Informace o publikaci
Treatment of consecutive patients with chronic myeloid leukaemia in the cooperating centres from the Czech Republic and the whole of Slovakia after 2000 – a report from the population-based CAMELIA Registry
| Autoři | |
|---|---|
| Rok publikování | 2011 |
| Druh | Článek v odborném periodiku |
| Časopis / Zdroj | European Journal of Haematology |
| Fakulta / Pracoviště MU | |
| Citace | |
| Doi | http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0609.2011.01637.x |
| Obor | Onkologie a hematologie |
| Klíčová slova | chronic myeloid leukaemia; imatinib; tyrosine kinase inhibitors; allogeneic stem cell transplantation; interferon; registry |
| Popis | Most results on the treatment of chronic myeloid leukaemia (CML) with imatinib were obtained from clinical trials that may differ from the routine practice. We report the results of treatment of consecutive patients with CML at ten major centres during 2000–2008. Patients and methods: Data reporting was retrospective in 2000–2004 and prospective from 2005 on. A total of 661 patients [301 women and 360 men; median age 51 (range, 15–83)] with Ph + CML were registered. The median follow-up was 46.1 months (0–122.2). Results: Most patients were treated with first- (379; 57.3%) or second-line (193; 29.2%) imatinib; some of the patients underwent allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (AHSCT) (83; 12.6%), but 6.1% were treated with other modalities [40 patients; median age 66 (range, 32–83)]. The probability of overall survival (OS) at 5 years, according to Kaplan and Meier, was 88.9%, 77.5% and 68.7% for chronic-phase patients treated with first-line imatinib, second-line imatinib and first-line AHSCT, respectively, but only 25.2% for patients receiving other modalities. The OS was dependent on the disease phase and Sokal, Hasford and European group for blood and marrow transplantation (EBMT) risk scores (P < 0.001; each). Only 46.2% of deaths in patients treated with other modalities were attributable to CML. Elderly patients over 65 years achieved similar response rates and progression-free survival to the younger ones. There was a trend for inferior results of AHSCT performed after the failure of imatinib (P = 0.075), probably as a result of differences in EBMT risk scores (P < 0.001). Conclusions: The ability to achieve results comparable to those of previous clinical studies in our CML cohort was influenced by centralised care. Decisions not to initiate imatinib or to delay AHSCT may have a negative impact on OS, but comorbidities may limit the treatment potential of imatinib in the elderly. |