4.4 Article

Achieving deeper molecular response is associated with a better clinical outcome in chronic myeloid leukemia patients on imatinib front-line therapy

期刊

HAEMATOLOGICA
卷 99, 期 3, 页码 458-464

出版社

FERRATA STORTI FOUNDATION
DOI: 10.3324/haematol.2013.095158

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Sustained imatinib treatment in chronic myeloid leukemia patients can result in complete molecular response allowing discontinuation without relapse. We set out to evaluate the frequency of complete molecular response in imatinib de novo chronic phase chronic myeloid leukemia patients, to identify base-line and under-treatment predictive factors of complete molecular response in patients achieving complete cytogenetic response, and to assess if complete molecular response is associated with a better outcome. A random selection of patients on front-line imatinib therapy (n=266) were considered for inclusion. Complete molecular response was confirmed and defined as MR4.5 with undetectable BCR-ABL transcript levels. Median follow up was 4.43 years (range 0.79-10.8 years). Sixty-five patients (24%) achieved complete molecular response within a median time of 32.7 months. Absence of spleen enlargement at diagnosis, achieving complete cytogenetic response before 12 months of therapy, and major molecular response during the year following complete cytogenetic response was predictive of achieving further complete molecular response. Patients who achieved complete molecular response had better event-free and failure-free survivals than those with complete cytogenetic response irrespective of major molecular response status (95.2% vs. 64.7% vs. 27.7%, P=0.00124; 98.4% vs. 82.3% vs. 56%, P=0.0335), respectively. Overall survival was identical in the 3 groups. In addition to complete cytogenetic response and major molecular response, further deeper molecular response is associated with better event-free and failure-free survivals, and complete molecular response confers the best outcome.

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