RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: CPX-351 is approved for the treatment of therapy related acute myeloid leukemia (t-AML) and AML with myelodysplastic related changes (MRC-AML). The benefits of this treatment over standard chemotherapy has not been addressed in well matched cohorts of real-life patients. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of AML patients treated with CPX-351 as per routine practice. A propensity score matching (PSM) was used to compare their main outcomes with those observed in a matched cohort among 765 historical patients receiving intensive chemotherapy (IC), all of them reported to the PETHEMA epidemiologic registry. RESULTS: Median age of 79 patients treated with CPX-351 was 67 years old (interquartile range 62-71), 53 were MRC-AML. The complete remission (CR) rate or CR without recovery (CRi) after 1 or 2 cycles of CPX-351 was 52%, 60-days mortality 18%, measurable residual disease <0.1% in 54% (12 out of 22) of them. Stem cell transplant (SCT) was performed in 27 patients (34%), median OS was 10.3 months, and 3-year relapse incidence was 50%. Using PSM, we obtained two comparable cohorts treated with CPX-351 (n = 52) or IC (n = 99), without significant differences in CR/CRi (60% vs. 54%) and median OS (10.3 months vs. 9.1 months), although more patients were bridged to SCT in the CPX-351 group (35% vs. 12%). The results were confirmed when only 3 + 7 patients were included in the historical cohort. In multivariable analyses, SCT was associated with better OS (HR 0.33 95% CI: 0.18-0.59), p < 0.001. CONCLUSION: Larger post-authorization studies may provide evidence of the clinical benefits of CPX-351 for AML in the real-life setting.
Asunto(s)
Citarabina , Leucemia Mieloide Aguda , Humanos , Anciano , Estudios Retrospectivos , Citarabina/uso terapéutico , Inducción de RemisiónRESUMEN
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: At present, there is strong concern about the efficacy of current antimicrobial prophylaxis for the management of neutropenic patients. The purpose of this study was to test the effectiveness of levofloxacin, a new quinolone with expanded activity against grampositive bacteria, versus cotrimoxazol as a prophylactic treatment for granulocytopenic patients. PATIENTS AND METHOD: In this prospective and controlled study, we included 249 consecutive episodes of neutropenia, such as those resulting from lymphoma and leukemia treatment, during 28 months (from November 1999 to February 2002). These episodes were divided into 3 cohorts: the first was treated with levofloxacin, the second with cotrimoxazol and the third was a subgroup without antibiotic prophylaxis (control group). The incidence of infection, rate of mortality, and reduction of hospitalization rate for treatment with parenteral antibiotics were tested. RESULTS: There was a reduction in documented infections (clinically or microbiologically) when comparing the levofloxacin cohort with the control cohort (p < 0.0001) and the levofloxacin cohort with the cotrimoxazol group (p < 0.01). The reduction in the hospitalization rate for treatment with parenteral antibiotics reached statistical significance when comparing the levofloxacin group with the control cohort (p < 0.001) and levofloxacin group with the cotrimoxazol group (p < 0.05). Although the rate of global mortality was lower in the levofloxacin group than in the other two groups, no statistical significance was observed. CONCLUSIONS: Our results show that levofloxacin effectively reduces the incidence of infection, the rate of hospitalization and the requirement for parenteral antibiotics. Although we found a reduction in the overall mortality and in the infection-related mortality, the corresponding data did not reach statistical significance.
