Benefit of high-dose daunorubicin in AML induction extends across cytogenetic and molecular groups

122Citations
Citations of this article
119Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

The initial report of the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group-American College of Radiology Imaging Network Cancer Research Group trial E1900 (#NCT00049517) showed that induction therapy with high-dose (HD) daunorubicin (90 mg/m2) improved overall survival in adults <60 years old with acute myeloid leukemia (AML); however, at initial analysis, the benefit was restricted to younger patients (<50 years) and patients without unfavorable cytogenetics or a FLT3-ITD mutation. Here, we update the results of E1900 after longer follow-up (median, 80.1 months among survivors), focusing on the benefit of HD daunorubicin on common genetic subgroups. Compared with standard-dose daunorubicin (45 mg/m2), HD daunorubicin is associated with a hazard ratio (HR) for death of 0.74 (P 5 .001). Younger patients (<50 years) benefited from HD daunorubicin (HR, 0.66; P 5 .002), as did patients with favorable and intermediate cytogenetics (HR, 0.51; P 5 .03 andHR, 0.68;P5.01, respectively). Patients with unfavorable cytogenetics wereshownto benefit from HD daunorubicin on multivariable analysis (adjusted HR, 0.66; P 5 .04). Patients with FLT3-ITD (24%), DNMT3A (24%), and NPM1 (26%) mutant AML all benefited from HDdaunorubicin (HR, 0.61, P5.009; HR, 0.62, P5.02; and HR, 0.50, P5.002; respectively).HD benefit was seen in the subgroup of older patients (50-60 years) with the FLT3-ITD or NPM1 mutation. Additionally, the presence of an NPM1 mutation confers a favorable prognosis only for patients receiving anthracycline dose intensification during induction.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Luskin, M. R., Lee, J. W., Fernandez, H. F., Abdel-Wahab, O., Bennett, J. M., Ketterling, R. P., … Luger, S. M. (2016). Benefit of high-dose daunorubicin in AML induction extends across cytogenetic and molecular groups. Blood, 127(12), 1551–1558. https://doi.org/10.1182/blood-2015-07-657403

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