Why the study?
Few treatment options exist for patients with chronic myeloid leukemia who are resistant or intolerant to first- and second-line therapies.
This expert consensus provides 17 evidence-based recommendations for managing chronic-phase CML patients who have failed at least two lines of TKI therapy.
Chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) usually requires long-term therapy with tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). While these agents have markedly advanced the clinical management and prognosis of CML, a subset of patients experience treatment resistance or suboptimal response, necessitating multiple lines of TKI therapy. Few treatment options exist for patients who are resistant or intolerant to first- and second-line therapies. To provide guidance for the management of patients in chronic-phase failing at least two lines of treatment, a literature review followed by consensus generation from an expert panel with a modified Delphi process was conducted. This was followed by a meeting in person and subsequent online iterations for the establishment of a list of consensus guidelines. Consensus was defined as ≥ 75% of respondents selecting either 'accept completely' or 'accept with some reservation'. Overall, 17 statements were formulated covering five topics - defining treatment failure and acceptable treatment response, in terms of efficacy and intolerance; sequencing therapy to prevent disease progression and improve quality of life; managing patients with broad resistance, specific mutations, and risk of cardiovascular events; considering timing of cytogenetic or molecular response; and mitigating risk when using novel therapies and allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. These comprehensive, evidence-based recommendations will assist clinicians in managing their patients with CML in third and later lines of treatment.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Cheung et al. (2025) conducted a review in Chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) in chronic phase. Third-line and later tyrosine kinase inhibitors (e.g., asciminib, ponatinib) was evaluated.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: