Second-line use of dasatinib and nilotinib in a real-world patient population with chronic phase chronic myeloid leukemia

Abstract

Background While there has been no direct head-to-head comparison, it is assumed that second-line treatment with dasatinib and nilotinib has comparable efficacy but distinct safety profiles in the treatment of patients with chronic phase chronic myeloid leukemia (CML-CP). Our aim was to conduct a real-world analysis to compare the efficacy and safety profiles of these two agents.Methods Data from 73 CML-CP patients, who received either dasatinib or nilotinib in second-line treatment, were analyzed. The primary interest of the efficacy assessment was a major molecular response (MMR) at the 12-month, 5-year cumulative incidence of treatment failure, and overall survival.Results A total of 73.5% of 34 patients in the dasatinib and 76.9% of 39 patients in the nilotinib group achieved MMR at 12 months. Five-year cumulative probability of treatment failure in patients, who previously achieved MMR was 0 and 7.6% for patients receiving dasatinib and nilotinib, respectively (p = 0.25). Eight-year OS was 82.7 and 86.3% for dasatinib and nilotinib groups, respectively (p = 0.90). Pleural effusions were more common in the dasatinib group, leading to treatment discontinuation, while cardiovascular events and thrombotic incidents were more prevalent in the nilotinib group.Conclusion Dasatinib and nilotinib exhibit similar efficacy in the CML-CP treatment. Individualized patient management should consider patient comorbidities and safety profiles.

Keywords

• Chronic myeloid leukemia
• comparison
• efficacy
• dasatinib
• nilotinib