Lee Benjamin J, Griffin Shawn P, Doh Jean, Ciurea Stefan O, Jeyakumar Deepa, Kongtim Piyanuch, Naqvi Kiran
Department of Pharmacy, Chao Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of California Irvine Health, 101 The City Drive South, Bldg. 23, Rm 275, Orange, CA, 92868, USA.
Department of Clinical Pharmacy Practice, School of Pharmacy & Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of California, Irvine, CA, USA.
Ann Hematol. 2024 Dec;103(12):5395-5403. doi: 10.1007/s00277-024-06045-8. Epub 2024 Oct 23.
Outcomes for patients with myeloid blast phase chronic myeloid leukemia (CML-MBP) are dismal, and no preferred chemotherapy regimen has been identified. Recent studies have suggested a higher response rate with administration of timed-sequenced regimens (TSR) (purine analog, high-dose cytarabine, anthracycline) in high-risk acute myeloid leukemia patients. We retrospectively evaluated outcomes of newly diagnosed CML-MBP patients consecutively treated at our institution with a TSR or standard-dose cytarabine and an anthracycline ("7 + 3") combined with a tyrosine-kinase inhibitor (TKI) between 2011 and 2023. Endpoints of interest included hematologic response, clinically significant cytogenetic response (CSCR) defined as achieving at least a minor cytogenetic response (Ph + metaphases 0%-≤65%) after induction therapy, event-free survival (EFS), and overall survival (OS). A total of 18 patients with CML-MBP were included of whom 9 (50%) received a TSR and 9 (50%) received "7 + 3". Hematologic response (55.6% vs. 55.6%) and CSCR (25% vs. 37.5%) were similar between TSR- and "7 + 3" treated patients. Twelve patients (66.7%) experienced at least one grade ≥ 3 non-hematologic, end-organ toxicity with 33.3% and 11.1% of TSR- and 7 + 3-treated patients, respectively, experiencing at least two. Our data suggests that intensification of upfront chemotherapy does not appear to improve treatment outcomes in CML-MBP patients however, further studies are warranted to confirm these findings involving a larger cohort.
髓系原始细胞期慢性髓性白血病(CML-MBP)患者的预后很差,目前尚未确定首选的化疗方案。最近的研究表明,在高危急性髓系白血病患者中,采用定时序贯方案(TSR)(嘌呤类似物、大剂量阿糖胞苷、蒽环类药物)给药的缓解率更高。我们回顾性评估了2011年至2023年间在我们机构连续接受TSR或标准剂量阿糖胞苷与蒽环类药物(“7 + 3”)联合酪氨酸激酶抑制剂(TKI)治疗的新诊断CML-MBP患者的预后。感兴趣的终点包括血液学缓解、临床显著细胞遗传学缓解(CSCR),定义为诱导治疗后至少达到微小细胞遗传学缓解(Ph +中期0% - ≤65%)、无事件生存期(EFS)和总生存期(OS)。总共纳入了18例CML-MBP患者,其中9例(50%)接受了TSR治疗,9例(50%)接受了“7 + 3”治疗。TSR治疗组和“7 + 3”治疗组之间的血液学缓解率(55.6%对55.6%)和CSCR(25%对37.5%)相似。12例患者(66.7%)经历了至少一次≥3级非血液学终末器官毒性,TSR治疗组和“7 + 3”治疗组分别有33.3%和11.1%的患者经历了至少两次。我们的数据表明,强化初始化疗似乎并不能改善CML-MBP患者的治疗结果,然而,需要进一步研究以更大的队列来证实这些发现。