Introduction
Systemic mastocytosis (SM) is a myeloproliferative neoplasm characterized by the proliferation and activation of mast cells in various organs, including the skin, liver, spleen, and hematopoietic tissues, eventually resulting in impaired organ function (Valent et al.
2003). The clinical course in SM is heterogeneous and ranges from asymptomatic with a normal life expectancy to highly aggressive with decreased life expectancy (Quintas-Cardama et al.
2011). SM is rare; the annual incidence of new cases is 0.3 per 100,000 (Woodward
2003). The median overall survival is approximately 63 months overall, 198 months for patients with indolent SM (ISM), 24 months for patients with aggressive SM (ASM), and 2 months for patients with mast cell leukemia (MCL) (Lim et al.
2009b; Fuller
2012).
SM is classified based on the abnormal morphology, immunophenotype, and molecular characteristics of mast cells. The diagnostic algorithm for SM includes evaluating bone marrow by immunostaining for the presence of tryptase and/or KIT and immunophenotyping mast cells for expression of CD25 and/or CD2. Serum tryptase level and the presence of the
KIT D816V mutation in blood or bone marrow are also evaluated. SM is then categorized as ISM (2 or more B-findings), ASM (1 or more C-findings), or MCL (at least 20 % mast cells on bone marrow aspirate smear) (Pardanani
2015; Horny et al.
2008).
There is no accepted standard therapy for patients with SM. Patients generally receive treatments intended to manage symptoms and improve quality of life, such as antihistamines for the relief of pruritus and flushing, proton pump inhibitors to treat gastrointestinal symptoms, or corticosteroids and/or analgesics for mitigating bone pain and other symptoms (Andersen et al.
2012; Valent et al.
2010; Pardanani
2015). Patients with advanced SM may receive treatment with interferon (IFN)-α or cladribine; these treatments also decrease symptoms but may not substantially reduce mast cell burden (Verstovsek
2013). Tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs), such as imatinib, have demonstrated modest effects in SM, although primary resistance is common in patients with the
KIT D816V mutation (Lim et al.
2009a; Pardanani
2012; Valent et al.
2010).
As many as 93 % of SM cases may harbor an activating D816V mutation in the catalytic domain of KIT (Garcia-Montero et al.
2006; Quintas-Cardama et al.
2011; Akin and Metcalfe
2004), a receptor tyrosine kinase expressed on the surface of mature mast cells and mast cell precursors (Lammie et al.
1994; Valent et al.
2003). The
KIT D816V mutation induces downstream signaling that is independent of the KIT ligand stem cell factor (Furitsu et al.
1993) and is mediated through the signal transducer and activator of transcription 5 (STAT5) and phosphoinositol-3-kinase (PI3K) pathways (Harir et al.
2008). Constitutive KIT activation results in increased mast cell accumulation in the bone marrow and more aggressive disease (Valent et al.
2003; Lim et al.
2009b; Verstovsek
2013). The presence of the
KIT D816V mutation is one of four minor criteria for the diagnosis of SM (Valent et al.
2003), and
KIT D816V allele burden can be used to monitor residual disease in patients with SM (Erben et al.
2014). Additional
KIT mutations as well as KIT-independent pathways (e.g., Lyn and Btk) have recently been implicated in the pathogenesis of SM (Gleixner et al.
2011; Schwaab et al.
2013; Orfao et al.
2007).
The TKI nilotinib was rationally designed to inhibit mutant forms of the BCR-ABL protein that display resistance to the TKI imatinib in patients with chronic myeloid leukemia (CML); both imatinib and nilotinib are approved for the treatment of CML. Nilotinib is also active against the KIT kinase in vitro (Weisberg et al.
2005; Manley et al.
2010). Recent data from a multicenter, phase 2, open-label registration trial demonstrated that nilotinib 400 mg twice daily continued to be safe and effective in patients with CML in chronic phase (Giles et al.
2013), accelerated phase (le Coutre et al.
2012), and blast crisis (Giles et al.
2012) who were resistant to or intolerant of prior therapies. Based on promising results from the first data analysis (Hochhaus et al.
2006), we evaluated the efficacy and safety of nilotinib 400 mg twice daily in patients with SM (with or without the D816V mutation) enrolled in the phase 2 nilotinib registration trial (CAMN107A2101, registered at
www.clinicaltrials.gov as NCT00109707).
Discussion
SM is a heterogeneous disease. Consensus guidelines on the diagnosis and subclassification of patients with SM were published in 2007 (Valent et al.
2007) and have since been updated and refined by several groups, including the WHO (Pardanani and Tefferi
2010a,
b; Valent et al.
2012; Horny et al.
2008). These criteria have established definitive categories of SM distinguishable by their clinical presentation, histology, and growth characteristics: ISM, ISM with bone marrow involvement but no skin lesions, smoldering SM (SSM), SM-AHNMD, ASM, and MCL (Gotlib et al.
2013). These categories were established after the design of the current trial. Here, disease subtypes were determined retrospectively, and the study population included patients with a heterogeneous mixture of SM subtypes, making interpretation of the data difficult.
Patients with different SM subtypes require different types of treatment. Patients with ISM may not require cytoreductive therapy because their symptom burden is low (Valent et al.
2010). Traditional treatments for more advanced SM, including cladribine (Hermine et al.
2010) and IFN (Casassus et al.
2002), are sufficient to improve disease symptoms but have limited efficacy in reducing underlying disease burden (Lim et al.
2009a). Given the inadequacy of current treatment strategies, particularly with aggressive SM subtypes, and the role that KIT activation may play in the disease, the level of interest in targeted therapies for the treatment of SM has increased.
The high prevalence of the
KIT D816V activating mutation in patients with SM led to the development of KIT inhibitors for the treatment of this disease (Pardanani et al.
2003). Imatinib is a KIT-targeted TKI that is approved for patients with multiple hematologic malignancies, including adult patients with ASM without the
KIT D816V mutation or with unknown
KIT mutational status (Gleevec package insert.
2015). However, imatinib has demonstrated only modest activity against the
KIT D816V mutation in vitro and in the clinic (Lim et al.
2009a; Vega-Ruiz et al.
2009; Gleixner et al.
2006). For example, a study including 22 patients with SM treated with imatinib demonstrated an ORR of 33.3 % in patients without the
KIT D816V mutation, 16.7 % in patients with this mutation, and 0 % in patients with missing mutation data (Lim et al.
2009a).
Here, we report the activity of nilotinib in patients with SM enrolled in an open-label registration trial. Patients with SM, with or without the
KIT D816V mutation, met the standard disease criteria for SM and had a clinical indication for treatment. Approximately half of the patients (47.5 %) had received no prior treatment for SM. Eight patients (21.6 %) in the ASM subgroup had a minor response or better to nilotinib. The safety profile of nilotinib in patients with SM was similar to that previously reported with nilotinib in other hematologic malignancies (Kantarjian et al.
2007; Tasigna package insert.
2015).
Although nilotinib has shown little inhibitory activity toward the
KIT D816V/Y mutation in vitro (von Bubnoff et al.
2005; Verstovsek et al.
2006; Manley et al.
2010), the ORR in patients with ASM with the
KIT D816V mutation at any time was higher than that in patients without the mutation at baseline [8/29 (27.6 %) vs 0/8 (0 %), respectively]. The mechanisms responsible for this are currently unknown. The D816V mutation shifts
KIT from the inactive conformation, to which imatinib and nilotinib bind, to its active conformation (Gajiwala et al.
2009; Weisberg et al.
2005). Nilotinib-mediated inhibition of KIT signaling in nontransformed cells that support survival of malignant cells (e.g., stromal cells, mast cells, macrophages) may provide some clinical benefit, even in patients with
KIT D816V-mutated SM (Pittoni et al.
2011). In addition, nilotinib may be active against other KIT-dependent and -independent pathways involved in the development of SM (Gleixner et al.
2011; Schwaab et al.
2013). Additional studies are needed to further explore the pathogenesis of SM and to understand the mechanisms underlying the clinical activity of nilotinib in SM. It also must be noted that 20 patients did not have
KIT mutation results available at baseline. Thus, response rates in patients with mutated
KIT D816V vs unmutated
KIT must be interpreted with caution.
In the current study, all patients with ASM who responded met the major criterion for SM diagnosis (multifocal clusters of mast cells in the bone marrow) at baseline. During the study, the proportion of mast cells in the bone marrow in patients who responded decreased by 70.0 %, suggesting that nilotinib did have an effect on the underlying disease in these patients. Likewise, serum tryptase level is a minor diagnostic criterion in SM and a strong measure of disease status. Elevated serum tryptase level can predict progression to more aggressive forms of disease (Kristensen et al.
2013) and has been shown to correlate with
KIT D816V allele burden, a marker of disease severity (Matito et al.
2013). In the current study, the median tryptase level decreased by 29.8 % in responders with ASM. Thus, while the rate of response was not high, the quality of response in patients who did respond suggests that nilotinib may have clinical benefit in some patients. Improvements in laboratory parameters were also observed in the ISM and the “other” subgroups. However, these subgroups cannot be evaluated using standard ASM criteria due to differences in the underlying disease.
The current trial had several limitations. Current response criteria, developed after the design of this study, are based on the resolution of C-findings in patients with the aggressive subtype of SM (Gotlib et al.
2013). This study included patients less likely to have C-findings at baseline; 31.1 % of patients had ISM. Using C-findings as a measure of response may not be appropriate for patients with ISM. Also, because C-findings were collected retrospectively in this study, these data may not be complete. Furthermore, the minimum response duration in this study (4 weeks) was shorter than current response duration criteria (12 weeks) (Gotlib et al.
2013), which may have increased the rates of response observed. For these reasons, the true magnitude of the clinical benefit of nilotinib in this population is difficult to determine, and it is possible that the response rates observed in this study may overestimate the true benefit of nilotinib in patients with advanced SM.
Previous studies have demonstrated a median overall survival of 24 months in patients with ASM (Lim et al.
2009b; Fuller
2012). Despite a lack of response in the majority of patients in the current study, overall survival was 81.2 % at 24 months, with the median survival not yet reached after a median of 34.7 months of patient follow-up. Thus, our data demonstrate that treatment with nilotinib may provide some clinical benefit to patients with SM. It is also possible, as our retrospective interpretation of the study population suggests, that a sufficient number of patients with ISM were included who may have skewed the overall survival results in such a manner that the true benefit is somewhat less than identified here. Additional studies will be necessary to determine whether nilotinib improves the long-term survival of patients with SM, including patients with ASM.
Several additional KIT-targeting TKIs are currently being investigated in patients with SM. Although the dual BCR-ABL/SRC TKI dasatinib inhibits the kinase activity of
KIT D816V in vitro (Shah et al.
2006; Lombardo et al.
2004) and has demonstrated efficacy in other myeloproliferative neoplasms, such as CML (Kantarjian et al.
2010), it has displayed minimal activity in patients with SM (Verstovsek et al.
2008). Data from a phase 2 study in patients with systemic or cutaneous mastocytosis (
N = 25) treated with the KIT/LYN kinase inhibitor masitinib, however, demonstrated an ORR of 56.0 % and modest improvements in symptoms and quality-of-life measurements after 12 weeks of treatment (Paul et al.
2010).
The multikinase inhibitor midostaurin has also demonstrated potent in vitro activity against
KIT D816V (Gleixner et al.
2006; Weisberg et al.
2002; Fabbro et al.
2000) as well as activity in patients with advanced SM with this mutation (Gotlib et al.
2010). Phase 2 data in a cohort of 26 patients with advanced SM demonstrated an ORR of 69.2 %, and the presence of the
KIT D816V mutation was significantly associated with achievement of a major response (Gotlib et al.
2010). Another phase 2 study used central adjudication to identify patients with ASM or MCL, thereby producing a homogenous population of patients with advanced SM according to the current definitions (Gotlib et al.
2014). In this trial, which evaluated midostaurin in patients with ASM or MCL (
n = 89), high rates of durable responses and good tolerability were observed. The ORR was 60 % (45 % major response and 15 % partial response). The ORR was 63 % in patients with the
KIT D816V mutation (46 of 73) and 44 % in patients without it (7 of 16). With a median follow-up of 26 months, the median duration of response was 24 months (range 11 months—not evaluable), and median OS was 29 months (range 18 months—not evaluable). Further, improvements in symptoms and quality-of-life measures were observed in all patients across all reported scales.
KIT-targeting TKIs may also be effective when used in combination with other treatments, such as chemotherapy. Treatment with the TKI dasatinib and standard chemotherapy induced hematologic remission and decreased the levels of
KIT D816V in the mast cells of a patient with SM-AML (Ustun et al.
2009). Combined inhibition of KIT and its downstream effectors, such as PI3K or STAT5, may also be an effective strategy in SM (Harir et al.
2008; Buet et al.
2012). Several clinical trials are evaluating additional agents in patients with SM, including the interleukin 2-diphtheria toxin fusion protein denileukin diftitox and the mechanistic target of rapamycin (mTOR) inhibitor everolimus (US National Institutes of Health
2015).
Despite its limitations, this study provides additional information about this rare disease and illustrates the importance of enrolling only patients who meet strict eligibility criteria in prospective trials to ensure consistency of populations across studies. Data from the present analysis demonstrated that nilotinib has a safety profile that is consistent with that seen in previous reports and has modest clinical activity in patients with SM, particularly patients with the KIT D816V mutations who otherwise have limited treatment options. Nilotinib, either alone or in combination with other agents, may have a role in the treatment of these patients. However, other TKIs, which in more recent trials have shown higher rates of response in patients with advanced SM, may provide more clinical benefit for patients with more aggressive disease. Future studies of SM should use the most recent disease classification definitions to generate homogeneous patient populations and more robust data sets. Furthermore, identification of SM patient subgroups mostly likely to benefit from nilotinib may be an important approach in future studies of SM.