Aclarubicin (aclacinomycin A) is one of the anthracycline antineoplastic antibiotics with a multifaceted mechanism of antitumor activity. As a second-generation drug, it offers several advantages compared to standard anthracycline drugs such as doxorubicin or daunorubicin, which could position it as a potential blockbuster drug in antitumor therapy. Key mechanisms of action for aclarubicin include the inhibition of both types of topoisomerases, suppression of tumor invasion processes, generation of reactive oxygen species, inhibition of chymotrypsin-like activity, influence on cisplatin degradation, and inhibition of angiogenesis. Therefore, aclarubicin appears to be an ideal candidate for antitumor therapy. However, despite initial interest in its clinical applications, only a limited number of high-quality trials have been conducted thus far. Aclarubicin has primarily been evaluated as an induction therapy in acute myeloid and lymphoblastic leukemia. Studies have indicated that aclarubicin may hold significant promise for combination therapies with other anticancer drugs, although further research is needed to confirm its potential. This paper provides an in-depth exploration of aclarubicin\'s diverse mechanisms of action, its pharmacokinetics, potential toxicity, and the clinical trials in which it has been investigated.

The efficacy of anthracycline-based chemotherapeutics, which include doxorubicin and its structural relatives daunorubicin and idarubicin, remains almost unmatched in oncology, despite a side effect profile including cumulative dose-dependent cardiotoxicity, therapy-related malignancies and infertility. Detoxifying anthracyclines while preserving their anti-neoplastic effects is arguably a major unmet need in modern oncology, as cardiovascular complications that limit anti-cancer treatment are a leading cause of morbidity and mortality among the 17 million cancer survivors in the U.S. In this study, we examined different clinically relevant anthracycline drugs for a series of features including mode of action (chromatin and DNA damage), bio-distribution, anti-tumor efficacy and cardiotoxicity in pre-clinical models and patients. The different anthracycline drugs have surprisingly individual efficacy and toxicity profiles. In particular, aclarubicin stands out in pre-clinical models and clinical studies, as it potently kills cancer cells, lacks cardiotoxicity, and can be safely administered even after the maximum cumulative dose of either doxorubicin or idarubicin has been reached. Retrospective analysis of aclarubicin used as second-line treatment for relapsed/refractory AML patients showed survival effects similar to its use in first line, leading to a notable 23% increase in 5-year overall survival compared to other intensive chemotherapies. Considering individual anthracyclines as distinct entities unveils new treatment options, such as the identification of aclarubicin, which significantly improves the survival outcomes of AML patients while mitigating the treatment-limiting side-effects. Building upon these findings, an international multicenter Phase III prospective study is prepared, to integrate aclarubicin into the treatment of relapsed/refractory AML patients.

The prognosis of patients diagnosed with relapsed or refractory (R/R) T-lymphoblastic leukemia/lymphoma (T-ALL/LBL) has consistently been unsatisfactory, with limited treatment options. As reports, the CAG regimen can serve as a salvage treatment for R/R T-ALL/LBL, but there remains a subset of patients who do not benefit from it. Recent studies have indicated that daratumumab (Dara) and venetoclax (Ven) may offer promising therapeutic benefits for T-ALL/LBL. In light of these findings, we conducted a safety and efficacy evaluation of the enhanced treatment regimen, combining Dara and Ven with aclarubicin, cytarabine, granulocyte colony-stimulating factor, and etoposide (CAGE), in patients suffering from R/R T-ALL/LBL. The participants in this phase I trial were patients with R/R T-ALL/LBL who fail to standard treatment regimens. During each 28-day cycle, the patients were treated by Dara, Ven, cytarabine, aclarubicin, granulocyte colony-stimulating factor, etoposide. The primary endpoint of this study was the rate of remission. This report presents the prospective outcomes of 21 patients who received the salvage therapy of Dara and Ven combined with the CAGE regimen (Dara + Ven + CAGE). The objective remission rate (ORR) was determined to be 57.1%, while the complete remission (CR) rate was 47.6%. Notably, patients with the early T-cell precursor (ETP) subtype exhibited a significantly higher remission rate in the bone marrow compared to non-ETP patients (100% vs. 44.4%, p = 0.044). The Dara + Ven + CAGE regimen demonstrated a favorable remission rate in patients with R/R T-ALL/LBL. Moreover, the treatment was well-tolerated.

Chromatinized DNA is targeted by proteins and small molecules to regulate chromatin function. For example, anthracycline cancer drugs evict nucleosomes in a mechanism that is still poorly understood. We here developed a flexible method for specific isotope labeling of nucleosomal DNA enabling NMR studies of such nucleosome interactions. We describe the synthesis of segmental one-strand 13C-thymidine labeled 601-DNA, the assignment of the methyl signals, and demonstrate its use to observe site-specific binding to the nucleosome by aclarubicin, an anthracycline cancer drug that intercalates into the DNA minor grooves. Our results highlight intrinsic conformational heterogeneity in the 601 DNA sequence and show that aclarubicin binds an exposed AT-rich region near the DNA end. Overall, our data point to a model where the drug invades the nucleosome from the terminal ends inward, eventually resulting in histone eviction and nucleosome disruption.

BACKGROUND: Both venetoclax plus a hypomethylating agent (VEN/HMA) and cytarabine, aclarubicin, and granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (CAG) are low-intensity regimens for older patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) that show good efficacy and safety. It is unknown how VEN/HMA compares with the CAG regimen for the treatment of newly diagnosed AML.
METHODS: The outcomes of patients with newly diagnosed AML treated with VEN/HMA were compared with those of patients treated with a CAG-based regimen. Propensity score matching between these two cohorts at a 1:1 ratio was performed according to age at diagnosis, sex, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, state of fitness, and European LeukemiaNet (ELN) 2022 risk stratification to minimize bias.
RESULTS: A total of 84 of 96 patients in the VEN/HMA cohort were matched with 84 of 147 patients in the CAG cohort. VEN/HMA resulted in a better response than the CAG-based regimens, as indicated by a higher composite complete remission (CRc) rate (82.1% vs. 60.7%; p = .002) and minimal residual disease negativity rate (88.2% vs. 68.2%; p = .009). In patients with an ELN adverse risk, VEN/HMA was associated with a higher CRc rate compared to CAG (80.5% vs. 58.3%; p = .006). VEN/HMA was associated with longer event-free survival (EFS) (median EFS, not reached vs. 4.5 months; p = .0004), whereas overall survival (OS) was comparable between the two cohorts (median OS, not reached vs. 18 months; p = .078).
CONCLUSIONS: The VEN/HMA regimen may result in a better response than CAG-based treatment in older patients with newly diagnosed AML.

OBJECTIVE: We investigated the validity of claims of the healthy vaccinee effect (HVE) in COVID-vaccine studies by analyzing associations between all-cause mortality (ACM) and COVID-19 vaccination status.
METHODS: Approximately 2.2 million individual records from two Czech health insurance companies were retrospectively analyzed. Each age group was stratified according to the vaccination status (unvaccinated vs. individuals less than 4 weeks vs. more than 4 weeks from Doses 1, 2, 3, and 4 or more doses of vaccine). ACMs in these groups were computed and compared.
RESULTS: Consistently over datasets and age categories, ACM was substantially lower in the vaccinated than unvaccinated groups regardless of the presence or absence of a wave of COVID-19 deaths. Moreover, the ACMs in groups more than 4 weeks from Doses 1, 2, or 3 were consistently several times higher than in those less than 4 weeks from the respective dose. HVE appears to be the only plausible explanation for this, which is further corroborated by a created mathematical model.
CONCLUSIONS: In view of the presence of HVE, the baseline difference in the frailty of vaccinated and unvaccinated populations in periods without COVID-19 must be taken into account when estimating COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness from observational data.

In cancer therapy, DNA intercalators are mainly known for their capacity to kill cells by inducing DNA damage. Recently, several DNA intercalators have attracted much interest given their ability to inhibit RNA Polymerase I transcription (BMH-21), evict histones (Aclarubicin) or induce chromatin trapping of FACT (Curaxin CBL0137). Interestingly, these DNA intercalators lack the capacity to induce DNA damage while still retaining cytotoxic effects and stabilize p53. Herein, we report that these DNA intercalators impact chromatin biology by interfering with the chromatin stability of RNA polymerases I, II and III. These three compounds have the capacity to induce degradation of RNA polymerase II and they simultaneously enable the trapping of Topoisomerases TOP2A and TOP2B on the chromatin. In addition, BMH-21 also acts as a catalytic inhibitor of Topoisomerase II, resembling Aclarubicin. Moreover, BMH-21 induces chromatin trapping of the histone chaperone FACT and propels accumulation of Z-DNA and histone eviction, similarly to Aclarubicin and CBL0137. These DNA intercalators have a cumulative impact on general transcription machinery by inducing accumulation of topological defects and impacting nuclear chromatin. Therefore, their cytotoxic capabilities may be the result of compounding deleterious effects on chromatin homeostasis.

OBJECTIVE: Preclinical evidence and clinical trials have suggested synergistic effects of epigenetic modifiers in combination with cytotoxic agents for the treatment of leukemia. However, their efficacy in patients with relapsed/refractory acute myeloid leukemia (R/R AML) remains unclear.
METHODS: Clinical data of R/R AML patients who received a CDCAG regimen (chidamide, decitabine, cytarabine, aclarubicin, and granulocyte colony-stimulating factor) from July 1, 2018 to October 31, 2021 at our center were retrospectively assessed, and the safety and efficacy of the CDCAG regimen were evaluated. Patients were followed up until November 30, 2021, with a median follow-up of 21.6 months (95% CI: 10.0-33.2 months).
RESULTS: A total of 67 patients were enrolled. Two patients died within 3 weeks after the initiation, and therefore only 65 patients underwent the assement for clinical response and survival. It was found that 56.9% patients achieved complete remission with a median overall survival (OS) of 9.6 months. The median OS of responders was 25.9 months, while that of non-responders was 5.0 months (P<0.0001). Patients with gene mutations had a superior overall response rate (ORR) (80.4% vs. 45.5%, P=0.043) compared to those without gene mutations. The presence of DNA methyltransferase 3 A (DNMT3A), ten-eleven translocation-2 (TET2), and isocitrate dehydrogenase 1/2 (IDH1/2) mutations did not affect the response rate (88.2% vs. 68.9%, P=0.220) and reflected a better OS (not attained vs. 9.0 months, P=0.05). The most common non-hematologic adverse events were pulmonary infection (73.1%), followed by febrile neutropenia (23.9%) and sepsis (19.4%).
CONCLUSIONS: The CDCAG regimen was effective and well-tolerated in R/R AML patients, increasing the potential for allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Moreover, patients with DNMT3A, TET2, and IDH1/2 mutations might benefit from this regimen.

Venetoclax (VEN)-based regimens are the standard of care for elderly or unfit patients with newly diagnosed (ND) acute myeloid leukemia (AML). Some single-arm studies have implied that hypomethylating agents (HMAs) plus priming regimens may potentially provide an alternative therapeutic approach, owing to encouraging efficacy seen. However, no comparative data exists yet regarding these two treatment approaches. In this retrospective multi-center cohort study, we enrolled 294 ND AML patients, allocating 167 to the HMA + priming group and 127 to the VEN-based group. Treatment response and overall survival (OS) were compared between groups. Molecular subgroup analyses were also conducted. With a median of two cycles for HMA + priming group, the overall response (ORR) was 65.3%, including 55.1% complete remission (CR), 9.6% CR with incomplete hematologic recovery (CRi) and 0.6% morphologic leukemia-free state (MLFS). With a median of two cycles for VEN-based group, the ORR was 70.9%, including 46.5% CR, 18.9% CRi, and 5.5% MLFS. Response differences (ORR or CR/CRi) between groups were not significant (p > 0.05). With a median follow-up of 10.1 months, median OSs were similar between groups (20.9 vs 16.3 months, p = 0.41). However, VEN regimens demonstrated superior CR/CRi for patients with mutations in FLT3, IDH1/2, and NPM1 compared to HMA + priming (80.0% vs 35.0%, p = 0.01; 90.9% vs 65.5%, p = 0.02; 90.9% and 65.5%, p = 0.02, respectively). In conclusion, HMAs plus modified priming regimens might be a potential alternative therapeutic approach for patients with ND AML, but VEN-based regimens presented predominance in specific molecular subgroups. Molecular characteristics contribute to guiding choice of treatment.

To compare efficacy between homoharringtonine combined with cytarabine and aclarubicin (HAA) and idarubicin and cytarabine (IA) regimens as first induction chemotherapy in patients with core binding factor acute myeloid leukemia (CBF-AML). Cox regression model and propensity score matching (PSM) were used to identify the regimen associated with a better remission rate and outcomes. In total, 374 patients with CBF-AML (243 with RUNX1::RUXN1T1 and 131 with CBFB::MYH11) were included in this study. The patients received the HAA or IA regimen (187 each) as the first induction therapy. For patients with RUNX1::RUXN1T1, multivariate analyses showed that the HAA regimen was significantly associated with a higher CR/CRi rate after the first induction (hazard ratio [HR] = 5.3 [95% CI 2.3, 12.2]; p < 0.001) and more favorable relapse-free survival (RFS) (HR = 0.5 [0.3, 0.8], p = 0.01). In PSM analysis, the HAA regimen also had a higher CR/CRi rate (96% vs. 77%, p < 0.001), especially for those harboring wild-type KIT (KITWT) (96% vs. 83%, p = 0.02) or non-D816 KIT mutation (100% vs. 63%, p = 0.002), as well as more favorable RFS (p = 0.01), compared with the IA regimen. However, there was no difference in the remission rate or outcomes between the two regimens for patients with CBFB::MYH11. The HAA regimen as first induction chemotherapy resulted in a higher CR/CRi rate in AML patients with RUNX1::RUNX1T1, especially those harboring KITWT and non-D816 KIT mutation, and a more favorable RFS compared with the IA regimen. The efficacy between the two regimens did not differ in those with CBFB::MYH11.