Suppr超能文献

核心结合因子急性髓系白血病的造血干细胞移植:t(8;21)和inv(16)代表不同的临床结局。

Hematopoietic stem cell transplantation for core binding factor acute myeloid leukemia: t(8;21) and inv(16) represent different clinical outcomes.

作者信息

Kuwatsuka Yachiyo, Miyamura Koichi, Suzuki Ritsuro, Kasai Masaharu, Maruta Atsuo, Ogawa Hiroyasu, Tanosaki Ryuji, Takahashi Satoshi, Koda Kyuhei, Yago Kazuhiro, Atsuta Yoshiko, Yoshida Takashi, Sakamaki Hisashi, Kodera Yoshihisa

机构信息

Department of Hematology, Japanese Red Cross Nagoya First Hospital, Nagoya, Japan.

出版信息

Blood. 2009 Feb 26;113(9):2096-103. doi: 10.1182/blood-2008-03-145862. Epub 2009 Jan 6.

Abstract

We analyzed 338 adult patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) with t(8;21) and inv(16) undergoing stem cell transplantation (SCT) who were registered in the Japan Society for Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation database. At 3 years, overall survival (OS) of patients with t(8;21) and inv(16) was 50% and 72%, respectively (P= .002). Although no difference was observed when restricted to allogeneic SCT in first complete remission (CR; 84% and 74%), OS of patients with t(8;21) and inv(16) undergoing allogeneic SCT in second or third CR (45% and 86% at 3 years; P= .008) was different. OS was not different between patients in first CR who received allogeneic SCT and those who received autologous SCT for both t(8;21) AML (84% vs 77%; P= .49) and inv(16) AML (74% vs 59%; P= .86). Patients with inv(16) not in CR did better after allogeneic SCT than those with t(8;21) (70% and 18%; P= .03). Patients with t(8;21) and inv(16) should be managed differently as to the application of SCT. SCT in first CR is not necessarily recommended for inv(16). For t(8;21) patients in first CR, a prospective trial is needed to clarify the significance of autologous SCT and allogeneic SCT over chemotherapy.

摘要

我们分析了日本造血细胞移植协会数据库中登记的338例患有t(8;21)和inv(16)的急性髓系白血病(AML)成年患者,这些患者均接受了干细胞移植(SCT)。3年时,t(8;21)和inv(16)患者的总生存率(OS)分别为50%和72%(P = 0.002)。尽管在首次完全缓解(CR)时进行异基因SCT的患者中未观察到差异(分别为84%和74%),但在第二次或第三次CR时接受异基因SCT的t(8;21)和inv(16)患者的OS不同(3年时分别为45%和86%;P = 0.008)。对于t(8;21) AML和inv(16) AML,首次CR时接受异基因SCT的患者与接受自体SCT的患者之间的OS无差异(分别为84%对77%;P = 0.49)和(74%对59%;P = 0.86)。未处于CR的inv(16)患者在异基因SCT后比t(8;21)患者表现更好(分别为70%和18%;P = 0.03)。对于t(8;21)和inv(16)患者,在SCT的应用方面应区别对待。对于inv(16)患者,不一定推荐在首次CR时进行SCT。对于首次CR的t(8;21)患者,需要进行前瞻性试验以阐明自体SCT和异基因SCT相对于化疗的意义。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验