4.6 Article

The impact of dose escalation and resistance modulation in older patients with acute myeloid leukaemia and high risk myelodysplastic syndrome: the results of the LRF AML14 trial

期刊

BRITISH JOURNAL OF HAEMATOLOGY
卷 145, 期 3, 页码 318-332

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2141.2009.07604.x

关键词

acute myeloid leukaemia; chemoresistance; p-glycoprotein

资金

  1. Leukaemia Research Fund of the United Kingdom
  2. Medical Research Council [G0300133] Funding Source: researchfish
  3. National Institute for Health Research [NF-SI-0507-10370] Funding Source: researchfish
  4. MRC [G0300133] Funding Source: UKRI

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The acute myeloid leukaemia (AML)14 trial addressed four therapeutic questions in patients predominantly aged over 60 years with AML and High Risk Myelodysplastic Syndrome: (i) Daunorubicin 50 mg/m(2) vs. 35 mg/m(2); (ii) Cytarabine 200 mg/m(2) vs. 400 mg/m(2) in two courses of DA induction; (iii) for part of the trial, patients allocated Daunorubicin 35 mg/m(2) were also randomized to receive, or not, the multidrug resistance modulator PSC-833 in a 1:1:1 randomization; and (iv) a total of three versus four courses of treatment. A total of 1273 patients were recruited. The response rate was 62% (complete remission 54%, complete remission without platelet/neutrophil recovery 8%); 5-year survival was 12%. No benefits were observed in either dose escalation randomization, or from a fourth course of treatment. There was a trend for inferior response in the PSC-833 arm due to deaths in induction. Multivariable analysis identified cytogenetics, presenting white blood count, age and secondary disease as the main predictors of outcome. Although patients with high Pgp expression and function had worse response and survival, this was not an independent prognostic factor, and was not modified by PSC-833. In conclusion, these four interventions have not improved outcomes in older patients. New agents need to be explored and novel trial designs are required to maximise prospects of achieving timely progress.

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

4.6
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