Salvage treatment for refractory or relapsed acute myeloid leukemia: a 10-year single-center experience

The outcomes of refractory and relapsed acute myeloid leukemia (AML) patients in developing countries are underreported, even though the similar classic regimens are widely used. We conducted a retrospective comparison of “MEC” (mitoxantrone, etoposide, and cytarabine) and “FLAG-IDA” (fludarabine, c...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Clinics (São Paulo, Brazil) Brazil), 2020-01, Vol.75, p.e1566-e1566, Article e1566
Hauptverfasser: da Silva, Wellington Fernandes, da Rosa, Lidiane Inês, Seguro, Fernanda Salles, Silveira, Douglas Rafaele Almeida, Bendit, Israel, Buccheri, Valeria, Velloso, Elvira Deolinda Rodrigues Pereira, Rocha, Vanderson, Rego, Eduardo M
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:The outcomes of refractory and relapsed acute myeloid leukemia (AML) patients in developing countries are underreported, even though the similar classic regimens are widely used. We conducted a retrospective comparison of “MEC” (mitoxantrone, etoposide, and cytarabine) and “FLAG-IDA” (fludarabine, cytarabine, idarubicin, and filgrastim) in adults with first relapse or refractory AML. In total, 60 patients were included, of which 28 patients received MEC and 32 received FLAG-IDA. A complete response (CR) rate of 48.3% was observed. Of the included patients, 16 (27%) died before undergoing bone marrow assessment. No statiscally significant difference in CR rate was found between the two protocols (p=0.447). The median survival in the total cohort was 4 months, with a 3-year overall survival (OS) rate of 9.7%. In a multivariable model including age, fms-like tyrosine kinase 3 (FLT3) status, and stem-cell transplantation (SCT), only the last two indicators remained significant: FLT3-ITD mutation (hazard ratio [HR]=4.6, p
ISSN:1807-5932
1980-5322
1980-5322
DOI:10.6061/clinics/2020/e1566