European journal of haematology · 2024
Real-world effectiveness of first-line azacitidine or decitabine with or without venetoclax in acute myeloid leukemia patients unfit for intensive therapy.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеНазвание 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.
Acker Fabian, Chromik Jörg, Tiedjen Emily, Wolf Sebastian, Vischedyk Jonas B, Makowka Philipp, Enßle Julius C, Kouidri Khouloud, Sebastian Martin, Steffen Björn, Oellerich Thomas, Serve Hubert, Neubauer Andreas, Schäfer Jonas A, Bittenbring Jörg T
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: First-line treatment in patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) unfit for intensive therapy is the combination of a hypomethylating agent (HMA) with venetoclax (VEN). However, retrospective data confirming the benefits of this regimen outside of clinical trials have shown conflicting results.
METHODS: We performed a multicenter retrospective analysis of outcomes with first-line HMA-VEN versus HMA in AML patients unfit for intensive chemotherapy.
RESULTS: A total of 213 patients were included from three German hospitals (125 HMA-VEN, 88 HMA). Median overall survival in the HMA-VEN cohort was 7.9 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 5.1-14.7) versus 4.9 months (3.1-7.1) with HMA. After 1 year, 42% (95% CI, 33-54) and 19% (12-30) of patients were alive, respectively (hazard ratio [HR] for death, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.46-0.88). After adjusting for clinical and molecular baseline characteristics, treatment with HMA-VEN remained significantly associated with both prolonged survival (HR, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.29-0.77) and time to next treatment (HR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.47-0.85). Patients who achieved recovery of peripheral blood counts had a favorable prognosis (HR for death, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.33-0.84).
DISCUSSION: These data align with findings from the pivotal VIALE-A trial and support the use of HMA-VEN in patients unfit for intensive therapy.
METHODS: We performed a multicenter retrospective analysis of outcomes with first-line HMA-VEN versus HMA in AML patients unfit for intensive chemotherapy.
RESULTS: A total of 213 patients were included from three German hospitals (125 HMA-VEN, 88 HMA). Median overall survival in the HMA-VEN cohort was 7.9 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 5.1-14.7) versus 4.9 months (3.1-7.1) with HMA. After 1 year, 42% (95% CI, 33-54) and 19% (12-30) of patients were alive, respectively (hazard ratio [HR] for death, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.46-0.88). After adjusting for clinical and molecular baseline characteristics, treatment with HMA-VEN remained significantly associated with both prolonged survival (HR, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.29-0.77) and time to next treatment (HR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.47-0.85). Patients who achieved recovery of peripheral blood counts had a favorable prognosis (HR for death, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.33-0.84).
DISCUSSION: These data align with findings from the pivotal VIALE-A trial and support the use of HMA-VEN in patients unfit for intensive therapy.