Department of Hematology, Xiangyang No. 1 People's Hospital, Hubei University of Medicine, Xiangyang, China.
Department of Hematology, The Central Hospital of Wuhan, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China.
Clin Transl Oncol. 2018 Jul;20(7):870-880. doi: 10.1007/s12094-017-1798-8. Epub 2017 Nov 27.
To compare the clinical remission and survival between CLAG and FLAG induction chemotherapy in treating patients with refractory or relapsed acute myeloid leukemia (R/R AML).
103 R/R AML patients were consecutively enrolled in this prospective cohort study. 55 patients were treated by CLAG induction chemotherapy as follows: 5 mg/m/day cladribine (days 1-5); 2 g/m/day cytarabine (days 1-5) and 300 μg/day filgrastim (days 0-5). While 48 patients were treated by FLAG: 30 mg/m/day fludarabine (days 1-5), 2 g/m/day cytarabine (days 1-5), and 300 μg/day filgrastim (days 0-5).
CLAG induction chemotherapy achieved 61.7% complete remission rate (CR) and 78.7% overall remission rate (ORR), which was similar with FLAG chemotherapy which realized 48.7% CR and 69.2% ORR. No difference of overall survival (OS) was discovered between two groups either. Age cytarabine 60 years, secondary disease, poor risk stratification and BM blast ≥ 42.7% and second or higher salvage therapy were independent factors for worse prognosis. Subgroups analysis revealed that in patients with second or higher salvage therapy, CLAG seemed to achieve a higher CR than FLAG. And in patients with relapsed disease, poor risk stratification or CR at first induction, CLAG seemed to realize a prolonged OS compared to FLAG.
CLAG was equally effective to FLAG induction chemotherapy in total R/R AML patients, while CLAG seemed to be a better option than FLAG in patients with relapsed disease, poor risk stratification, CR at first induction or second or higher salvage therapies.
比较 CLAG 与 FLAG 诱导化疗治疗难治/复发急性髓系白血病(R/R AML)患者的临床缓解率和生存率。
本前瞻性队列研究连续纳入 103 例 R/R AML 患者。55 例患者接受 CLAG 诱导化疗,方案如下:5mg/m/d 克拉屈滨(第 1-5 天);2g/m/d 阿糖胞苷(第 1-5 天)和 300μg/d 非格司亭(第 0-5 天)。48 例患者接受 FLAG 方案治疗:30mg/m/d 氟达拉滨(第 1-5 天),2g/m/d 阿糖胞苷(第 1-5 天)和 300μg/d 非格司亭(第 0-5 天)。
CLAG 诱导化疗的完全缓解率(CR)和总缓解率(ORR)分别为 61.7%和 78.7%,与 FLAG 化疗的 48.7%CR 和 69.2%ORR 相似。两组的总生存(OS)也无差异。年龄≥60 岁、继发疾病、不良风险分层、骨髓原始细胞≥42.7%和二次或以上挽救性治疗是预后不良的独立因素。亚组分析显示,在接受二次或以上挽救性治疗的患者中,CLAG 似乎比 FLAG 更能达到较高的 CR。在复发疾病、首次诱导时不良风险分层或 CR 的患者中,CLAG 似乎比 FLAG 有更长的 OS。
CLAG 与 FLAG 诱导化疗在所有 R/R AML 患者中同样有效,而在复发疾病、不良风险分层、首次诱导时 CR 或二次或以上挽救性治疗的患者中,CLAG 似乎是比 FLAG 更好的选择。