To compare the long-term efficacy and safety of two randomized induction treatments (IAT vs. IdAraC-Ida) in AML patients and introduce the results of a novel risk grouping and residual disease guided treatment strategy.
Structured questionnaire forms were used to gather data in each cycle of treatment and during follow-up. SPSS version 25 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, Illinois, USA) was used for statistical analysis.
356 patients with AML participated in the study. Long term overall survival (OS) and relapse-free survival (RFS) observed in our study were 49 % and 49 % at 10 years, respectively. Median follow-up for the living patients was 114 months. No significant difference in remission induction rate, OS, RFS was observed between the two induction treatments. Risk classification according to protocol, measurable residual disease (MRD) status after first consolidation treatment (P < 0.001) and last consolidation treatment (P < 0.001) affected the overall survival and relapse-free survival.
Intensified cytarabine dose in first induction treatment is unlikely to yield favorable long-term results compared with IAT in patients with AML. Intensified post-remission treatment in patients with clinical risk factors or MRD seems reasonable, but randomized controlled studies are warranted in the future.
|Julkaisun otsikon käännös||Effekten av konventionella doser cytarabin, idarubicin och tioguanin (IAT) kontra mellandos cytarabin och idarubicin (IdAraC-Ida) vid induktionsbehandling av AML och effekterna av kvarvarande sjukdom: långsiktiga resultat av den potentiella randomiserade rikstäckande AML- 2003 studie av den finska leukemigruppen|
|Julkaisu||European Journal of Haematology|
|DOI - pysyväislinkit|
|Tila||Julkaistu - 30 toukok. 2022|
|OKM-julkaisutyyppi||A1 Julkaistu artikkeli, soviteltu|