Impact of Targeted Agents on Survival of Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia Patients Fit for Fludarabine, Cyclophosphamide, and Rituximab (FCR) Relative to Age- and Sex-Matched Population

Simple Summary: In a comprehensive analysis of phase 3 clinical trials, including the two FLAIR sub-studies, ECOG1912, and the CLL13 trials, we assessed the impact of first-line treatments with targeted agents (TAs), or fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab (FCR)-based chemo-immunotherapy (CIT), on overall survival (OS) compared to age- and sex-matched individuals in the general population. TAs demonstrated a higher 5-year restricted mean survival time (RMST) (58.1 months; 95% CI: 57.4 to 58.8) compared to CIT (5-year RMST, 56.9 months; 95% CI: 56.7-58.2). Moreover, the comparison with age- and gender-matched general populations (AGMGP) suggested that TAs may mitigate CLL's impact on OS during the first five years post-treatment initiation. In contrast, CLL patients treated with FCR exhibited sustained OS differences compared to both the Italian and US AGMGP cohorts. These results support TAs as the preferred first-line treatment for younger/fit CLL patients but imply the need for a careful interpretation due to variations in patient selection criteria and clinical profiles across trials. Longer follow-up is essential to assess the survival improvement of younger CLL patients treated with TAs relative to the AGMGP. To assess the impact of first-line treatment with targeted agents (TAs) or fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab (FCR)-based chemo-immunotherapy (CIT) on overall survival (OS) compared to age- and sex-matched individuals in the general population, we conducted an aggregated analysis of phase 3 clinical trials, including the two FLAIR sub-studies, ECOG1912, and CLL13 trials. The restricted mean survival time (RMST), an alternative measure in outcome analyses capturing OS changes over the entire history of the disease, was used to minimize biases associated with the short follow-up time of trials. Patients treated with TAs demonstrated a higher 5-year RMST (58.1 months; 95% CI: 57.4 to 58.8) compared to those treated with CIT (5-year RMST, 56.9 months; 95% CI: 56.7-58.2). Furthermore, the OS comparison of treatment groups with the AGMGP suggests that TAs may mitigate the impact of CLL on OS during the first five years post-treatment initiation. In summary, the 5-year RMST difference was -0.4 months (95% CI: -0.8 to 0.2; p = 0.10) when comparing CLL patients treated with TAs to the Italian age- and gender-matched general population (AGMGP). A similar trend was observed when CLL patients treated with TAs were compared to the US AGMGP (5-year RMST difference, 0.3 months; 95% CI: -0.1 to 0.9; p = 0.12). In contrast, CLL patients treated with FCR exhibited sustained OS differences when compared to both the Italian cohort (5-year RMST difference: -1.6 months; 95% CI: -2.4 to -0.9; p < 0.0001) and the US AGMGP cohort (5-year RMST difference: -0.9 months; 95% CI: -1.7 to -0.2; p = 0.015). Although these results support TAs as the preferred first-line treatment for younger CLL patients, it is crucial to acknowledge that variations in patient selection criteria and clinical profiles across clinical trials necessitate a cautious interpretation of these findings that should be viewed as directional and hypothesis-generating. A longer follow-up is needed to assess the survival improvement of younger CLL patients treated with TAs relative to the AGMGP.