Oncology · 2026
FLAG-Based versus Standard 7+3 Induction Therapy in Adults with Newly Diagnosed Acute Myeloid Leukemia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
СтатьяСистематический обзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Abdulgayoom Mohammed, Aboukhalaf Soha, Osman Mahmoud, H Soliman Nada, Rahmoon Samreen Mumtaz, Rabadi Marrita, Fituri Nuha, Al-Mashdali Abdulrahman F, Kaddoura Rasha, F Mohamed Shehab
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The standard induction regimen for newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia (AML) in eligible patients remains cytarabine-daunorubicin (7+3), although FLAG-based regimens are increasingly used in high-risk disease.
METHODS: We performed a PRISMA 2020-compliant systematic review and meta-analysis comparing FLAG-based induction with standard 7+3 in adults with newly diagnosed AML. Five retrospective cohort studies, including 534 patients, were analyzed.
RESULTS: FLAG-based induction was associated with a significantly higher overall response rate than 7+3 (OR: 1.83, 95% CI: 1.03-3.22), without a significant difference in 30-day mortality (OR 0.56, 95% CI: 0.12-2.69) or 60-day mortality (OR: 0.79, 95% CI: 0.29-2.14). Survival outcomes were heterogeneous and could not be pooled: median overall survival (OS) was similar in 1 cohort, whereas 2 studies reported improved OS with FLAG-based induction; disease-free survival/relapse-free survival outcomes were inconsistently reported. FLAG-based induction was associated with higher receipt of consolidation therapy, while bridging to allogeneic transplantation did not differ significantly. Cytogenetic and molecular risk data were variably defined and incompletely reported, precluding reliable pooled subgroup analyses.
CONCLUSIONS: Overall, FLAG-based induction improves response rates without a clear increase in early mortality or selected reported safety outcomes; however, its impact on survival remains uncertain and appears influenced by post-remission strategies. Prospective randomized trials are needed to better define its role in frontline AML therapy.
METHODS: We performed a PRISMA 2020-compliant systematic review and meta-analysis comparing FLAG-based induction with standard 7+3 in adults with newly diagnosed AML. Five retrospective cohort studies, including 534 patients, were analyzed.
RESULTS: FLAG-based induction was associated with a significantly higher overall response rate than 7+3 (OR: 1.83, 95% CI: 1.03-3.22), without a significant difference in 30-day mortality (OR 0.56, 95% CI: 0.12-2.69) or 60-day mortality (OR: 0.79, 95% CI: 0.29-2.14). Survival outcomes were heterogeneous and could not be pooled: median overall survival (OS) was similar in 1 cohort, whereas 2 studies reported improved OS with FLAG-based induction; disease-free survival/relapse-free survival outcomes were inconsistently reported. FLAG-based induction was associated with higher receipt of consolidation therapy, while bridging to allogeneic transplantation did not differ significantly. Cytogenetic and molecular risk data were variably defined and incompletely reported, precluding reliable pooled subgroup analyses.
CONCLUSIONS: Overall, FLAG-based induction improves response rates without a clear increase in early mortality or selected reported safety outcomes; however, its impact on survival remains uncertain and appears influenced by post-remission strategies. Prospective randomized trials are needed to better define its role in frontline AML therapy.