METHODS: A parallel RCT was conducted in two hospitals in Malaysia, where 129 CML patients were randomised to MMS or control (usual care) groups using a stratified 1:1 block randomisation method. The 6-month MMS included three face-to-face medication use reviews, CML and TKI-related education, two follow-up telephone conversations, a printed information booklet and two adherence aids. Medication adherence (primary outcome), molecular responses and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) scores were assessed at baseline, 6th and 12th month. Medication adherence and HRQoL were assessed using medication possession ratio and the European Organisation for Research and Treatment in Cancer questionnaire (EORTC_QLQ30_CML24) respectively.
RESULTS: The MMS group (n = 65) showed significantly higher adherence to TKIs than the control group (n = 64) at 6th month (81.5% vs 56.3%; p = 0.002), but not at 12th month (72.6% vs 60.3%; p = 0.147). In addition, a significantly higher proportion of participants in the MMS group achieved major molecular response at 6th month (58.5% vs 35.9%; p = 0.010), but not at 12th month (66.2% vs 51.6%; p = 0.092). Significant deep molecular response was also obtained at 12th month (24.6% vs 10.9%; p = 0.042). Six out of 20 subscales of EORTC-QLQ30-CML24 were significantly better in the MMS group.
CONCLUSIONS: The MMS improved CML patients' adherence to TKI as well as achieved better clinical outcomes.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrial.gov (ID: NCT03090477).
METHODS: This retrospective study included all patients with CML, in chronic or accelerated phase, who were treated with imatinib at University of Malaya Medical Centre, Malaysia.
RESULTS: A total of 70 patients were analysed. The median follow-up duration was 74 months, and the cumulative percentages of patients with CCyR and MMR were 80.0% and 65.7%, respectively. Overall survival (OS) and event-free survival (EFS) at ten years were 94.3% and 92.9%, respectively. Patients who achieved CCyR and MMR had significantly better OS and EFS than those who did not. At six months, patients who had a BCR-ABL level ≤ 10% had significantly better OS and EFS than those who had a BCR-ABL level > 10%. The target milestone of CCyR at 12 months and MMR at 18 months showed no survival advantage in our patients.
CONCLUSION: Our data showed that imatinib is still useful as first-line therapy. However, vigilant monitoring of patients who have a BCR-ABL level > 10% at six months of treatment should be implemented so that prompt action can be taken to provide the best outcome for these patients.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: BCR-ABL positive CML cells resistant to imatinib (K562-R) were developed by overexposure of K562 cell lines to the drug. Cytotoxicity was determined by MTS assays and IC50 values calculated. Apoptosis assays were performed using annexin V-FITC binding assays and analyzed by flow cytometry. Methylation profiles were investigated using methylation specific PCR and sequencing analysis of SOCS-1 and SOCS-3 genes. Gene expression was assessed by quantitative real-time PCR, and protein expression and phosphorylation of STAT1, 2 and 3 were examined by Western blotting.
RESULTS: The IC50 for imatinib on K562 was 362 nM compared to 3,952 nM for K562-R (p=0.001). Percentage of apoptotic cells in K562 increased upto 50% by increasing the concentration of imatinib, in contrast to only 20% in K562-R (p<0.001). A change from non-methylation of the SOCS-3 gene in K562 to complete methylation in K562-R was observed. Gene expression revealed down- regulation of both SOCS-1 and SOCS-3 genes in resistant cells. STAT3 was phosphorylated in K562-R but not K562.
CONCLUSIONS: Development of cells resistant to imatinib is feasible by overexposure of the drug to the cells. Activation of STAT3 protein leads to uncontrolled cell proliferation in imatinib resistant BCR-ABL due to DNA methylation of the SOCS-3 gene. Thus SOCS-3 provides a suitable candidate for mechanisms underlying the development of imatinib resistant in CML patients.