Aller au contenu principal
Accès ouvert déclaré 2026 article

Treatment of therapy-related acute myeloid leukemia and acute myeloid leukemia with myelodysplasia-related changes: a comparative analysis of higher-dose intensive 7+3 induction chemotherapy versus liposomal cytarabine and daunorubicin.

0Citations signalées, ce qui n’est pas une note de qualité
1Institutions déclarées
1Pays d’affiliation déclarés

Rattachement africain : at. Niveau de preuve : code pays fourni par la source.

Le résumé fourni par la source

Therapy-related acute myeloid leukemia (t-AML) and AML with myelodysplasia-related changes (AML-MRC) are associated with poor outcomes. The liposomal formulation of cytarabine and daunorubicin (CPX-351) improved complete remission (CR) and CR with incomplete hematologic recovery (CRi) rates and overall survival (OS) compared with 'standard' induction (7+3) chemotherapy in a phase-III trial for patients aged 60-75 years. However, 7+3 dosing varies among trials and in clinical practice and it remains unknown whether CPX-351 is superior to 7+3 double-induction regimens including intermediate-dose cytarabine, as the one employed in the HOVON-SAKK-Nordic clinical trials. To address this question, we conducted a post-hoc analysis on t-AML/AML-MRC patients aged ≥60 years enrolled in three HOVON-SAKK-Nordic trials and defined a subset of patients that met the eligibility criteria of the CPX-351 trial and compared their outcomes with those of the CPX-351 arm using reconstructed survival data. CR/CRi rates were higher in the higher-intensity 7+3 cohort (67.8%) compared with CPX-351 (47.7%) with similar median OS between the two cohorts (10.1 months versus 8.9 months respectively, HR = 0.99; 95% CI 0.78-1.26, p=0.95). Thirty-day mortality (4.4% for higher-intensity 7+3 versus 5.9% for CPX-351) and adverse events, including febrile neutropenia (61% for higher-intensity 7+3 versus 68% for CPX-351), were comparable. The data suggest that obligatory double-induction may achieve outcomes similar to CPX-351 in these patients and provide a strong rationale for ongoing clinical trials comparing these regimens.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.

Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert

La source scientifique ouverte est momentanément indisponible.

Les institutions déclarées

Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.

Les sujets associés

Acute Myeloid Leukemia ResearchNeutropenia and Cancer InfectionsCancer Treatment and Pharmacology

BNTIC News n’est pas le producteur de ces données. Les publications sont interrogées à la demande dans Crossref, OpenAIRE, DOAJ, Europe PMC, HAL, DataCite, AfricArXiv, ROR et la Banque mondiale, sans clé d’accès. OpenAlex reste optionnel. Aucun service payant n’est nécessaire et aucune donnée externe n’est enregistrée en base. Consulter les sources et leurs limites.