Wiernik P H, Banks P L, Case D C, Arlin Z A, Periman P O, Todd M B, Ritch P S, Enck R E, Weitberg A B
Albert Einstein Cancer Center, Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx, NY 10467.
Blood. 1992 Jan 15;79(2):313-9.
The purpose of this study was to determine the relative merits of idarubicin and daunorubicin in acute myeloid leukemia (AML) therapy. Thirty-two sites provided 214 previously untreated adults with AML aged 15 years or more who were randomized to receive for induction therapy cytarabine 100 mg/m2/d as a continuous 7-day infusion plus either daunorubicin 45 mg/m2/d (A + D) or idarubicin 13 mg/m2/d (A + I), daily on the first three days of treatment. Postremission therapy consisted of two courses of the induction regimen at the same daily doses, with the anthracycline administered for 2 days and cytarabine for 5. The complete response (CR) rates for evaluable patients were 70% (A + I) and 59% (A + D) (P = .08). The difference in CR rates was significant in patients aged 18 to 50 years (88% for A + I, 70% for A + D, P = .035). Resistant disease was a significantly more frequent cause of induction therapy failure with A + D than with A + I. Hyperleukocytosis (white blood cell count greater than 50,000/microL) unfavorably affected the attainment of CR with A + D but not with A + I. CR duration was significantly greater after A + I. CR duration was significantly greater after A + I treatment, and the survival of all randomized patients treated with A + I was significantly better than that observed after A + D treatment (median 12.9 months v 8.7 months, respectively, P = .038). Toxicity of the two treatments was similar, although A + I patients experienced more prolonged myelosuppression during consolidation therapy, and a greater incidence of mild chemical hepatitis was observed in the A + I group. It is concluded that, at the doses and schedule used in this study, A + I is superior to A + D for induction therapy of AML in adults.
本研究的目的是确定伊达比星和柔红霉素在急性髓系白血病(AML)治疗中的相对优势。32个研究点为214例年龄在15岁及以上、既往未接受过治疗的成年AML患者提供了治疗,这些患者被随机分为两组,接受诱导治疗:阿糖胞苷100mg/m²/d持续静脉输注7天,同时在治疗的前三天每天联合柔红霉素45mg/m²/d(A+D)或伊达比星13mg/m²/d(A+I)。缓解后治疗包括两个疗程的诱导方案,每日剂量相同,蒽环类药物给药2天,阿糖胞苷给药5天。可评估患者的完全缓解(CR)率分别为70%(A+I)和59%(A+D)(P=0.08)。在18至50岁的患者中,CR率的差异具有统计学意义(A+I为88%,A+D为70%,P=0.035)。与A+I相比,难治性疾病是A+D诱导治疗失败的更常见原因。高白细胞血症(白细胞计数大于50,000/μL)对A+D方案CR的获得有不利影响,但对A+I方案无影响。A+I治疗后的CR持续时间明显更长。接受A+I治疗的所有随机分组患者的生存期明显优于接受A+D治疗后的生存期(中位生存期分别为12.9个月和8.7个月,P=0.038)。两种治疗的毒性相似,尽管A+I组患者在巩固治疗期间骨髓抑制持续时间更长,且A+I组轻度化学性肝炎的发生率更高。结论是,在本研究使用的剂量和方案下,A+I在成人AML诱导治疗中优于A+D。