Suppr超能文献

米托蒽醌联合中剂量阿糖胞苷与高剂量阿糖胞苷作为伴有良好和中等细胞遗传学特征的年轻非 APL 急性髓系白血病患者巩固治疗的比较。

Comparison of Mitoxantrone in Combination with Intermediate-dose Cytarabine versus High-dose Cytarabine as Consolidation Therapies for Young Non-APL Acute Myeloid Leukemia Patients with Favorable and Intermediate Cytogenetics.

机构信息

Department of Hematology, The Second Clinical Medical College of Jinan University (Shenzhen People's Hospital), Jinan University, Shenzhen, 518020, China.

出版信息

Curr Med Sci. 2018 Feb;38(1):51-57. doi: 10.1007/s11596-018-1845-x. Epub 2018 Mar 15.

Abstract

In this study, we compared the efficacy of mitoxantrone in combination with intermediate-dose cytarabine (HAM) with that of high-dose cytarabine alone (HiDAC) as consolidation regimens in non-acute promyelocytic leukemia (APL) acute myeloid leukemia patients with favorable and intermediate cytogenetics. A total of 62 patients from Shenzhen People's Hospital were enrolled in this study. All patients enrolled received standard induction chemotherapy and achieved the first complete remission (CR1). In these patients, 24 received HiDAC and 38 received HAM as consolidation. The median relapse free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) were similar between these two consolidation regimens. Even in subgroup analysis according to risk stratification, the combination regimen conferred no benefit in longterm outcome in patients with favorable or intermediate cytogenetics. However, in patients receiving HAM regimen, the lowest neutrophil count was lower, neutropenic period longer, neutropenic fever rate higher, and more platelet transfusion support was required. HAM group also tended to have higher rate of sepsis than HiDAC group. According to our results, we suggest that combination treatment with mitoxantrone and intermediate-dose cytarabine has limited value as compared to HiDAC, even in young non-APL AML patients with favorable and intermediate cytogenetics.

摘要

在这项研究中,我们比较了米托蒽醌联合中剂量阿糖胞苷(HAM)与高剂量阿糖胞苷(HiDAC)作为巩固治疗方案在具有良好和中等细胞遗传学的非急性早幼粒细胞白血病(APL)急性髓系白血病患者中的疗效。共有 62 名来自深圳市人民医院的患者入组本研究。所有入组患者均接受标准诱导化疗并达到首次完全缓解(CR1)。在这些患者中,24 例接受 HiDAC 治疗,38 例接受 HAM 治疗。两种巩固治疗方案的无复发生存(RFS)和总生存(OS)中位数相似。即使根据风险分层进行亚组分析,联合方案在具有良好或中等细胞遗传学的患者中也不能带来长期生存获益。然而,在接受 HAM 方案治疗的患者中,最低中性粒细胞计数更低,中性粒细胞减少期更长,中性粒细胞减少性发热发生率更高,需要更多血小板输注支持。HAM 组也倾向于比 HiDAC 组发生脓毒症的比率更高。根据我们的结果,我们建议与 HiDAC 相比,米托蒽醌联合中剂量阿糖胞苷的联合治疗方案的价值有限,即使在具有良好和中等细胞遗传学的年轻非 APL AML 患者中也是如此。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验