Azacitidine–venetoclax versus azacitidine salvage treatment for primary induction failure or first relapsed acute myeloid leukaemia patients

2Citations
Citations of this article
6Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Objectives: To compare the efficacy of venetoclax-azacitidine (VEN–AZA) with AZA in the real-life for patients with first relapsed or refractory acute myeloid leukaemia (R/R AML). Methods: We retrospectively analysed R/R AML patients treated with VEN–AZA at the Institut Paoli Calmettes between September 2020 and February 2022. We compared them to a historical cohort of patients treated with AZA between 2010 and 2021. Results: Thirty-five patients treated with VEN–AZA were compared with 140 patients treated with AZA. There were more favourable cytogenetics (25.7% vs. 8.6%; p = 0.01) and less FLT3-ITD mutated AML (8.8% vs. 25.5%; p =.049) in the VEN–AZA group. The overall 30-day mortality rate was 7.4% and the overall 90-day mortality was 20%, with no difference between the groups. The complete remission rate was 48.6% in the VEN–AZA group versus 15% (p

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Petit, C., Saillard, C., Mohty, B., Hicheri, Y., Villetard, F., Maisano, V., … Garciaz, S. (2024). Azacitidine–venetoclax versus azacitidine salvage treatment for primary induction failure or first relapsed acute myeloid leukaemia patients. European Journal of Haematology, 112(4), 530–537. https://doi.org/10.1111/ejh.14140

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