy-related myelodysplasia and acute myeloid leukemia after exposure to alkylating agents and significantly associated with deletion or loss of 5q, a complex karyotype, and a poor prognosis. J. Clin. Oncol. 2001, 19, 1405–1413. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  47. Ok, C.Y.; Patel, K.P.; Garcia-Manero, G.; Routbort, M.J.; Peng, J.; Tang, G.; Goswami, M.; Young, K.H.; Singh, R.; Medeiros, L.J.; et al. TP53 mutation characteristics in therapy-related myelodysplastic syndromes and acute myeloid leukemia is similar to de novo diseases. J. Hematol. Oncol. 2015, 8, 45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  48. Pedersen-Bjergaard, J.; Andersen, M.K.; Andersen, M.T.; Christiansen, D.H. Genetics of therapy-related myelodysplasia and acute myeloid leukemia. Leukemia 2008, 22, 240–248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  49. Rücker, F.G.; Schlenk, R.F.; Bullinger, L.; Kayser, S.; Teleanu, V.; Kett, H.; Habdank, M.; Kugler, C.M.; Holzmann, K.; Gaidzik, V.I.; et al. TP53 alterations in acute myeloid leukemia with complex karyotype correlate with specific copy number alterations, monosomal karyotype, and dismal outcome. Blood 2012, 119, 2114–2121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Kadia, T.M.; Jain, P.; Ravandi, F.; Garcia-Manero, G.; Andreef, M.; Takahashi, K.; Borthakur, G.; Jabbour, E.; Konopleva, M.; Daver, N.G.; et al. TP53 mutations in newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia: Clinicomolecular characteristics, response to therapy, and outcomes. Cancer 2016, 122, 3484–3491. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  51. Bowen, D.; Groves, M.J.; Burnett, A.K.; Patel, Y.; Allen, C.; Green, C.; Gale, R.E.; Hills, R.; Linch, D.C. TP53 gene mutation is frequent in patients with acute myeloid leukemia and complex karyotype, and is associated with very poor prognosis. Leukemia 2009, 23, 203–206. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  52. Zhang, Q.; Bykov, V.J.N.; Wiman, K.G.; Zawacka-Pankau, J. APR-246 reactivates mutant p53 by targeting cysteines 124 and 277. Cell Death Dis. 2018, 9, 439. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  53. Zhang, T.D.; Chen, G.Q.; Wang, Z.G.; Wang, Z.Y.; Chen, S.J.; Chen, Z. Arsenic trioxide, a therapeutic agent for APL. Oncogene 2001, 20, 7146–7153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  54. Yan, W.; Jung, Y.S.; Zhang, Y.; Chen, X. Arsenic trioxide reactivates proteasome-dependent degradation of mutant p53 protein in cancer cells in part via enhanced expression of Pirh2 E3 ligase. PLoS ONE 2014, 9, e103497. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  55. Yan, W.; Zhang, Y.; Zhang, J.; Liu, S.; Cho, S.J.; Chen, X. Mutant p53 protein is targeted by arsenic for degradation and plays a role in arsenic-mediated growth suppression. J. Biol. Chem. 2011, 286, 17478–17486. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  56. Burke, L.P.; Kukoly, C.A. Statins induce lethal effects in acute myeloblastic leukemia [corrected] cells within 72 hours. Leuk. Lymphoma 2008, 49, 322–330. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  57. Pan, R.; Hogdal, L.J.; Benito, J.M.; Bucci, D.; Han, L.; Borthakur, G.; Cortes, J.; DeAngelo, D.J.; Debose, L.; Mu, H.; et al. Selective BCL-2 inhibition by ABT-199 causes on-target cell death in acute myeloid leukemia. Cancer Discov. 2014, 4, 362–375. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  58. Vo, T.T.; Ryan, J.; Carrasco, R.; Neuberg, D.; Rossi, D.J.; Stone, R.M.; Deangelo, D.J.; Frattini, M.G.; Letai, A. Relative mitochondrial priming of myeloblasts and normal HSCs determines chemotherapeutic success in AML. Cell 2012, 151, 344–355. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  59. Konopleva, M.; Contractor, R.; Tsao, T.; Samudio, I.; Ruvolo, P.P.; Kitada, S.; Deng, X.; Zhai, D.; Shi, Y.X.; Sneed, T.; et al. Mechanisms of apoptosis sensitivity and resistance to the BH3 mimetic ABT-737 in acute myeloid leukemia. Cancer Cell 2006, 10, 375–388. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  60. Pan, R.; Ruvolo, V.R.; Wei, J.; Konopleva, M.; Reed, J.C.; Pellecchia, M.; Andree, M.; Ruvolo, P.P. Inhibition of Mcl-1 with the pan-Bcl-2 family inhibitor (-) BI97D6 overcomes ABT-737 resistance in acute myeloid leukemia. Blood 2015, 126, 363–372. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  61. Souers, A.J.; Leverson, J.D.; Boghaert, E.R.; Ackler, S.L.; Catron, N.D.; Chen, J.; Dayton, B.D.; Ding, H.; Enschede, S.H.; Fairbrother, W.J.; et al. ABT-199, a potent and selective BCL-2 inhibitor, achieves antitumor activity while sparing platelets. Nat. Med. 2013, 19, 202–208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Konopleva, M.; Pollyea, D.A.; Potluri, J.; Chyla, B.; Hogdal, L.; Busman, T.; McKeegan, E.; Salem, A.H.; Zhu, M.; Ricker, J.L.; et al. Efficacy and Biological Correlates of Response in a Phase 2 Study of Venetoclax Monotherapy in Patients with Acute Myelogenous Leukemia. Cancer Discov. 2016, 6, 1106–1117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  63. Wei, A.H.; Strickland, S.A., Jr.; Hou, J.Z.; Fiedler, W.; Lin, T.L.; Walter, R.B.; Enjeti, A.; Tiong, I.S.; Savona, M.; Lee, S.; et al. Venetoclax combined with low-dose cytarabine for previously untreated patients with acute myeloid leukemia: Results from a phase Ib/II study. J. Clin. Oncol. 2019, 37, 1277–1284. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  64. DiNardo, C.D.; Pratz, K.; Pullarkat, V.; Jonas, B.A.; Arellano, M.; Becker, P.S.; Frankfurt, O.; Konopleva, M.; Wei, A.H.; Kantarjian, H.M.; et al. Venetoclax combined with decitabine or azacitidine in treatment-naive, elderly patients with acute myeloid leukemia. Blood 2019, 133, 7–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  65. Cortes, J.E.; Gutzmer, R.; Kieran, M.W.; Solomon, J.A. Hedgehog signaling inhibitors in solid and hematological cancers. Cancer Treat. Rev. 2019, 76, 41–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  66. Terao, T.; Minami, Y. Targeting Hedgehog (Hh) Pathway for the Acute Myeloid Leukemia Treatment. Cells 2019, 8, 312. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  67. Cortes, J.E.; Heidel, F.H.; Hellmann, A.; Fiedler, W.; Smith, B.D.; Robak, T.; Montesinos, P.; Pollyea, D.A.; DesJardins, P.; Ottmann, O.; et al. Randomized comparison of low dose cytarabine with or without glasdegib in patients with newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia or high-risk myelodysplastic syndrome. Leukemia 2019, 33, 379–389. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  68. Soucy, T.A.; Smith, P.G.; Milhollen, M.A.; Berger, A.J.; Gavin, J.M.; Adhikari, S.; Brownell, J.E.; Burke, K.E.; Cardin, D.P.; Critchley, S.; et al. An inhibitor of NEDD8-activating enzyme as a new approach to treat cancer. Nature 2009, 458, 732–736. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Swords, R.T.; Coutre, S.; Maris, M.B. Pevonedistat, a first-in-class NEDD8-activating enzyme inhibitor, combined with azacitidine in patients with AML. Blood 2018, 131, 1415–1424. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  70. Boffo, S.; Damato, A.; Alfano, L.; Giordano, A. CDK9 inhibitors in acute myeloid leukemia. J. Exp. Clin. Cancer Res. 2018, 37, 36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  71. Karp, J.E.; Passaniti, A.; Gojo, I.; Kaufmann, S.; Bible, K.; Garimella, T.S.; Greer, J.; Briel, J.; Smith, B.D.; Gore, S.D.; et al. Phase I and pharmacokinetic study of flavopiridol followed by 1-β-D arabinofuranosylcytosine and mitoxantrone in relapsed and refractory adult acute leukemias. Clin Cancer Res. 2005, 11, 8403–8412. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  72. Karp, J.E.; Smith, B.D.; Levis, M.J.; Gore, S.D.; Greer, J.; Hattenburg, C.; Briel, J.; Jones, R.J.; Wright, J.J.; Colevas, A.D.; et al. Sequential flavopiridol, cytosine arabinoside, and mitoxantrone: A phase II trial in adults with poor-risk acute myelogenous leukemia. Clin. Cancer Res. 2007, 13, 4467–4473. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  73. Karp, J.E.; Blackford, A.; Smith, B.D.; Alino, K.; Seung, A.H.; Bolaños-Meade, J.; Greer, J.M.; Carraway, H.E.; Gore, S.D.; Jones, R.J.; et al. Clinical activity of sequential flavopiridol, cytosine arabinoside, and mitoxantrone for adults with newly diagnosed, poor risk acute myelogenous leukemia. Leuk. Res. 2010, 34, 877–882. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  74. Karp, J.E.; Garrett-Mayer, E.; Estey, E.H.; Rudek, M.A.; Smith, B.D.; Greer, J.M.; Drye, D.M.; Mackey, K.; Dorcy, K.S.; Gore, S.D.; et al. Randomized phase II study of two schedules of flavopiridol given as timed sequential therapy with cytosine arabinoside and mitoxantrone for adults with newly diagnosed, poor-risk acute myelogenous leukemia. Haematologica 2012, 97, 1736–1742. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  75. Zeidner, J.F.; Foster, M.C.; Blackford, A.L.; Litzow, M.R.; Morris, L.E.; Strickland, S.A.; Lancet, J.E.; Bose, P.; Levy, M.Y.; Tibes, R.; et al. Randomized multicenter phase II study of flavopiridol (alvocidib), cytarabine, and mitoxantrone (FLAM) versus cytarabine/daunorubicin (7 + 3) in newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia. Haematologica 2015, 100, 1172–1179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  76. Dombret, H.; Seymour, J.F.; Butrym, A.; Wierzbowska, A.; Selleslag, D.; Jang, J.H.; Kumar, R.; Cavenagh, J.; Schuh, A.C.; Candoni, A.; et al. International phase 3 study of azacitidine vs conventional care regimens in older patients with newly diagnosed AML with 30% blasts. Blood 2015, 126, 291–299. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  77. Fenaux, P.; Mufti, G.J.; Hellstro¨m-Lindberg, E.; Santini, V.; Gattermann, N.; Germing, U.; Sanz, G.; List, A.F.; Gore, S.; Seymour, J.F.; et al. Azacitidine prolongs overall survival compared with conventional care regimens in elderly patients with low bone marrow blast count acute myeloid leukemia. J. Clin. Oncol. 2010, 28, 562–569. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Fenaux, P.; Mufti, G.J.; Hellstrom-Lindberg, E.; Santini, V.; Finelli, C.; Giagounidis, A.; Schoch, R.; Gattermann, N.; Sanz, G.; List, A.; et al. International Vidaza High-Risk MDS Survival Study Group. Efficacy of azacitidine compared with that of conventional care regimens in the treatment of higher-risk myelodysplastic syndromes: A randomised, open-label, phase III study. Lancet Oncol. 2009, 10, 223–232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  79. Harris, W.J.; Huang, X.; Lynch, J.T.; Spencer, G.J.; Hitchin, J.R.; Li, Y.; Ciceri, F.; Blaser, J.G.; Greystoke, B.F.; Jordan, A.M.; et al. The histone demethylase KDM1A sustains the oncogenic potential of MLL-AF9 leukemia stem cells. Cancer Cell 2012, 21, 473–487. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  80. Bernt, K.M.; Zhu, N.; Sinha, A.U.; Vempati, S.; Faber, J.; Krivtsov, A.V.; Feng, Z.; Punt, N.; Daigle, A.; Bullinger, L.; et al. MLL rearranged leukemia is dependent on aberrant H3K79 methylation by DOT1L. Cancer Cell 2011, 20, 66–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  81. Stein, E.M.; Garcia-Manero, G.; Rizzieri, D.A.; Tibes, R.; Berdeja, J.G.; Savona, M.R.; Jongen-Lavrenic, M.; Altman, J.K.; Thomson, B.; Blakemore, S.J.; et al. The DOT1L inhibitor pinometostat reduces H3K79 methylation and has modest clinical activity in adult acute leukemia. Blood 2018, 131, 2661–2669. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Feng, Z.; Yao, Y.; Zhou, C.; Chen, F.; Wu, F.; Wei, L.; Liu, W.; Dong, S.; Redell, M.; Mo, Q.; et al. Pharmacological inhibition of LSD1 for the treatment of MLL rearranged leukemia. J. Hematol. Oncol. 2016, 9, 24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  83. Ishikawa, Y.; Nakayama, K.; Morimoto, M.; Mizutani, A.; Nakayama, A.; Toyoshima, K.; Hayashi, A.; Takagi, S.; Dairiki, R.; Miyashita, H.; et al. Synergistic anti-AML effects of the LSD1 inhibitor T-3775440 and the NEDD8-activating enzyme inhibitor pevonedistat via transdifferentiation and DNA rereplication. Oncogenesis 2017, 6, e377. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  84. Dawson, M.A.; Prinjha, R.K.; Dittmann, A.; Giotopoulos, G.; Bantscheff, M.; Chan, W.I.; Robson, S.C.; Chung, C.W.; Hopf, C.; Savitski, M.M.; et al. Inhibition of BET recruitment to chromatin as an effective treatment for MLL-fusion leukaemia. Nature 2011, 478, 529–533. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  85. Dinndorf, P.A.; Andrews, R.G.; Benjamin, D.; Ridgway, D.; Wolff, L.; Bernstein, I.D. Expression of normal myeloid-associated antigens by acute leukemia cells. Blood 1986, 67, 1048–1053. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  86. Hauswirth, A.W.; Florian, S.; Printz, D.; Sotlar, K.; Krauth, M.T.; Fritsch, G.; Schernthaner, G.H.; Wacheck, V.; Selzer, E.; Sperr, W.R.; et al. Expression of the target receptor CD33 in CD34+/CD38-/CD123+ AML stem cells. Eur. J. Clin. Investig. 2007, 37, 73–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Lambert, J.; Pautas, C.; Terré, C.; Raffoux, E.; Turlure, P.; Caillot, D.; Legrand, O.; Thomas, X.; Gardin, C.; Gogat-Marchant, K.; et al. Gemtuzumab ozogamicin for de novo acute myeloid leukemia: Final efficacy and safety updates from the open-label, phase III ALFA-0701 trial. Haematologica 2019, 104, 113–119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  88. Amadori, S.; Suciu, S.; Selleslag, D.; Aversa, F.; Gaidano, G.; Musso, M.; Annino, L.; Venditti, A.; Voso, M.T.; Mazzone, C.; et al. Gemtuzumab Ozogamicin Versus Best Supportive Care in Older Patients With Newly Diagnosed Acute Myeloid Leukemia Unsuitable for Intensive Chemotherapy: Results of the Randomized Phase III EORTC-GIMEMA AML-19 Trial. J. Clin. Oncol. 2016, 34, 972–979. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Taksin, A.-L.; Legrand, O.; Raffoux, E.; de Revel, T.; Thomas, X.; Contentin, N.; Bouabdallah, R.; Pautas, C.; Turlure, P.; Reman, O.; et al. High efficacy and safety profile of fractionated doses of Mylotarg as induction therapy in patients with relapsed acute myeloblastic leukemia: A prospective study of the alfa group. Leukemia 2007, 21, 66–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Stein, E.M.; Walter, R.B.; Erba, H.P.; Fathi, A.T.; Advani, A.S.; Lancet, J.E.; Ravandi, F.; Kovacsovics, T.; DeAngelo, D.J.; Bixby, D.; et al. A phase 1 trial of vadastuximab talirine as monotherapy in patients with CD33-positive acute myeloid leukemia. Blood 2018, 131, 387–396. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  91. Fathi, A.T.; Erba, H.P.; Lancet, J.E.; Stein, E.M.; Ravandi, F.; Faderl, S.; Walter, R.B.; Advani, A.S.; DeAngelo, D.J.; Kovacsovics, T.J.; et al. A phase 1 trial of vadastuximab talirine combined with hypomethylating agents in patients with CD33-positive AML. Blood 2018, 132, 1125–1133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Erba, H.P.; Levy, M.Y.; Vasu, S.; Stein, A.S.; Fathi, A.T.; Maris, M.B.; Advani, A.; Faderl, S.; Smith, S.E.; Wood, B.L.; et al. A phase 1b study of Vadastuximab Talirine in combination with 7+3 induction therapy for patients with newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia (AML). Blood 2016, 128, 211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Finn, L.E.; Levy, M.; Orozco, J.J.; Park, J.H.; Atallah, E.; Craig, M.; Perl, A.E.; Scheinberg, D.A.; Cicic, D.; Bergonio, G.R.; et al. A phase 2 study of actinium-225 (225Ac)-Lintuzumab in older patients with previously untreated acute myeloid leukemia (AML) unfit for intensive chemotherapy. Blood 2017, 130 (Suppl. 1), 2638. [Google Scholar]
  94. Munoz, L.; Nomdedeu, J.F.; Lopez, O.; Carnicer, M.J.; Bellido, M.; Aventin, A.; Brunet, S.; Sierra, J. Interleukin-3 receptor alpha chain (CD123) is widely expressed in hematologic malignancies. Haematologica 2001, 86, 1261–1269. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  95. He, S.Z.; Busfield, S.; Ritchie, D.S.; Hertzberg, M.S.; Durrant, S.; Lewis, I.D.; Marlton, P.; McLachlan, A.J.; Kerridge, I.; Bradstock, K.F.; et al. A Phase 1 study of the safety, pharmacokinetics and anti-leukemic activity of the anti-CD123 monoclonal antibody CSL360 in relapsed, refractory or high-risk acute myeloid leukemia. Leuk. Lymphoma 2015, 56, 1406–1415. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  96. Li, F.; Sutherland, M.K.; Yu, C.; Walter, R.B.; Westendorf, L.; Valliere-Douglass, J.; Pan, L.; Cronkite, A.; Sussman, D.; Klussman, K.; et al. Characterization of SGN-CD123A, A potent CD123-directed antibody-drug conjugate for acute myeloid leukemia. Mol. Cancer Ther. 2018, 17, 554–564. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  97. Sutherland, M.S.K.; Yu, C.; Walter, R.B.; Westendorf, L.; Valliere-Douglass, J.; Pan, L.; Sussman, D.; Anderson, M.; Zeng, W.; Stone, I.; et al. SGN-CD123A, a pyrrolobenzodiazepine dimer linked anti-CD123 antibody drug conjugate, demonstrates effective anti-leukemic activity in multiple preclinical models of AML. Blood 2015, 126, 330. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Kovtun, Y.; Jones, G.E.; Adams, S.; Harvey, L.; Audette, C.A.; Wilhelm, A.; Bai, C.; Rui, L.; Laleau, R.; Liu, F.; et al. A CD123-targeting antibody-drug conjugate, IMGN632, designed to eradicate AML while sparing normal bone marrow cells. Blood Adv. 2018, 2, 848. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  99. Topp, M.S.; Gökbuget, N.; Zugmaier, G.; Degenhard, E.; Goebeler, M.E.; Klinger, M.; Neumann, S.A.; Horst, H.A.; Raff, T.; Viardot, A.; et al. Long-term follow-up of hematologic relapse-free survival in a phase 2 study of blinatumomab in patients with MRD in B-lineage ALL. Blood 2012, 120, 5185–5187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  100. Topp, M.S.; Gokbuget, N.; Zugmaier, G.; Klappers, P.; Stelljes, M.; Neumann, S.; Viardot, A.; Marks, R.; Diedrich, H.; Faul, C.; et al. Phase II trial of the anti-CD19 bispecific T cell-engager blinatumomab shows hematologic and molecular remissions in patients with relapsed or refractory B-precursor acute lymphoblastic leukemia. J. Clin. Oncol. 2014, 32, 4134–4140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  101. Topp, M.S.; Gokbuget, N.; Stein, A.S.; Zugmaier, G.; O’Brien, S.; Bargou, R.C.; Dombret, H.; Fielding, A.K.; Heffner, L.; Larson, R.A.; et al. Safety and activity of blinatumomab for adult patients with relapsed or refractory B-precursor acute lymphoblastic leukaemia: A multicentre, single-arm, phase 2 study. Lancet Oncol. 2015, 16, 57–66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  102. Brinkmann, U.; Kontermann, R.E. The making of bispecific antibodies. MAbs 2017, 9, 182–212. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  103. Friedrich, M.; Henn, A.; Raum, T.; Bajtus, M.; Matthes, K.; Hendrich, L.; Wahl, J.; Homann, P.; Kischel, R.; Kvesic, M.; et al. Preclinical characterization of AMG 330, a CD3/CD33-bispecific T-cell-engaging antibody with potential for treatment of acute myelogenous leukemia. Mol. Cancer Ther. 2014, 13, 1549–1557. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  104. Chichili, G.R.; Huang, L.; Li, H.; Burke, S.; He, L.; Tang, Q.; Jin, L.; Gorlatov, S.; Ciccarone, V.; Chen, F.; et al. A CD3xCD123 bispecific DART for redirecting host T cells to myelogenous leukemia: Preclinical activity and safety in nonhuman primates. Sci. Transl. Med. 2015, 7, 289ra282. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  105. Ansell, S.M.; Lesokhin, A.M.; Borrello, I.; Halwani, A.; Scott, E.C.; Gutierrez, M.; Schuster, S.J.; Millenson, M.M.; Cattry, D.; Freeman, G.J.; et al. PD-1 blockade with nivolumab in relapsed or refractory Hodgkin’s lymphoma. N. Engl. J. Med. 2015, 372, 311–319. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  106. Sehgal, A.; Whiteside, T.L.; Boyiadzis, M. PD-1 Checkpoint Blockade in Acute Myeloid Leukemia. Expert Opin. Biol. Ther. 2015, 15, 1191–1203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  107. Davids, M.S.; Kim, H.T.; Bachireddy, P.; Costello, C.; Liguori, R.; Savell, A.; Lukez, A.P.; Avigan, D.; Chen, Y.B.; McSweeney, P.; et al. Ipilimumab for patients with relapse after allogeneic transplantation. N. Engl. J. Med. 2016, 375, 143–153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  108. Freeman, G.J.; Long, A.J.; Iwai, Y.; Bourque, K.; Chernova, T.; Nishimura, H.; Fitz, L.J.; Malenkovich, N.; Okazaki, T.; Byrne, M.C.; et al. Engagement of the PD-1 immunoinhibitory receptor by a novel B7 family member leads to negative regulation of lymphocyte activation. J. Exp. Med. 2000, 192, 1027–1034. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  109. Kadia, T.M.; Cortes, J.E.; Ghorab, A.; Ravandi, F.; Jabbour, E.; Daver, N.G.; Alvarado, Y.; Ohanian, M.; Konopleva, M.; Kantarjian, H.M. Nivolumab (Nivo) maintenance (maint) in high-risk (HR) acute myeloid leukemia (AML) patients. J. Clin. Oncol. 2018, 36, 7014. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  110. Daver, N.; Basu, S.; Garcia-Manero, G.; Cortes, J.E.; Ravandi, F.; Jabbour, E.J.; Hendrickson, S.; Pierce, S.; Ning, J.; Konopleva, M.; et al. Phase IB/II Study of Nivolumab in Combination with Azacytidine (AZA) in Patients (pts) with Relapsed Acute Myeloid Leukemia (AML). Blood 2016, 128, 763. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  111. Pietsch, E.C.; Dong, J.; Cardoso, R.; Zhang, X.; Chin, D.; Hawkins, R.; Dinh, T.; Zhou, M.; Strake, B.; Feng, P.H.; et al. Anti-leukemic activity and tolerability of anti-human CD47 monoclonal antibodies. Blood Cancer J. 2017, 7, e536. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  112. Brentjens, R.J.; Davila, M.L.; Riviere, I.; Park, J.; Wang, X.; Cowell, L.G.; Bartido, S.; Stefanski, J.; Taylor, C.; Olszewska, M.; et al. CD19-targeted T cells rapidly induce molecular remissions in adults with chemotherapy refractory acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Sci. Transl. Med. 2013, 5, 177ra38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  113. Park, J.H.; Riviere, I.; Gonen, M.; Wang, X.; Senechal, B.; Curran, K.J.; Sauter, C.; Wang, Y.; Santomasso, B.; Mead, E.; et al. Long-term follow-up of CD19 CAR therapy in acute lymphoblastic leukemia. N. Engl. J. Med. 2018, 378, 449–459. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  114. Locke, F.L.; Neelapu, S.S.; Bartlett, N.L.; Siddiqi, T.; Chavez, J.C.; Hosing, C.M.; Ghobadi, A.; Budde, L.E.; Bot, A.; Rossi, J.M.; et al. Phase1 results of ZUMA-1: A multicenter study of KTE-C19 Anti-CD19 CAR T cell therapy in refractory aggressive lymphoma. Mol. Ther. 2017, 25, 285–295. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  115. Maude, S.L.; Frey, N.; Shaw, P.A.; Aplenc, R.; Barrett, D.M.; Bunin, N.J.; Chew, A.; Gonzalez, V.E.; Zheng, Z.; Lacey, S.F.; et al. Chimeric antigen receptor T cells for sustained remissions in leukemia. N. Engl. J. Med. 2014, 371, 1507–1517. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  116. Porter, D.L.; Levine, B.L.; Kalos, M.; Bagg, A.; June, C.H. Chimeric antigen receptor modified T cells in chronic lymphoid leukemia. N. Engl. J. Med. 2011, 365, 725–733. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  117. Tasian, S.K. Acute myeloid leukemia chimeric antigen receptor T-cell immunotherapy: How far up the road have we traveled? Ther. Adv. Hematol. 2018, 9, 135–148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  118. Ritchie, D.S.; Neeson, P.J.; Khot, A.; Peinert, S.; Tai, T.; Tainton, K.; Chen, K.; Shin, M.; Wall, D.M.; Hönemann, D.; et al. Persistence and efficacy of second generation CAR T cell against the LeY antigen in acute myeloid leukemia. Mol. Ther. 2013, 21, 2122–2129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  119. Wang, Q.S.; Wang, Y.; Lv, H.Y.; Han, Q.W.; Fan, H.; Guo, B.; Wang, L.L.; Han, W.D. Treatment of CD33 directed chimeric antigen receptor-modified T cells in one patient with relapsed and refractory acute myeloid leukemia. Mol. Ther. 2015, 23, 184–191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  120. Cummins, K.D.; Frey, N.; Nelson, A.M.; Schmidt, A.; Luger, S.; Isaacs, R.E.; Lacey, S.F.; Hexner, E.; Melenhorst, J.J.; June, C.H.; et al. Treating Relapsed/Refractory (RR) AML with Biodegradable Anti-CD123 CAR Modified T Cells. Blood 2017, 130 (Suppl. 1), 1359. [Google Scholar]
  121. Zhang, J.; Gu, Y.; Chen, B. Mechanisms of drug resistance in acute myeloid leukemia. OncoTargets Ther. 2019, 12, 1937–1945. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  122. Kiyoi, H.; Kawashima, N.; Ishikawa, Y. FLT3 mutations in acute myeloid leukemia: Therapeutic paradigm beyond inhibitor development. Cancer Sci. 2020, 111, 312–322. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  123. Göllner, S.; Oellerich, T.; Agrawal-Singh, S.; Schenk, T.; Klein, H.U.; Rohde, C.; Pabst, C.; Sauer, T.; Lerdrup, M.; Tavor, S.; et al. Loss of the Histone Methyltransferase EZH2 Induces Resistance to Multiple Drugs in Acute Myeloid Leukemia. Nat. Med. 2017, 23, 69–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  124. McMahon, C.M.; Ferng, T.; Canaani, J.; Wang, E.S.; Morrissette, J.J.D.; Eastburn, D.J.; Pellegrino, M.; Durruthy-Durruthy, R.; Watt, C.D.; Asthana, S.; et al. Clonal Selection With RAS Pathway Activation Mediates Secondary Clinical Resistance to Selective FLT3 Inhibition in Acute Myeloid Leukemia. Cancer Discov. 2019, 9, 1050–1063. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  125. Lam, S.S.Y.; Leung, A.Y.H. Overcoming Resistance to FLT3 Inhibitors in the Treatment of FLT3-Mutated AML. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2020, 21, 1537. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  126. Miyamoto, K.; Minami, Y. Precision medicine and novel molecular target therapies in acute myeloid leukemia: The background of hematologic malignancies (HM)-SCREEN-Japan 01. Int. J. Clin. Oncol. 2019, 24, 893–898. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
Ijms 21 05114 g001 550
Figure 1. The major targetable pathways and abnormalities in acute myeloid leukemia (AML). Small molecule drugs targeting mutant genes, small molecule drugs targeting signal pathways, drugs targeting epigenetic regulation, antibody therapy, immune checkpoint inhibitors, and adoptive therapy in AML.
Figure 1. The major targetable pathways and abnormalities in acute myeloid leukemia (AML). Small molecule drugs targeting mutant genes, small molecule drugs targeting signal pathways, drugs targeting epigenetic regulation, antibody therapy, immune checkpoint inhibitors, and adoptive therapy in AML.
Ijms 21 05114 g001
Ijms 21 05114 g002 550
Figure 2. Proposed treatment strategy in AML.
Figure 2. Proposed treatment strategy in AML.
Ijms 21 05114 g002
Table
Table 1. The recent FDA-approved agents.
Table 1. The recent FDA-approved agents.
Newly Diagnosed AML
Drug/RegimenFDA Approval IndicationApproval DateIdentifier
Rydapt/midostaurin + ICFLT3 mutated AML 28 April 2017NCT00651261
Mylotarg/GOAdults or pediatric patients ≥ 1 m with newly diagnosed CD33 positive AML1 September 2017
(Reapproval)
16 June 2020
(FDA extended the indication to pediatric patients ≥ 1 month)		NCT00927498
NCT00372593
Daurismo/glasdegib + LDAC> 75 y or unfit for IC21 November 2018
(accelerated approval)		NCT01546038
Venclexta/venetoclax + HMANew AML ≥ 75 y or unfit21 November 2018
(accelerated approval)		NCT02203773
Venclexta/venetoclax + LDACNew AML ≥ 75 y or unfit21 November 2018
(accelerated approval)		NCT02287233
Tibsovo/ivosidenibNew AML ≥ 75 y or unfit with IDH mutation2 May 2019NCT02074839
Relapsed/Refractory AML
Drug/RegimenFDA Approval IndicationApproval DateIdentifier
Mylotarg/GOAdults or pediatric patients ≥ 2 y with R/R CD33 positive AML1 September 2017
(Reapproval)		-
Tibsovo/ivosidenibR/R IDH1 mutated AML20 July 2018NCT02074839
Idhifa/enasidenib mesylateR/R IDH2 mutated AML1 August 2017NCT01915498
Xospata/gilteritinib fumarateR/R FLT3 mutated AML28 November 2018NCT02421939
Abbreviation; IC, intensive chemotherapy; GO, Gemtuzumab ozogamicin; HMA, hypomethylating agents; LADC, low dose cytarabine; R/R, relapsed or refractory.
Table
Table 2. Selected ongoing trials for AML featuring the targeted agents.
Table 2. Selected ongoing trials for AML featuring the targeted agents.
Small Molecule Drug Targeting Mutant Genes
DrugTargetsSubjectPhase/NInvestigationInitiation Date/StatusIdentifier
CrenolanibFLT3Untreated FLT3 + AMLIII/510Crenolanib + IC vs. Midostaurin + ICAug 2018/RecruitingNCT03258931
GilteritinibFLT3Untreated FLT3 + AMLII/179Gilteritinib + IC vs. Midostaurin + ICDec 2019/RecruitingNCT03836209
GilteritinibFLT3Untreated AMLI/80Gilteritinib + IC (IDR/AraC or IDR/AraC/DNR)Jan 2015/Active, not recruitingNCT02236013
GilteritinibFLT3FLT3 + AMLII/98Gilteritinib vs. Placebo as maintenance therapy following ICJan 2017/Active, not recruitingNCT02927262
GilteritinibFLT3FLT3 + AML fit for allogeneic SCTIII/346Gilteritinib vs. Placebo as maintenance therapy following allogeneic SCTJun 2017/RecruitingNCT02997202
Ivosidenib/EnasidenibIDH1/2Untreated IDH1/2+ AML/MDSIII/968Ivosidenib/Enasidenib + IC vs. Placebo + ICMar 2019/RecruitingNCT03839771
IvosidenibIDH1Untreated IDH1 + AMLIII/392Ivosidenib + AZA vs. Placebo + AZAJun 2017/RecruitingNCT03173248
APR-246TP53TP53 + AML/MDS/MPNIb/II/56APR-246 + AZAMay 2017/Active, not recruitingNCT03072043
Arsenic trioxideTP53TP53 + AMLII/100Decitabine/Cytarabine/Arsenic trioxideNot yet recruitingNCT03381781
AtorvastatinTP53AML/Solid tumorsI/50AtorvastatinJul 2018/RecruitingNCT03560882
Small Molecule Drug Targeting Signal Pathway
DrugTargetsSubjectPhase/NInvestigationInitiation Date/StatusIdentifier
VenetoclaxBCL2R/R AMLI/52Venetoclax + GilteritinibOct 2018/RecruitingNCT03625505
VenetoclaxBCL2AMLI/II/116Venetoclax + Fludarabine/Idarubicin/CytarabineSep 2017/RecruitingNCT03214562
VenetoclaxBCL2R/R AMLII/280Venetoclax + DecitabineJan 2018/RecruitingNCT03404193
VenetoclaxBCL2Untreated AML unfit for ICIII/443Venetoclax + AZA vs. Placebo + AZAFeb 2017/Active, not recruitingNCT02993523
VenetoclaxBCL2Untreated AML unfit for ICIII/211Venetoclax + LDAC vs. Placebo + LDACMay 2017/Active, not recruitingNCT03069352
VenetoclaxBCL2Untreated AML unfit for ICIII/60Venetoclax +AZA or DecitabineAug 2019/RecruitingNCT03941964
VenetoclaxBCL2Untreated AMLI/64Venetoclax + ICOct 2018/RecruitingNCT03709758
GlasdegibSMOUntreated AMLIII/720Glasdegib + IC vs. Placebo + IC Glasdegib + AZA vs. Placebo + AZAApr 2018/RecruitingNCT03416179
VismodegibSMOR/R AML or AML unfit for ICII/40Vismodegib/Ribavirin/Decitabine vs. Vismodegib/RibavirinMay 2015/RecruitingNCT02073838
LDE225SMOR/R AMLII/70LDE225May 2013/CompletedNCT01826214
PevonedistatNAEUntreated AML/MDS/CMMLIII/450Pevonedistat + AZA vs. AZANov 2017/Active, not recruitingNCT03268954
AlvocidibCDK9R/R MCL-1 dependent AMLII/104Alvocidib/MIT/AraC vs. MIT/AraCMar 2016/TerminatedNCT02520011
AlvocidibCDK9Untreated AMLI/32Alvocidib + ICSep 2017/CompletedNCT03298984
BAY1143572 (Atuveciclib)CDK9R/R AMLI/42BAY1143572 (Atuveciclib)Feb 2015/CompletedNCT02345382
TG02 citrateCDK9R/R AML or untreated AML (≥ 65)I/120TG02 citrateAug 2010/CompletedNCT01204164
Drugs Targeting Epigenetic Regulation
DrugTargetsSubjectPhase/NInvestigationInitiation Date/StatusIdentifier
Tranylcypromine(TCP)LSD1R/R AML/MDSI/17TCP + ATRAMar 2015/Active, not recruitingNCT02273102
TCPLSD1R/R AML or untreated AML unfit for ICI/II/16TCP + ATRASep 2014/RecruitingNCT02261779
TCPLSD1AML/MDS unfit for standard therapyI/II/60TCP/ATRA/AraCMay 2015/Recruiting NCT02717884
INCB059872LSD1R/R AML or untreated AMLI/II/215INCB059872 + ATRA in R/R AML INCB059872 + AZA in untreated AMLMay 2016/RecruitingNCT02712905
IMG-7289LSD1AML/MDSI/45LSD1 ± ATRAOct 2016/CompletedNCT02842827
MK-8628 (OTX015)BETR/R AML/DLBCLI/9MK-8628May 2016/Active, not recruitingNCT02698189
FT-1101BETR/R AML/MDS or untreated AML unfit for ICI/94FT-1101 FT-1101 + AZASep 2015/CompletedNCT02543879
RO6870810 (TEN-010)BETR/R AML/MDSI/26RO6870810Nov 2014/CompletedNCT02308761
Antibody Therapy
DrugTargetsSubjectPhase/NInvestigationInitiation Date/StatusIdentifier
SGN-CD33ACD33CD33 + AMLI/195SGN-CD33A +HMAJul 2013/CompletedNCT01902329
SGN-CD33ACD33AMLI/116SGN-CD33A +IC followed by SGN-CD33A as maintenance therapyDec 2014/CompletedNCT02326584
CSL360CD123R/R AML or AML unfit for ICI/40CSL360Dec 2006/CompletedNCT00401739
SGN-CD123ACD123R/R CD123 + AMLI/17SGN-CD123AAug 2016/TerminatedNCT02848248
AMG330CD33/CD3R/R AMLI/100AMG330Aug 2015/RecruitingNCT02520427
GEM333CD33/CD3R/R CD33+ AMLI/33GEM333Apr 2018/RecruitingNCT03516760
AMG673CD33/CD3R/R AMLI/50AMG673Sep 2017/RecruitingNCT03224819
AMV564CD33/CD3R/R AML or untreated AML unfit for ICI/148AMV564 ± PembrolizumabMar 2017/RecruitingNCT03144245
Flotetuzumab (MGD006)CD123/CD3R/R AMLI/II/179Flotetuzumab(MGD006)Jun 2014/RecruitingNCT02152956
JNJ-63709178CD123/CD3R/R AML or untreated AML unfit for ICI/120JNJ-63709178Jun 2016/RecruitingNCT02715011
GTB-3550CD16/IL-15/CD33R/R CD33 + AML/MDSI/II/60GTB-3550Jan 2020/RecruitingNCT03214666
Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor
DrugTargetsSubjectPhase/NInvestigationInitiation Date/StatusIdentifier
IpilimumabCTLA-4RR MDS/AMI/48Ipilimumab + decitabineApr 2017/RecruitingNCT2890329
NivolumabPD-1Postremission AMLII/82NivolumabMay 2015/Active, not recruitingNCT02275533
NivolumabPD-1AMLwith high risk of relapsII/30NivolumabOct 2015/recruitingNCT02532231
NivolumabPD-1AML/MDSII/30Nivolumab and 7 + 3 induction July 2015/completedNCT02464657
NivolumabPD-1RR AML, AML > 65 yearsII/182Nivolumab + azacytidine+/-ipilimumab Apr 2015/recruitingNCT02397720
NivolumabPD-1Elderly patients MDS or newly diagnosed AMLII/III/1670Azacitidine+/-nivolumab or midostaurin, or decitabine + cytarabine Dec 2017/suspendedNCT03092674
PembrolizumabPD-1RR AMLII/37Pembrolizumab following HDAC salvage inductionAug 2016/Active, not recruitingNCT02768792
PembrolizumabPD-1RR MDS/AML and newly diagnosed AML patients (≥ 65)II/40Pembrolizumab + AzacitidineJuly 2016/recruitingNCT02845297
PembrolizumabPD-1RR AMLI/II/10Pembrolizumab + decitabineDec 2016/completedNCT02996474
PembrolizumabPD-1AML patients (≥ 60) in post remission treatmentII/12PembrolizumabOct 2016/Active, not recruitingNCT02708641
PembrolizumabPD-1AML patients with high risk of relapseII/20Pembrolizumab + Fludarabine/melphalan conditioning + autologous SCT Sep 2016/recruitingNCT02771197
DurvalumabPD-1High risk MDS, elderly AML patientsII/213Durvalumab + azacitidine Jun 2016/Active, not recruitingNCT02775903
AtezolimumabPD-1RR AML, elderly AML patient unfit for ICI/40Atezolizumab + guadecitabine Oct 2016/completedNCT02892318
Hu5F9-G4CD47RR AML, MDS intermediate2 or high riskI/20Hu5F9-G4Nov 2015/completedNCT02678338
Hu5F9-G4CD47RR MDS/AMLor AML/MDS patient unfit for ICI/257Hu5F9-G4 + Azacitidine Sep 2017/recruitingNCT03248479
Adoptive Cell Therapy
DrugTargetsSubjectPhase/NInvestigationInitiation Date/StatusIdentifier
CAR-T cellsVarious (CD33, CD58, CD56, CD123, Muc1)RR AMLI/II/10Infusion of Muc1/CD33/CD38/CD56/CD123-specific gene-engineered TcellsJuly 2017/recruitingNCT03222674
CAR-T cellsCD33RR CD33 + AMLI/II34FC followed by anti-CD33 CART infusionJan 2020/recruitingNCT03971799
CAR-T cellsCD123RR CD123 + AMLI/32FC followed by autologous anti-CD123 CAR-T cellsMay 2020/recruitingNCT04318678
CAR-T cellsCD123CD123 + AMLI/59Allogenic anti-CD123 CAR T-cells following lympho depleting regimen Jun 2017/recruitingNCT03190278
CAR-T cellsCD123CD123 + RR AML (> 14)I/II/10FC followed by infusion of allogenic or autologous anti-CD123 CAR-T cellsMar 2018/unknownNCT03556982
CAR-T cellsCD123CD123 + AML relapsed after allogeneic SCTI/20CD123 CAR-41BB-CD3zeta-EGFRt-expressing Tcells after preconditioningMar 2017/recruitingNCT03114670
CAR-T cellsCD123RR CD123 + AML or BPDCN (> 12)I/42Lymphodepletion with FC, autologous or allogenic CD123 CAR-CD28 CD3 zeta-EGFRt-expressing T lymphocytesDec 2015/recruitingNCT02159495
Abbreviation; IC, intensive chemotherapy; DNR, daunorubicin; AraC, cytarabine; SCT, stem cell transplantation;LADC, low dose cytarabine; HDAC, high dose cytarabine; R/R, relapsed or refractory; ATRA, All-trans retinoic acid; MIT, mitoxantrone; AZA, azacitidine; HMA, hypomethylating agents; MDS, myelodysplastic syndromes; DLBCL, diffuse large B-cell lymphoma; fludarabine + cyclophosphamide.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Miyamoto, K.; Minami, Y. Cutting Edge Molecular Therapy for Acute Myeloid Leukemia. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2020, 21, 5114. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms21145114

AMA Style

Miyamoto K, Minami Y. Cutting Edge Molecular Therapy for Acute Myeloid Leukemia. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2020; 21(14):5114. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms21145114

Chicago/Turabian Style

Miyamoto, Kenichi, and Yosuke Minami. 2020. "Cutting Edge Molecular Therapy for Acute Myeloid Leukemia" International Journal of Molecular Sciences 21, no. 14: 5114. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms21145114

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop