Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 5, 2025

Kinase Inhibitor Screening In Self-assembled Human Protein Microarrays
Published on: October 23, 2019
Ponatinib vs. asciminib in post-second-generation tyrosine kinase inhibitor therapy for chronic-phase chronic myeloid
Valentin Garcia-Gutierrez1, Fei Huang2, Ajibade Ashaye2
1Ramón y Cajal University Hospital, Instituto Ramón y Cajal de Investigación Sanitaria (IRYCIS), Universidad de Alcalá, Madrid, Spain.
Background:
Ponatinib and asciminib are approved for third-line therapy in chronic-phase chronic myeloid leukemia (CP-CML) and are the only drugs approved for patients with the T315I mutation in the United States. In Europe, only ponatinib is approved for patients with the T315I mutation.
Methods:
Clinical trials evaluating ponatinib or asciminib in patients with relapsed and refractory (R/R) CP-CML who failed one or more second-generation TKIs or had the T315I mutation were identified in a systematic review of medical literature databases. A matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC) analysis with individual patient-level data with ponatinib was used to balance baseline characteristics between ponatinib and asciminib groups. After matching, the response rate was calculated using the MAIC weight for each patient and the difference in response rate was calculated using a two-independent proportion Z-test. Cumulative rates of BCR::ABL1 IS ≤1% and major molecular response (MMR) in patients without baseline response were compared. Patients were further stratified by T315I mutation status.
Results:
The MAIC included four trials (ponatinib: NCT02467270, NCT01207440; asciminib: NCT02081378, NCT03106779). In patients without baseline response of BCR::ABL1 IS ≤1%, the adjusted BCR::ABL1 IS ≤1% rate difference with ponatinib vs. asciminib was 9.33% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.79%-17.86%; adjusted MMR rate difference: 6.84% [95% CI: -0.95%-14.62%]) by 12 months in favor of ponatinib. In patients with the T315I mutation, adjusted BCR::ABL1 IS ≤1% rate difference with ponatinib vs. asciminib was 43.54% (95% CI: 22.20%-64.87%; adjusted MMR rate difference: 47.37% [95% CI: 28.72%-66.02%]) by 12 months.
Conclusion:
After key baseline characteristics adjustment, cumulative BCR::ABL1 IS ≤1% and MMR rates were statistically higher with ponatinib than asciminib in patients without a baseline response in most of the comparisons by 12 months. Favorable efficacy outcomes observed in ponatinib vs. asciminib were consistently stronger in the T315I mutation subgroup.
Related Concept Videos
Treatment for Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension: Receptor Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors and Calcium Channel Blockers
TKIs, such as imatinib (Gleevec), are particularly effective in tackling the growth and mitogenic factors that become upregulated in PAH patients. These factors contribute to the...
Combination Therapies and Personalized Medicine
The combination of the drug acetazolamide and sulforaphane is a good example of combination therapy to treat cancer. The cells in the interior of a large tumor often die due to the hypoxic and...
Targeted Cancer Therapies
There are several types of targeted therapies against...
Inhibition of Cdk Activity
Transducer Mechanism: Enzyme-Linked Receptors
Major types that are helpful drug targets include:
Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting: Neurokinin-1 Receptor Antagonists

