Nilotinib vs imatinib in patients with newly diagnosed Philadelphia chromosome-positive chronic myeloid leukemia in chronic phase: ENESTnd 3-year follow-up

Evaluating Nilotinib Efficacy and Safety in Clinical Trials Newly Diagnosed Patients compares nilotinib and imatinib in patients with newly diagnosed chronic myeloid leukemia in chronic phase (CML-CP). With a minimum follow-up of 3 years, major molecular response, molecular response of BCR-ABL≤ 0.01...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Leukemia 2012-10, Vol.26 (10), p.2302
Hauptverfasser: Larson, R.A, Hochhaus, A, Hughes, T.P, Clark, R.E, Etienne, G, Kim, D.-W, Flinn, I.W, Kurokawa, M, Moiraghi, B, Yu, R, Blakesley, R.E, Gallagher, N.J, Saglio, G, Kantarjian, H.M
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page
container_issue 10
container_start_page 2302
container_title Leukemia
container_volume 26
creator Larson, R.A
Hochhaus, A
Hughes, T.P
Clark, R.E
Etienne, G
Kim, D.-W
Flinn, I.W
Kurokawa, M
Moiraghi, B
Yu, R
Blakesley, R.E
Gallagher, N.J
Saglio, G
Kantarjian, H.M
description Evaluating Nilotinib Efficacy and Safety in Clinical Trials Newly Diagnosed Patients compares nilotinib and imatinib in patients with newly diagnosed chronic myeloid leukemia in chronic phase (CML-CP). With a minimum follow-up of 3 years, major molecular response, molecular response of BCR-ABL≤ 0.01% expressed on the international scale (BCR-ABL(IS); MR(4)) and BCR-ABL(IS)≤ 0.0032% (MR(4.5)) rates were significantly higher with nilotinib compared with imatinib, and differences in the depth of molecular response between nilotinib and imatinib have increased over time. No new progressions occurred on treatment since the 2-year analysis. Nilotinib was associated with a significantly lower probability of progression to accelerated phase/blast crisis vs imatinib (two (0.7%) progressions on nilotinib 300 mg twice daily, three (1.1%) on nilotinib 400 mg twice daily and 12 (4.2%) on imatinib). When considering progressions occurring after study treatment discontinuation, the advantage of nilotinib over imatinib in preventing progression remained significant (nine (3.2%) progressions on nilotinib 300 mg twice daily, six (2.1%) on nilotinib 400 mg twice daily and 19 (6.7%) on imatinib). Both nilotinib and imatinib were well tolerated, with minimal changes in safety over time. Nilotinib continues to demonstrate superior efficacy in all key response and outcome parameters compared with imatinib for the treatment of patients with newly diagnosed CML-CP.
doi_str_mv 10.1038/leu.2012.175
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>gale_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_1095495021</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A306240708</galeid><sourcerecordid>A306240708</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-g1261-c4cf52b004781c4922d07b250d58004c7b7fb3b6a616c1d19b56551b3173847d3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNptkFtL5DAUx4Os4Kz65gcILPjWMUmbpPVNZLyAqKA-D2mSTo-mSbdpHeaz-GWNN9YFOQ_n8D-_c0XogJI5JXl55Ow0Z4SyOZV8C81oIUXGOae_0IyUpcxExYod9DvGR0LekmKGXq7BhRE81Pg5YujURwwe9ym0fox4DWOLvV27DTagVj5Ea_BtC04Z6_oWFNbtELoQQ2ezPkQY4dm-ax407jbWBTA47fZkuwSn1l-5vlXRHuPF9eLu3hucZxurBtwE58I6m_o9tN0oF-3-p99FD2eL-9OL7Orm_PL05CpbUSZopgvdcFYTUsiS6qJizBBZM04ML5OoZS2bOq-FElRoamhVc5GeUudU5mUhTb6L_nz07Yfwd7JxXD6GafBp5JKSihcVJ4z-o1bK2SX4JoyD0h1EvTzJiWAFkaRM1PwHKplJx-vgbQNJ_6_g8FtBa5Ub2xjcNELw8Tv4Cirik58</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1095495021</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Nilotinib vs imatinib in patients with newly diagnosed Philadelphia chromosome-positive chronic myeloid leukemia in chronic phase: ENESTnd 3-year follow-up</title><source>SpringerLink Journals</source><source>Nature Journals Online</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><creator>Larson, R.A ; Hochhaus, A ; Hughes, T.P ; Clark, R.E ; Etienne, G ; Kim, D.-W ; Flinn, I.W ; Kurokawa, M ; Moiraghi, B ; Yu, R ; Blakesley, R.E ; Gallagher, N.J ; Saglio, G ; Kantarjian, H.M</creator><creatorcontrib>Larson, R.A ; Hochhaus, A ; Hughes, T.P ; Clark, R.E ; Etienne, G ; Kim, D.-W ; Flinn, I.W ; Kurokawa, M ; Moiraghi, B ; Yu, R ; Blakesley, R.E ; Gallagher, N.J ; Saglio, G ; Kantarjian, H.M</creatorcontrib><description>Evaluating Nilotinib Efficacy and Safety in Clinical Trials Newly Diagnosed Patients compares nilotinib and imatinib in patients with newly diagnosed chronic myeloid leukemia in chronic phase (CML-CP). With a minimum follow-up of 3 years, major molecular response, molecular response of BCR-ABL≤ 0.01% expressed on the international scale (BCR-ABL(IS); MR(4)) and BCR-ABL(IS)≤ 0.0032% (MR(4.5)) rates were significantly higher with nilotinib compared with imatinib, and differences in the depth of molecular response between nilotinib and imatinib have increased over time. No new progressions occurred on treatment since the 2-year analysis. Nilotinib was associated with a significantly lower probability of progression to accelerated phase/blast crisis vs imatinib (two (0.7%) progressions on nilotinib 300 mg twice daily, three (1.1%) on nilotinib 400 mg twice daily and 12 (4.2%) on imatinib). When considering progressions occurring after study treatment discontinuation, the advantage of nilotinib over imatinib in preventing progression remained significant (nine (3.2%) progressions on nilotinib 300 mg twice daily, six (2.1%) on nilotinib 400 mg twice daily and 19 (6.7%) on imatinib). Both nilotinib and imatinib were well tolerated, with minimal changes in safety over time. Nilotinib continues to demonstrate superior efficacy in all key response and outcome parameters compared with imatinib for the treatment of patients with newly diagnosed CML-CP.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0887-6924</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1476-5551</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1038/leu.2012.175</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>London: Nature Publishing Group</publisher><ispartof>Leukemia, 2012-10, Vol.26 (10), p.2302</ispartof><rights>COPYRIGHT 2012 Nature Publishing Group</rights><rights>Copyright Nature Publishing Group Oct 2012</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27901,27902</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Larson, R.A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hochhaus, A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hughes, T.P</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Clark, R.E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Etienne, G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kim, D.-W</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Flinn, I.W</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kurokawa, M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Moiraghi, B</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yu, R</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Blakesley, R.E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gallagher, N.J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Saglio, G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kantarjian, H.M</creatorcontrib><title>Nilotinib vs imatinib in patients with newly diagnosed Philadelphia chromosome-positive chronic myeloid leukemia in chronic phase: ENESTnd 3-year follow-up</title><title>Leukemia</title><description>Evaluating Nilotinib Efficacy and Safety in Clinical Trials Newly Diagnosed Patients compares nilotinib and imatinib in patients with newly diagnosed chronic myeloid leukemia in chronic phase (CML-CP). With a minimum follow-up of 3 years, major molecular response, molecular response of BCR-ABL≤ 0.01% expressed on the international scale (BCR-ABL(IS); MR(4)) and BCR-ABL(IS)≤ 0.0032% (MR(4.5)) rates were significantly higher with nilotinib compared with imatinib, and differences in the depth of molecular response between nilotinib and imatinib have increased over time. No new progressions occurred on treatment since the 2-year analysis. Nilotinib was associated with a significantly lower probability of progression to accelerated phase/blast crisis vs imatinib (two (0.7%) progressions on nilotinib 300 mg twice daily, three (1.1%) on nilotinib 400 mg twice daily and 12 (4.2%) on imatinib). When considering progressions occurring after study treatment discontinuation, the advantage of nilotinib over imatinib in preventing progression remained significant (nine (3.2%) progressions on nilotinib 300 mg twice daily, six (2.1%) on nilotinib 400 mg twice daily and 19 (6.7%) on imatinib). Both nilotinib and imatinib were well tolerated, with minimal changes in safety over time. Nilotinib continues to demonstrate superior efficacy in all key response and outcome parameters compared with imatinib for the treatment of patients with newly diagnosed CML-CP.</description><issn>0887-6924</issn><issn>1476-5551</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2012</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><recordid>eNptkFtL5DAUx4Os4Kz65gcILPjWMUmbpPVNZLyAqKA-D2mSTo-mSbdpHeaz-GWNN9YFOQ_n8D-_c0XogJI5JXl55Ow0Z4SyOZV8C81oIUXGOae_0IyUpcxExYod9DvGR0LekmKGXq7BhRE81Pg5YujURwwe9ym0fox4DWOLvV27DTagVj5Ea_BtC04Z6_oWFNbtELoQQ2ezPkQY4dm-ax407jbWBTA47fZkuwSn1l-5vlXRHuPF9eLu3hucZxurBtwE58I6m_o9tN0oF-3-p99FD2eL-9OL7Orm_PL05CpbUSZopgvdcFYTUsiS6qJizBBZM04ML5OoZS2bOq-FElRoamhVc5GeUudU5mUhTb6L_nz07Yfwd7JxXD6GafBp5JKSihcVJ4z-o1bK2SX4JoyD0h1EvTzJiWAFkaRM1PwHKplJx-vgbQNJ_6_g8FtBa5Ub2xjcNELw8Tv4Cirik58</recordid><startdate>20121001</startdate><enddate>20121001</enddate><creator>Larson, R.A</creator><creator>Hochhaus, A</creator><creator>Hughes, T.P</creator><creator>Clark, R.E</creator><creator>Etienne, G</creator><creator>Kim, D.-W</creator><creator>Flinn, I.W</creator><creator>Kurokawa, M</creator><creator>Moiraghi, B</creator><creator>Yu, R</creator><creator>Blakesley, R.E</creator><creator>Gallagher, N.J</creator><creator>Saglio, G</creator><creator>Kantarjian, H.M</creator><general>Nature Publishing Group</general><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7QL</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7T5</scope><scope>7T7</scope><scope>7TM</scope><scope>7TO</scope><scope>7U9</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8C1</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20121001</creationdate><title>Nilotinib vs imatinib in patients with newly diagnosed Philadelphia chromosome-positive chronic myeloid leukemia in chronic phase: ENESTnd 3-year follow-up</title><author>Larson, R.A ; Hochhaus, A ; Hughes, T.P ; Clark, R.E ; Etienne, G ; Kim, D.-W ; Flinn, I.W ; Kurokawa, M ; Moiraghi, B ; Yu, R ; Blakesley, R.E ; Gallagher, N.J ; Saglio, G ; Kantarjian, H.M</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-g1261-c4cf52b004781c4922d07b250d58004c7b7fb3b6a616c1d19b56551b3173847d3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2012</creationdate><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Larson, R.A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hochhaus, A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hughes, T.P</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Clark, R.E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Etienne, G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kim, D.-W</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Flinn, I.W</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kurokawa, M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Moiraghi, B</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yu, R</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Blakesley, R.E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gallagher, N.J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Saglio, G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kantarjian, H.M</creatorcontrib><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Bacteriology Abstracts (Microbiology B)</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Immunology Abstracts</collection><collection>Industrial and Applied Microbiology Abstracts (Microbiology A)</collection><collection>Nucleic Acids Abstracts</collection><collection>Oncogenes and Growth Factors Abstracts</collection><collection>Virology and AIDS Abstracts</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Public Health Database</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><jtitle>Leukemia</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Larson, R.A</au><au>Hochhaus, A</au><au>Hughes, T.P</au><au>Clark, R.E</au><au>Etienne, G</au><au>Kim, D.-W</au><au>Flinn, I.W</au><au>Kurokawa, M</au><au>Moiraghi, B</au><au>Yu, R</au><au>Blakesley, R.E</au><au>Gallagher, N.J</au><au>Saglio, G</au><au>Kantarjian, H.M</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Nilotinib vs imatinib in patients with newly diagnosed Philadelphia chromosome-positive chronic myeloid leukemia in chronic phase: ENESTnd 3-year follow-up</atitle><jtitle>Leukemia</jtitle><date>2012-10-01</date><risdate>2012</risdate><volume>26</volume><issue>10</issue><spage>2302</spage><pages>2302-</pages><issn>0887-6924</issn><eissn>1476-5551</eissn><abstract>Evaluating Nilotinib Efficacy and Safety in Clinical Trials Newly Diagnosed Patients compares nilotinib and imatinib in patients with newly diagnosed chronic myeloid leukemia in chronic phase (CML-CP). With a minimum follow-up of 3 years, major molecular response, molecular response of BCR-ABL≤ 0.01% expressed on the international scale (BCR-ABL(IS); MR(4)) and BCR-ABL(IS)≤ 0.0032% (MR(4.5)) rates were significantly higher with nilotinib compared with imatinib, and differences in the depth of molecular response between nilotinib and imatinib have increased over time. No new progressions occurred on treatment since the 2-year analysis. Nilotinib was associated with a significantly lower probability of progression to accelerated phase/blast crisis vs imatinib (two (0.7%) progressions on nilotinib 300 mg twice daily, three (1.1%) on nilotinib 400 mg twice daily and 12 (4.2%) on imatinib). When considering progressions occurring after study treatment discontinuation, the advantage of nilotinib over imatinib in preventing progression remained significant (nine (3.2%) progressions on nilotinib 300 mg twice daily, six (2.1%) on nilotinib 400 mg twice daily and 19 (6.7%) on imatinib). Both nilotinib and imatinib were well tolerated, with minimal changes in safety over time. Nilotinib continues to demonstrate superior efficacy in all key response and outcome parameters compared with imatinib for the treatment of patients with newly diagnosed CML-CP.</abstract><cop>London</cop><pub>Nature Publishing Group</pub><doi>10.1038/leu.2012.175</doi></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0887-6924
ispartof Leukemia, 2012-10, Vol.26 (10), p.2302
issn 0887-6924
1476-5551
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_1095495021
source SpringerLink Journals; Nature Journals Online; Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals
title Nilotinib vs imatinib in patients with newly diagnosed Philadelphia chromosome-positive chronic myeloid leukemia in chronic phase: ENESTnd 3-year follow-up
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-16T09%3A24%3A51IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Nilotinib%20vs%20imatinib%20in%20patients%20with%20newly%20diagnosed%20Philadelphia%20chromosome-positive%20chronic%20myeloid%20leukemia%20in%20chronic%20phase:%20ENESTnd%203-year%20follow-up&rft.jtitle=Leukemia&rft.au=Larson,%20R.A&rft.date=2012-10-01&rft.volume=26&rft.issue=10&rft.spage=2302&rft.pages=2302-&rft.issn=0887-6924&rft.eissn=1476-5551&rft_id=info:doi/10.1038/leu.2012.175&rft_dat=%3Cgale_proqu%3EA306240708%3C/gale_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1095495021&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_galeid=A306240708&rfr_iscdi=true