4.4 Article

Improved Outcome for Chinese Children With Acute Promyelocytic Leukemia: A Comparison of Two Protocols

期刊

PEDIATRIC BLOOD & CANCER
卷 53, 期 3, 页码 325-328

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/pbc.22042

关键词

acute promyelocytic leukemia; childhood; developing countries

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective. Acute promyelocytic leukemia (APL) is now highly Curable, except in many developing countries. Introduction of current treatment strategies may improve the outcome for children with APL in these countries. Methods. The diagnosis was based on the FAB classification and detection of PML-RAR alpha rearrangement. From December 1999 to September 2004, 16 eligible children were treated with an intensive in-house protocol including high-close AraC and anthracycline. Subsequently, 14 cases were treated with a less intensive protocol modified from the PETHEMA LPA99. Results. The 3.5 years event-free Survival (EFS) was 37.5% (95% CI, 13.8-61.2%.) for patients treated on initial protocol. The treatment failures were: six patients abandoned treatment (37.5%), two who died of intracranial hemorrhage at diagnosis (6.3%) and sepsis in remission (6.31%) respectively, and two who relapsed (12.5%). Those treated on modified PETHEMA had a 3.5 years EFS of 79.6% (95% CI, 52.9-106.3%). Treatment failures included: one who died of intracranial hemorrhage at diagnosis (7.1%) and one who relapsed (7.1%). The patients on modified PETHEMA had a significantly higher EFS (P=0.012), lower frequency of sepsis during treatment (7.7%. vs. 77.8%; P=0.0015), and lower hospitalization cost (median US$ 4,700 vs. US$ 20,000; P<0.0001) than those on in-house protocol. Conclusion. Treatment with the less intensive protocol based on the PETHEMA LPA99 Study of childhood APL Successfully reduced chemotherapy toxicity and lowered hospitalization costs without increasing relapses. This led to decreases in treatment-related morbidity and the treatment abandonment rate, thus improving overall Outcome. Pediatr Blood Cancer 2009;53:325-328. (C) 2009 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据