Blood· 2015Q1
International phase 3 study of azacitidine vs conventional care regimens in older patients with newly diagnosed AML with >30% blasts
- 1,152citations
- Q1SCImago
- 2015year
Short summary
Azacitidine improved median overall survival by 3.9 months (10.4 vs. 6.5 months) in older patients with newly diagnosed AML (>30% blasts) compared to conventional care regimens (CCRs).
AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.
Key points
- Azacitidine improved median overall survival from 6.5 months to 10.4 months in older AML patients (>30% blasts) vs. conventional care.
- A prespecified analysis censoring post-study treatment showed median OS of 12.1 months for azacitidine vs. 6.9 months for CCRs.
- One-year survival rates were 46.5% with azacitidine compared to 34.2% with CCRs.
- Azacitidine showed favorable trends across all patient subgroups.
AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.
Abstract
This multicenter, randomized, open-label, phase 3 trial evaluated azacitidine efficacy and safety vs conventional care regimens (CCRs) in 488 patients age ≥65 years with newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia (AML) with >30% bone marrow blasts. Before randomization, a CCR (standard induction chemotherapy, low-dose ara-c, or supportive care only) was preselected for each patient. Patients then were assigned 1:1 to azacitidine (n = 241) or CCR (n = 247). Patients assigned to CCR received their preselected treatment. Median overall survival (OS) was increased with azacitidine vs CCR: 10.4 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 8.0-12.7 months) vs 6.5 months (95% CI, 5.0-8.6 months), respectively (hazard ratio [HR] was 0.85; 95% CI, 0.69-1.03; stratified log-rank P = .1009). One-year survival rates with azacitidine and CCR were 46.5% and 34.2%, respectively (difference, 12.3%; 95% CI, 3.5%-21.0%). A prespecified analysis censoring patients who received AML treatment after discontinuing study drug showed median OS with azacitidine vs CCR was 12.1 months (95% CI, 9.2-14.2 months) vs 6.9 months (95% CI, 5.1-9.6 months; HR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.60-0.96; stratified log-rank P = .0190). Univariate analysis showed favorable trends for azacitidine compared with CCR across all subgroups defined by baseline demographic and disease features. Adverse events were consistent with the well-established safety profile of azacitidine. Azacitidine may be an important treatment option for this difficult-to-treat AML population. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT01074047.
The authors' abstract, as published at the source. Blood, 2015 · DOI ↗
Continue with a free account
Ask the paper: 3 free questions a day about this paper; save it, get its citation, new summaries every day for your field. Takeaways are Premium.
Continue free on the webSign in with Google or Apple; no card needed. You come back to this paper.
On your phone:
Field: Hematology
HematologyMedicine