Skip to main content
. 2025 Jul 18;9(20):5293–5305. doi: 10.1182/bloodadvances.2025016718

Table 3.

Response rates and duration

FAS N = 22
N = 22
Pooled (N = 22)
Monotherapy OLU (n = 6) Combination OLU+AZA (n = 16) TN (n = 7) R/R (n = 15)
Best overall response, n (%)
 ORR (CR + marrow CR + PR) 2 (33) 11 (69) 6 (86) 7 (47) 13 (59)
 CR 1 (17) 5 (31) 5 (71) 1 (7) 6 (27)
 Marrow CR 1 (17) 6 (38) 1 (14) 6 (40) 7 (32)
  Marrow CR with HI 1 (17) 3 (19) 1 (14) 3 (20) 4 (18)
 PR 0 0 0 0 0
 SD 2 (33) 3 (19) 1 (14) 4 (27) 5 (23)
  SD with HI 1 (17) 1 (6) 1 (14) 1 (7) 2 (9)
 PD 1 (17) 0 0 1 (7) 1 (5)
 Not done 1 (17) 2 (13) 0 3 (20) 3 (14)
 Composite response rate (CR + marrow CR + SD HI) 3 (50) 12 (75) 7 (100) 8 (53) 15 (68)
DOR, median (95% CI), mo
 Duration of CR NR (NR to NR) 14.2 (4.9 to NR) 14.5 (4.9 to NR) 20.5 20.5 (4.9 to NR)
 Duration of CR + marrow CR NR (6.7 to NR) 14.6 (2.8 to NR) 23 (5.8 to NR) 14.6 (2.8 to NR) 14.6 (5.8-32.8)
Time to response, median (range), mo
 Time to CR 8.3 (8.3-8.3) 5.1 (2.5-14.3) 5.1 (2.5-8.3) 14.3 5.7 (2.5-14.3)
 Time to CR + marrow CR 4.7 (1-8.3) 2 (1-13) 2.2 (1-8.3) 2 (1-13) 2 (1-13)
OS, median (95% CI), mo
 OS, total 14 (4.5 to NR) 27.5 (5-36.6) NR (7.3 to NR) 16.3 (3.1-36.6) 27.2 (6.9-37)
 CR responders NR (NR to NR) 26.9 (7.3 to NR) 26.9 (7.3 to NR) 37 37 (7.3 to NR)
 CR + marrow CR NR (14 to NR) 36.6 (7.3 to NR) NR (7.3 to NR) 36.6 (5 to NR) 36.6 (14 to NR)
 Nonresponders NR (4.5 to NR) 3.1 (1 to NR) NR (NR to NR)§ 5.7 (1 to NR) 6.9 (1-30.8)
EFS, median (95% CI), mo
 EFS, total 4.9 (1.9 to NR) 10.2 (3.7-25.8) 25.8 (7.3 to NR) 20.3 (3.7 to NR) 7.6 (3.7-25.8)
 CR responders NR (NR to NR) 19.9 (7.3 to NR) 19.9 (7.3 to NR) 34.8 25.8 (7.3 to NR)
 CR + marrow CR NR (7.6 to NR) 20.3 (7.3 to NR) 25.8 (7.3 to NR) 20.3 (3.7 to NR) 20.3 (7.3-34.8)
 Nonresponders 4.3 (1.9 to NR) 1.9 (1 to NR) NR (NR to NR)§ 2.8 (1 to 4.9) 3.7 (1-4.9)

AZA added to the regimen and achieved a CR.

Three patients from the phase 1 dose-escalation portion of the study (all received monotherapy OLU) received a suboptimal dose that was ≤50% of the approved dose of OLU. One patient (R/R) received 100 mg daily, and 2 patients (1 TN and 1 R/R) received 150 mg daily.

There were no patients with an event, and 1 patient was censored at study end but continued to receive study drug/transitioned to commercial use.

Range and 95% CI not applicable (n = 1)

§

The patient was categorized as SD while receiving suboptimal OLU monotherapy (150 mg, daily) but at investigator’s decision had AZA added to the regimen and achieved a CR.