Suppr超能文献

一线尼洛替尼或伊马替尼治疗慢性髓性白血病患者的临床疗效和安全性:全国真实世界数据。

Clinical efficacy and safety of first-line nilotinib or imatinib therapy in patients with chronic myeloid leukemia-Nationwide real life data.

机构信息

4th Department of Internal Medicine and Haematology, University Hospital Hradec Kralove and Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic.

Department of Internal Medicine-Haematology and Oncology, University Hospital Brno and Masaryk University, Brno, Czech Republic.

出版信息

Cancer Med. 2024 Sep;13(17):e70158. doi: 10.1002/cam4.70158.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

To evaluate the outcomes of first-line imatinib versus nilotinib treatment for chronic myeloid leukemia in the chronic phase (CML-CP) in real-world clinical practice.

METHODS

A propensity score analysis was performed to eliminate imbalances between the treatment groups. In the analysis, 163 patients in the nilotinib group and 163 patients in the matched imatinib group were retrospectively evaluated.

RESULTS

Nilotinib-treated patients achieved complete cytogenetic response (CCyR) and major molecular response more rapidly than imatinib-treated patients. However, there was no significant difference in 5-year overall survival (OS) or progression-free survival (PFS) between the two groups (OS: 94.3% vs. 90.5%, p = 0.602; PFS: 92.9% vs. 88.0%, p = 0.614). Nilotinib-treated patients had a higher failure-free survival (FFS) and event-free survival (EFS) than imatinib-treated patients (FFS: 71.7% vs. 54.3%, p = 0.040; EFS: 71.7% vs. 53.5%, p = 0.025).

CONCLUSIONS

This retrospective analysis from clinical practice did not confirm any benefit of frontline nilotinib treatment for OS and PFS; however, it did demonstrate higher FFS and EFS in the nilotinib cohort.

摘要

背景

评估一线伊马替尼与尼洛替尼治疗慢性髓性白血病慢性期(CML-CP)在真实世界临床实践中的结果。

方法

采用倾向评分分析消除治疗组之间的不平衡。在分析中,回顾性评估了尼洛替尼组的 163 例患者和匹配的伊马替尼组的 163 例患者。

结果

尼洛替尼治疗组患者获得完全细胞遗传学缓解(CCyR)和主要分子学缓解的速度快于伊马替尼治疗组。然而,两组间 5 年总生存率(OS)或无进展生存率(PFS)无显著差异(OS:94.3% vs. 90.5%,p=0.602;PFS:92.9% vs. 88.0%,p=0.614)。尼洛替尼治疗组患者的无失败生存率(FFS)和无事件生存率(EFS)均高于伊马替尼治疗组(FFS:71.7% vs. 54.3%,p=0.040;EFS:71.7% vs. 53.5%,p=0.025)。

结论

这项来自临床实践的回顾性分析并未证实一线尼洛替尼治疗对 OS 和 PFS 有任何获益;然而,它确实表明尼洛替尼组的 FFS 和 EFS 更高。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/8c1f/11393449/25ac0c05b6c8/CAM4-13-e70158-g002.jpg

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