Real-world data confirming the efficacy and safety of decitabine in acute myeloid leukaemia–results from a retrospective Belgian registry study

3Citations
Citations of this article
10Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Objectives: Currently, there is no standard treatment for patients with acute myeloid leukaemia (AML) ineligible for standard induction chemotherapy (IC). This study aimed to report real-world evidence data on the efficacy and safety of decitabine in this patient group. Methods: This study was a Belgian, retrospective, non-interventional, multicentre registry of patients ≥ 65 years, with newly-diagnosed de novo or secondary AML ineligible for IC. Patients were treated according to routine clinical practice. Overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS) and transfusion independence for ≥8 consecutive weeks were evaluated. Results: Forty-five patients were enrolled, including 67% (n = 30) with secondary AML. Median OS and PFS were 7.3 months (95% CI: 2.2–11.1) and 4.1 months (95% CI: 2.1–7.6) respectively. A subpopulation analysis showed that patients treated with ≥4 cycles (n = 21) had significantly better outcomes compared to patients receiving <4 cycles (median OS 17.5 vs 1.6 months; median PFS 17.5 vs. 1.4 months). Twenty-five percent and 58% of patients that were respectively RBC or platelet transfusion-dependent at baseline became transfusion independent during treatment. Conclusion: This real-world data confirms that decitabine can lead to transfusion independence and longer OS in AML patients, particularly after administering ≥4 cycles, as indicated in the summary of product characteristics.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Meers, S., Bailly, B., Vande Broek, I., Malfait, B., Van Hoorenbeeck, S., Geers, J., … Dierickx, D. (2021). Real-world data confirming the efficacy and safety of decitabine in acute myeloid leukaemia–results from a retrospective Belgian registry study. Acta Clinica Belgica: International Journal of Clinical and Laboratory Medicine, 76(2), 98–105. https://doi.org/10.1080/17843286.2019.1665233

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free