GLORIA

GEOMAR Library Ocean Research Information Access

Your email was sent successfully. Check your inbox.

An error occurred while sending the email. Please try again.

Proceed reservation?

Export
  • 1
    In: Blood, American Society of Hematology, Vol. 116, No. 21 ( 2010-11-19), p. 333-333
    Abstract: Abstract 333 Background: Standard chemotherapy for elderly AML patients results in a median overall survival of only about one year. Case reports and early phase I/II data have shown that the kinase inhibitor Sorafenib might show clinical benefit for Flt3-ITD-positive AML patients (Metzelder S Blood 2009; 113:6567) and that its addition to standard chemotherapy is feasible (Ravandi F JCO 2010; 28:1856). Sorafenib is a potent Raf, c-Kit and FLT3 inhibitor that may also affect AML blasts and bone marrow (BM) stroma cells via VEGFR and PDGFR-β inhibition. Therefore, we performed a multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind phase II trial in elderly ( & gt;60 y) AML patients analyzing the effect of Sorafenib in addition to standard chemotherapy and as a maintenance therapy for up to one year. Methods: 197 AML patients in 16 centers received up to two cycles of standard 7+3 induction chemotherapy plus two cycles of consolidation therapy with intermediate dose (6 × 1g/sqm) AraC. Before start of treatment, they were randomly assigned to receive either placebo or Sorafenib (400 mg bid between the cycles and after chemotherapy for up to one year after start of induction). The primary aim was to compare the event-free survival (EFS) of the two treatment groups. Secondary end points were to compare EFS and overall survival (OS) of predefined subgroups according to NPM and FLT3 mutation status and toxicity of treatment. Results: Among the 197 evaluable patients, 102 pts received Sorafenib and 95 pts placebo. EFS and OS were not significantly different between the two treatment groups (placebo vs. Sorafenib: EFS: Median: 7 vs. 5 months, hazard Ratio (HR): 1.261(p=0.13); OS: Median: 15 vs. 13 months, HR 1.025 (p=0.89)). CR or blast clearance without complete blood count recovery was observed in 49 (48%) and 9 (8.8%) Sorafenib patients and 57 (60%) and 4 (4.2%) placebo pts, respectively. Exploratory subgroup analyses did not reveal any significant difference between the treatment groups but showed a tendency towards decreased EFS in the Sorafenib arm for NPM1-wild type AML cases. Flt3-ITD mutations were found in 28 out of 197 patients (14.2%), in line with the reported incidence in the target population. No differences in EFS or OS were to be noted in this small patient population. Also, CR rate was not improved by the study drug in this subgroup of patients. Sorafenib was relatively well tolerated. The most frequent adverse events (AE) ≥grade 3 were febrile neutropenia, pneumonia in neutropenia, sepsis, diarrhea, skin rash, mucositis, hypertension (77 vs 74, 54 vs 35, 15 vs 15, 17 vs 6, 14 vs 7, 9 vs 6, 8 vs 5 events in the Sorafenib vs the placebo group). A hand-foot-skin reaction (≥grade 3) was noted in 5 vs 0 events in Sorafenib vs control pts. There was a trend of slower regeneration of leukocytes and thrombocytes within the Sorafenib arm compared to the control arm after the first and second induction course but not after consolidation cycles. Conclusion: Although the combination regimen appeared to be feasible and tolerable in elderly AML pts, Sorafenib treatment did not improve EFS or OS in this unselected elderly AML patient population. Further studies should focus on selected AML target populations for Sorafenib, especially FLT3-ITD+ AML patients. Disclosures: Off Label Use: Sorafenib (multikinase inhibitor) is given in combination with standard chemotherapy in elderly AML patients. (See title of the abstract!).
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 0006-4971 , 1528-0020
    RVK:
    RVK:
    Language: English
    Publisher: American Society of Hematology
    Publication Date: 2010
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 1468538-3
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 80069-7
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 2
    In: Blood, American Society of Hematology, Vol. 122, No. 21 ( 2013-11-15), p. 1447-1447
    Abstract: Data on benefit and toxicity by treatment intensification for AML are now available and allow rediscussing current dosing. Methods In a multicenter trial involving patients between 16 and 86 years of age, patients below 60 years received uniform double induction by the 1st course with standard dose araC/ daunorubicin (60mg/m²x3)/ thioguanine followed by the 2nd course with high-dose araC (3g/m²x6)/ mitoxantrone (10mg/m²x3), or randomly two high-dose courses. As age adaption patients of 60y or older received the 2nd course only in case of persistent blasts, and high-dose araC at 1 instead of 3g/m². Post remission treatment was consolidation and maintenance or randomly autologous stem cell transplantation in younger patients. Results 3369 patients entered the trial with 1843 patients 60y or older. A multivariate analysis identified age as continuous variable, favorable cytogenetics/ molecular genetics, unfavorable cytogenetics, white blood cell count and lactate dehydrogenase as categorical variables to be risk factors predicting complete remission, overall survival as well as relapse free survival. To separate the age effect from the treatment effect, two subgroups of similar age and baseline characteristics but different treatment were compared. Thus, the 239 patients aged 57-59 and the 336 patients aged 60-62 years shared not only similar age but also similar baseline characteristics, while their treatment by protocol and age adaption differed substantially. The difference as expressed by the cumulative araC dosis amounted to a factor of 3.6, which however did not translate into a different overall survival (equally 28%) or relapse rate (equally 70%) at 5 years. In contrast to different treatment, different age had a strong effect on outcome. Thus, the survival in patients aged 16-46y was 65% at 5 years versus 40% in those of 47-59y receiving the same treatment (p 〈 0.001). A corresponding age related difference was also found between the patients of 60-66y and those of 67-86y (p 〈 0.001) receiving the same age adapted treatment. As shown by others in patients of 18-60y doubling an intermediate cumulative dose of araC produced excessive toxicity without therapeutic benefit (Löwenberg B et al. NEJM 2011; 364: 1027-36), while high dose daunorubicin (90mg/m²) instead of standard dose (45mg/m²) improved the remission rate and survival in younger patients (Fernandez H et al. NEJM 2009; 361: 1249-59) and older patients of 60-65y (Löwenberg B et al. NEJM 2009; 361: 1235-48). No comparable data are available about daunorubicin 60mg/m² the standard in present study. Conclusion Age and disease biology rather than chemotherapy intensity are the main determinants of outcome in AML. Once a certain intensity and antileukemic effect has been achieved, a further escalation does not seem to overcome the age factor in AML. Present data require rediscussing current chemotherapy dosing and treatment alternatives. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 0006-4971 , 1528-0020
    RVK:
    RVK:
    Language: English
    Publisher: American Society of Hematology
    Publication Date: 2013
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 1468538-3
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 80069-7
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 3
    In: Blood, American Society of Hematology, Vol. 118, No. 21 ( 2011-11-18), p. 2773-2773
    Abstract: Abstract 2773 Introduction: For patients with high-risk myelodysplastic syndromes an epigenetic therapy with hypomethylating agents is considered standard of care. Intensive chemotherapy can be offered to a subset of patients; however, data about the long-term outcome of MDS patients receiving intensive chemotherapy are scarce. Methods: For this evaluation, 104 adult patients with IPSS intermediate-2 or high-risk MDS with at least 10% bone marrow blasts of all age groups treated within the AMLCG1999 trial were included. Patients were randomized upfront to receive 1. double induction therapy with either standard-dose containing TAD - versus high-dose containing HAM–HAM, 2. TAD consolidation therapy followed by either a monthly maintenance therapy for 3 years after achievement of CR or an autologous stem cell transplantation (patients aged ≥ 60 years were all assigned to maintenance therapy), and 3. blast priming with filgastrim starting on day -1 of chemotherapy in selected centers. Results: Fifty-four patients had IPSS Score intermediate-2 and 50 patients were IPSS high risk. Median bone marrow blast count at diagnosis was 15%. The median age was 63.5 years (range: 27–76 years), 39 patients (37.5 %) were female. Median lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) serum level was 296 U/l, median leukocyte count at diagnosis was 5,950 per μl. The cytogenetic risk groups were as follows: favorable 3, intermediate 57, unfavourable 37, missing 7. Among 38 patients with normal karyotype, NPM1/FLT3 mutational status was available for 22 with 5 patients having the combination NPM1 mutated/FLT3 wildtype. Comparison with 2051 patients with de novo AML within the same trial revealed the following significant differences: patients with MDS were older, had a higher male to female ratio, a lower LDH serum level at diagnosis, a lower leukocyte count at diagnosis and were more likely to have adverse cytogenetic risk. Compared to 636 patients with secondary AML after MDS, cytotoxic therapy or irradiation, the cohort of patients with MDS did not display any significant differences except the sex distribution. Patients with MDS displayed a CR rate of 48% (50/104 patients), which was significantly lower than de novo AML patients (67%) and not different to secondary AML patients (47%). Median overall survival in MDS patients was 320 (95% CI: 236 to 505) days with a 2-year and 5-year survival of 33.4% (95% CI: 23.6% to 43.2%) and 22.7% (95% CI: 13.5% to 31.9%), respective, which was significantly (p=0.03) lower than in patients with de novo AML (median 484, 95% CI 435 to 541 days) and comparable to patients with secondary AML (median 282, 95% CI 224 to 311 days, p=0.13). Median relapse-free survival in responding MDS patients was 536 (95% CI: 264 to 1299) days with no significant differences of RFS compared to de novo or secondary AML patients. In multivariate analyses, the diagnosis of MDS remained an independent prognostic factor for CR probability but had no independent influence on survival compared with de novo AML patients. Nine patients proceeded to allogeneic stem cell transplantation in first complete remission of whom six remain in first complete remission between 1354 and 1911 days after achievement of CR. In addition, 16 patients remained in CR for more than one year without allogeneic transplantation. Discussion: Taken together, outcome of patients with intermediate-2 or high-risk MDS after intensive chemotherapy is comparable to the outcome of patients with secondary AML. Adjustment for known risk factors such as age, cytogenetic risk and LDH revealed that inferior outcome of MDS patients compared to patients with de novo AML is attributable to the higher incidence of adverse risk factors. CR-rates appear to be higher compared to hypomethylating therapy and a fraction of MDS patients experiences long-term survival by intensive chemotherapy. Allogeneic transplantation can improve long-term survival for patients achieving remission. Disclosures: Krug: MedA Pharma: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; Alexion: Honoraria; Boehringer Ingelheim: Research Funding; Sunesis: Honoraria. Haferlach:MLL Munich Leukemia Laboratory: Employment, Equity Ownership. Schnittger:MLL Munich Leukemia Laboratory: Employment, Equity Ownership. Haferlach:MLL Munich Leukemia Laboratory: Employment, Equity Ownership.
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 0006-4971 , 1528-0020
    RVK:
    RVK:
    Language: English
    Publisher: American Society of Hematology
    Publication Date: 2011
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 1468538-3
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 80069-7
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 4
    In: Blood, American Society of Hematology, Vol. 120, No. 21 ( 2012-11-16), p. 1974-1974
    Abstract: Abstract 1974 Most available data on the relative value of allogeneic stem cell transplantation (allo-SCT) for acute myeloid leukemia (AML) in first complete remission (CR1) in the past, were generated from donor versus no-donor comparisons, focusing on documented tissue-typed patients and their siblings. The inclusion of patients who are not HLA-typed, for instance all those without siblings, causes bias of unknown magnitude. Additionally, concerns about the equivalence of related and unrelated donors should no longer be a problem in contemporary evaluation of allo-SCT. Using data of the prospective AMLCG 1999 trial, we performed a matched-pair analysis, to evaluate outcome in patients with AML according to post-remission allo-SCT or conventional postremission chemotherapy (PRT). 165 patients pairs in CR1 were identified, who matched for the following criteria: AML type (de novo AML, s-AML, t-AML, high-risk MDS); cytogenetic risk group [unfavorable (UNF-CG), intermediate (INT-CG), and favorable with the exclusion of t(15;17)]; age (± 5 years); and time in CR1 to account for the time to transplant in allo-SCT patients. If possible, patients were also matched for sex and assigned induction treatment (TAD-HAM versus HAM-HAM). 34 patient pairs had an UNF-CG, 122 pairs INT-CG, and 9 pairs had favorable cytogenetics. Median patients age at diagnosis was 45 years (range: 16–59). In the allo-SCT cohort, 105 patients had a related donor (matched related donor [MRD] 104, haploidentical 1) and 60 a matched unrelated donor (MUD). Median follow-up of surviving patients after first diagnosis of CR1 was 7.5 years. Projected 7-year relapse-free survival (RFS) was 56% in the allo-SCT group and 39% in the control group (p 〈 .0001, log-rank test). Overall survival (OS) was 58% and 45% (p=.143), respectively. RFS was significantly improved by allo-SCT in patients with UNF-CG (23% vs. 12% at 7 years; p=.005) or INT-CG (58% vs. 37%; p=.001). OS was 31% in allo-SCT patients with UNF-CG versus 18% in matched controls (p=.052) and 64% in INT-CG patients with allo-SCT versus 54% in matched controls (p=.403). Dividing the 330 patients into age groups by decades, revealed an age dependent, increasing risk of relapse for patients receiving conventional post-remission therapy, with cumulative relapse incidences of 51% ( 〈 31 years), 47% (31–40 years), 60% (41–50%) and 87% (51–60 years) at 7 years, whereas allo-SCT patients had similar relapse incidences of 32%, 34%, 25% and 34% respectively. The higher relapse incidence in control patients 〉 50 years of age, resulted in a significantly better OS of allo-SCT patients with 27% versus 58% (p=.022) in this age group. In the subset of patients with INT-CG, allo-SCT patients with non-normal karyotype had both a significant better OS and RFS after 7 years compared to control patients, whereas patients with normal karyotype had similar RFS and OS regardless of NPM1 and FLT3 mutational status. Of note, 48 of 99 patients with AML relapse in the control cohort, received an allo-SCT (18 from a MRD, 30 from a MUD) beyond CR1 (9 with UNF-CG, 38 with INT-CG, 1 with favorable CG). Median OS of 48 matched patients receiving an allo-SCT in CR1 was 54%, while it was 39% in paired patients with allo-SCT beyond CR1 (p=.289). We conclude that allo-SCT is the most potent post-remission therapy for AML with UNF-CG and INT-CG. Its impact on OS is difficult to assess, as about a third of patients initially treated with conventional PRT, underwent allo-SCT beyond CR1. In contrast to results from donor versus no-donor comparisons, our data highly suggest a benefit of allo-SCT in CR1, particularly for elderly patients, and in line with such comparisons, for patients with intermediate-II (according to the European LeukemiaNet [ELN] recommendation) or unfavorable ELN cytogenetic risk. Ultimately, the gold standard for the evaluation of allo-SCT in patients with INT-CG in CR1 is a randomized controlled trial, which is now feasible with unrelated donors becoming w idely available and is conducted by the German Cooperative Transplant Study Group (ETAL-1 study). Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 0006-4971 , 1528-0020
    RVK:
    RVK:
    Language: English
    Publisher: American Society of Hematology
    Publication Date: 2012
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 1468538-3
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 80069-7
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 5
    In: Journal of Clinical Oncology, American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), Vol. 30, No. 15_suppl ( 2012-05-20), p. 6610-6610
    Abstract: 6610 Background: Patients’ age is an important issue in treatment decisions for AML, while its role in this disease remains poorly explained. Methods: In the AMLCG 1999 trial 1223 patients (pts) were 16-59y and 1470 pts were 60-85y of age. Their treatment was randomized between TAD-HAM vs HAM-HAM induction (TAD, standard dose thioguanine, cytarabine, daunorubicin 60mg/m² x 3; HAM, high-dose cytarabine 3g/m² x 6, mitoxantrone 10mg/m² x 3), TAD consolidation and monthly maintenance vs autologous SCT, any chemotherapy + vs - G-CSF priming. All randomization was done upfront. Pts of 〈 60y received routine double induction and full dose HAM while pts of 60+y preferentially received only one course induction and HAM at 1g instead of 3g cytarabine /m² x 6. Results: With little differences according randomizations, pts 〈 60y and 60+y achieved a complete remission rate (CR) of 70.2% and 53.5% (p 〈 .001), overall survival (OS) at 5y of 41.3% and 12.9% (p 〈 .001) and a relapse rate (RR) of 49.0 and 72.0% (p 〈 .001). We also focussed on pts around 60y of age and compared the 172 pts of 57-59y with the 261 pts of 60-62y excluding pts undergoing allogeneic stem cell transplantation. According to their similar age the two groups showed similar baseline characteristics. In contrast and due to the cut-off point for age adaption at 60y they differed considerably in treatment. Expressed by the cumulative dosage of cytarabine, the difference between the two groups was by factor 2.9. This difference, however, did not translate into a different outcome being 62% vs 60% CR, 28% vs 21% 5y OS (p=0.25), and 73% vs 73% RR at 5y. A multivariable analysis in all pts between 16 and 85y of age identified cytogenetik/ molecular risk and age as a continuous variable, to be risk factors predicting CR, OS, as well as RR. In pts of 16-60y those below and above the median age of 47y differed in their CR rate by 75% vs 66% (p 〈 .001), their OS by 49% vs 35% (p 〈 .001) and in their RR by 45% vs 53% (p=.007). In pts of 60-85y those below and above the median age of 67y differed in their CR rate by 57% vs 51% (p=.023), and their OS by 16% vs 11% (p 〈 .001), while their RR was similarly 71%. Conclusions: The outcome in pts with AML is substantially determined by patients’ age as its own risk factor, and not by treatment intensity.
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 0732-183X , 1527-7755
    RVK:
    RVK:
    Language: English
    Publisher: American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)
    Publication Date: 2012
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 2005181-5
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 6
    In: Journal of Clinical Oncology, American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), Vol. 32, No. 4 ( 2014-02-01), p. 288-296
    Abstract: The majority of patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) who achieve complete remission (CR) relapse with conventional postremission chemotherapy. Allogeneic stem-cell transplantation (alloSCT) might improve survival at the expense of increased toxicity. It remains unknown for which patients alloSCT is preferable. Patients and Methods We compared the outcome of 185 matched pairs of a large multicenter clinical trial (AMLCG99). Patients younger than 60 years who underwent alloSCT in first remission (CR1) were matched to patients who received conventional postremission therapy. The main matching criteria were AML type, cytogenetic risk group, patient age, and time in first CR. Results In the overall pairwise compared AML population, the projected 7-year overall survival (OS) rate was 58% for the alloSCT and 46% for the conventional postremission treatment group (P = .037; log-rank test). Relapse-free survival (RFS) was 52% in the alloSCT group compared with 33% in the control group (P 〈 .001). OS was significantly better for alloSCT in patient subgroups with nonfavorable chromosomal aberrations, patients older than 45 years, and patients with secondary AML or high-risk myelodysplastic syndrome. For the entire patient cohort, postremission therapy was an independent factor for OS (hazard ratio, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.49 to 0.89 for alloSCT v conventional chemotherapy), among age, cytogenetics, and bone marrow blasts after the first induction cycle. Conclusion AlloSCT is the most potent postremission therapy for AML and is particularly active for patients 45 to 59 years of age and/or those with high-risk cytogenetics.
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 0732-183X , 1527-7755
    RVK:
    RVK:
    Language: English
    Publisher: American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)
    Publication Date: 2014
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 2005181-5
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 7
    In: Journal of Clinical Oncology, American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), Vol. 31, No. 25 ( 2013-09-01), p. 3110-3118
    Abstract: The prognosis of elderly patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) is still dismal even with intensive chemotherapy. In this trial, we compared the antileukemic activity of standard induction and consolidation therapy with or without the addition of the kinase inhibitor sorafenib in elderly patients with AML. Patients and Methods All patients received standard cytarabine and daunorubicin induction (7+3 regimen) and up to two cycles of intermediate-dose cytarabine consolidation. Two hundred one patients were equally randomly assigned to receive either sorafenib or placebo between the chemotherapy cycles and subsequently for up to 1 year after the beginning of therapy. The primary objective was to test for an improvement in event-free survival (EFS). Overall survival (OS), complete remission (CR) rate, tolerability, and several predefined subgroup analyses were among the secondary objectives. Results Age, sex, CR and early death (ED) probability, and prognostic factors were balanced between both study arms. Treatment in the sorafenib arm did not result in significant improvement in EFS or OS. This was also true for subgroup analyses, including the subgroup positive for FLT3 internal tandem duplications. Results of induction therapy were worse in the sorafenib arm, with higher treatment-related mortality and lower CR rates. More adverse effects occurred during induction therapy in the sorafenib arm, and patients in this arm received less consolidation chemotherapy as a result of higher induction toxicity. Conclusion In conclusion, combination of standard induction and consolidation therapy with sorafenib in the schedule investigated in our trial is not beneficial for elderly patients with AML.
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 0732-183X , 1527-7755
    RVK:
    RVK:
    Language: English
    Publisher: American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)
    Publication Date: 2013
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 2005181-5
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 8
    In: Blood, American Society of Hematology, Vol. 120, No. 21 ( 2012-11-16), p. 1509-1509
    Abstract: Abstract 1509 Introduction: Both, patients' age and genetic groups are important predictors of outcome in AML while their influence remains poorly quantified and compared. Methods: In the AMLCG (Acute Myeloid Leukemia Cooperative Group) 1999 trial 1470 patients (pts) were 16–59y and 1747 pts were 60–85y of age. 95% of pts could be classified according to genetic risk groups as standardized on behalf of the ELN (Blood 2010;115:453-74). Their treatment was randomized between TAD-HAM versus HAM-HAM induction (TAD, standard dose thioguanine, cytarabine, daunorubicin 60mg/m2 × 3; HAM, high-dose cytarabine 3g/m2 × 6, mitoxantrone 10mg/m2 × 3), TAD consolidation and monthly maintenance vs TAD and autologous SCT, any chemotherapy + vs – G-CSF priming. All assignment was done upfront. Pts of 〈 60y received routine double induction and full dose HAM while pts of 60+y preferentially received only 1 course induction and HAM at 1g instead of 3g cytarabine/m2 × 6. Results: With little difference according to randomizations, pts 〈 60y and 60+y achieved a complete remission (CR) rate of 65% and 51% (p 〈 .001), a 5y overall survival (OS) of 41% and 14% (p 〈 .001), and a 5y ongoing remission duration (RD) of 47% and 21% (p 〈 .001). We particularly focussed on pts around 60y of age and compared the 231 pts of 57–59y with the 315 pts of 60–62y. Corresponding to their similar age the two groups showed similar baseline characteristics. In contrast and due to the cutoff point for age adaption at 60y they differed considerably in treatment. Expressed by the cumulative dosage of cytarabine in induction and early consolidation, the difference between the two groups was by factor 3.9. This difference, however, did not translate into a different outcome being 60% vs 57% CR (p=0.59), 28% vs 25% 5y OS (p=0.40) and 32% vs 29% RD at 5y (p=0.46). Through focussing on patients around 60y a relevant influence of chemotherapy intensity and age adaption could thus be excluded. A multivariable analysis in the complete patients between 16 and 85y of age identified genetic groups and age (as a continuous variable) to be the only risk factors predicting CR, OS as well as RD whereas other risk factors such as secondary AML, WBC, and LDH were predictive only for subsets of endpoints. Among all treatment variables only HAM-HAM induction was associated with a slightly superior RD (p= 0.0715). Grouping by age resulted in 4 age categories (16–46y:n=683, 47–59y: n=787, 60–66y: n=815, and 67+y: n=932) with significantly different OS as well as RD. Subdividing by genetic groups (favorable: n=593, intermediate I: n=1169, intermediate II: n=526, adverse: n=780) distinguished 3 significantly different categories (favorable, intermediate, adverse), a pattern observed in all age groups. Conclusion: In a defined representative population of pts with AML the longterm outcome was mainly determined by age and genetic groups but not by treatment intensity or variables, nor by other prognostic factors. Both, age and genetic groups should thus contribute to a reliable prediction of outcome in AML. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 0006-4971 , 1528-0020
    RVK:
    RVK:
    Language: English
    Publisher: American Society of Hematology
    Publication Date: 2012
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 1468538-3
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 80069-7
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
Close ⊗
This website uses cookies and the analysis tool Matomo. More information can be found here...