FLAG-IDA Has Significant Activity As Frontline Induction or Salvage Therapy for Patients with High Risk and/or Relapsed or Refractory Acute Myeloid Leukemia (AML)
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Background: Therapy for patients (pts) with high risk and/or relapsed or refractory AML remains unsatisfactory. Retrospective studies have demonstrated activity of fludarabine, cytarabine, granulocyte colony stimulating factor and idarubicin (FLAG-IDA) as salvage therapy in pts with relapsed or refractory AML. Furthermore, a recent randomized trial has indicated high complete remission (CR) rates with improved relapsed-free survival when FLAG-IDA is administered as frontline induction chemotherapy (Burnett et al. J Clin Oncol 2013). Therefore, since January 2011, we have employed FLAG-IDA as first line therapy in pts with high risk AML (i.e. poor risk cytogenetics, antecedent myeloproliferative neoplasm or myelodysplastic syndrome, or therapy-related AML), or as first salvage in pts with primary refractory or relapsed AML, in an attempt to improve CR rates and permit more patients with AML to advance to allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (alloSCT). Methods: A retrospective review was conducted of the 62 consecutive patients with high risk AML or primary refractory or relapsed AML treated with FLAG-IDA between January 2011 to December 2013 at the Princess Margaret Cancer Centre to determine the CR rate and overall survival (OS) associated with FLAG-IDA remission induction chemotherapy. Results: Baseline characteristics of the patients are listed in Table 1. Fourteen pts received FLAG-IDA as first induction, whereas 48 pts received FLAG-IDA as salvage (39 as first salvage and 9 as second salvage). The overall CR rate (i.e. CR + CR with incomplete platelet recovery [CRi]) using FLAG-IDA as frontline therapy was assessed in 13 patients, as one pt died during induction therapy and therefore, was not evaluable. Of the 13 evaluable patients, all achieved CR or CRi. The overall CR rate for the salvage induction group was 73% (i.e. 31% CR and 42% CRi). The CR duration was censored at time of transplant. The CR duration for pts receiving FLAG-IDA as first induction was 3 mos (range, 0-15 mos). For pts receiving FLAG-IDA as salvage therapy, the CR1 duration for primary refractory AML pts was 6 mos (range, 2-58 mos) and CR2 duration for relapsed AML pts was 4 mos (range, 1-12 mos). 76% of patients (n=10) who received frontline FLAG-IDA induction chemotherapy, and achieved CR/CRi, had a donor identified, but only 40% of those pts underwent alloSCT. 85% of pts (n=30) who received salvage FLAG-IDA, and achieved CR/CRi, had a donor identified, but only 53% of those pts proceeded to alloSCT. The length of hospital stay during the first FLAG-IDA induction was 33 days (range, 17-96 days), whereas the length of hospital stay for salvage FLAG-IDA induction was 43 days (range, 10-305 days). Fourteen percent of pts in the first induction group were admitted to the ICU during their induction, compared to 17% of pts in the salvage induction group. The median ICU stay was 39.5 days and 14 days, respectively. There was a 14% death rate during FLAG-IDA induction for both groups. The median follow up time from diagnosis for both groups was 15.28 mos (range, 2-70.4 mos). Overall survival at 1 and 2 years in the upfront FLAG-IDA induction group was 65% and 41%, respectively, while OS at 1 and 2 years for the salvage FLAG-IDA group was 60% and 35%, respectively. Conclusions: The toxicities associated with FLAG-IDA induction, including induction death rates and ICU admission rates, are acceptable and similar in the untreated and heavily pre-treated groups. FLAG-IDA induction can result in durable CR rates, permitting patients with high risk AML or patients with primary refractory or relapsed AML to proceed to allogeneic transplantation. Table 1: Patient Characteristics Front-LineN=14 SalvageN=48 Median age, y (range) ≥70y (%) ≥60y (%) 65.5 (21-76) 2 (14%) 10 (71%) 50 (18-76) 2 (4%) 10 (21%) Gender 7M : 7F 22M : 26F Secondary/Therapy-related Prior MDS Prior MPN 14 (100%) 2 (14%) 2 (14%) 17 (35%) 8 (17%) 2 (4%) Cytogenetic risk group Good Intermediate Poor 0 4 (28%) 10 (71%) 3 (6%) 28 (58%) 17 (35%) Molecular abnormalities cKit mutated FLT3-ITD mutated 0 1 (7%) 2 (4%) 5 (10%) Median no. prior treatment regimens (range) 0 1 (1-2) Prior chemotherapy regimen Daunorubicin + cytarabine NOVE-HiDAc Other NA NA NA 43 (90%) 11 (23%) 3 (6%) Disease status Primary refractory Relapsed CR1 duration <12 months NA NA NA 17 (35%) 31 (65%)23 (74%) NA – not applicable; NOVE-HiDAc – mitoxantrone, etoposide and cytarabine Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».