4.2 Article

A Phase II Study of Lenalidomide Alone in Relapsed/Refractory Acute Myeloid Leukemia or High-Risk Myelodysplastic Syndromes With Chromosome 5 Abnormalities

期刊

CLINICAL LYMPHOMA MYELOMA & LEUKEMIA
卷 12, 期 5, 页码 341-344

出版社

CIG MEDIA GROUP, LP
DOI: 10.1016/j.clml.2012.04.001

关键词

Clinical trial; Deletion 5q; Response

资金

  1. Celgene Corporation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This phase II study assessed the efficacy and safety of lenalidomide in patients with relapsed/refractory acute myeloid leukemia (N = 18) and high-risk myelodysplastic syndrome (N = 9) with chromosome 5 abnormalities. The overall complete remission rate with or without platelet recovery was 7% (2/27). Activity of lenalidomide was limited to patients with noncomplex cytogenetics. Background: Lenalidomide is effective in low-risk myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) with deletion 5q. We conducted a phase II study to evaluate the safety and efficacy of lenalidomide in patients with relapsed/refractory acute myeloid leukemia (AML) and high-risk MDS with any chromosome 5 abnormality. Patients and Methods: Eighteen adults with AML and 9 with high-risk MDS were enrolled. Lenalidomide was given orally at doses 5 to 25 mg daily for 21 days of a 28-day cycle until disease progression or unacceptable adverse event. Results: Median age for all 27 patients was 64 years (range, 39-88 years) with a median of 2 previous therapies (range, 1-6 lines). Two patients (7%) with AML and 5q deletion and +8 cytogenetic abnormality in 2 separate clones achieved complete remission (CR) or CR without platelet recovery (CRp). Response durations were 4 and 6 months, respectively. No responses were seen in patients with chromosome 5 abnormality in a complex cytogenetic background. Twenty patients (74%) developed neutropenic fever or infection requiring hospitalization. Conclusions: Clinical activity of lenalidomide as single agent in AML and high-risk MDS with chromosome 5 abnormalities appears to be limited to patients with noncomplex cytogenetics.

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

4.2
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