Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology · 2006
An antecedent diagnosis of refractory anemia with excess blasts has no prognostic relevance in acute myeloid leukemia of older adult patients.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Palmieri S, D'Arco A M, Celentano M, Mele G, Califano C, Pollio F, D'Amico M R, Ferrara F
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Conflicting results have been reported about the prognostic relevance of antecedent myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) in acute myeloid leukemia (AML) of older adults.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data from 87 intensively treated AML patients (median age 69 years) were analyzed, with the aim of comparing therapeutic results and toxicity between de novo and AML secondary to a previous MDS (s-AML). Rate of CD34+ cells mobilization and feasibility of autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) were also compared.
RESULTS: Complete remission rate, death in induction and primary resistance were not statistically different between the two groups. Median time for neutrophil recovery was similar, while s-AML patients required a longer time for platelet recovery (P = 0.04). There was no difference as to eligibility for consolidation as well as for mobilization and feasibility of ASCT. S-AML had negligible impact on overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS). In the multivariate analysis the only parameter significantly related to either OS or DFS duration was adverse karyotype (P = 0.02 and 0.04, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS: A diagnosis of s-AML does not represent a clinically relevant prognostic factor in elderly AML patients treated with aggressive therapy. Furthermore, s-AML patients can be mobilized and autografted with comparable results as opposed to de novo cases.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data from 87 intensively treated AML patients (median age 69 years) were analyzed, with the aim of comparing therapeutic results and toxicity between de novo and AML secondary to a previous MDS (s-AML). Rate of CD34+ cells mobilization and feasibility of autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) were also compared.
RESULTS: Complete remission rate, death in induction and primary resistance were not statistically different between the two groups. Median time for neutrophil recovery was similar, while s-AML patients required a longer time for platelet recovery (P = 0.04). There was no difference as to eligibility for consolidation as well as for mobilization and feasibility of ASCT. S-AML had negligible impact on overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS). In the multivariate analysis the only parameter significantly related to either OS or DFS duration was adverse karyotype (P = 0.02 and 0.04, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS: A diagnosis of s-AML does not represent a clinically relevant prognostic factor in elderly AML patients treated with aggressive therapy. Furthermore, s-AML patients can be mobilized and autografted with comparable results as opposed to de novo cases.