High dose cytarabine or transplantation for consolidation of younger patients with acute myeloid leukemia

2000 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 110-115 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alan K Burnett ◽  
Jonathan Kell
Keyword(s):  
Acute Myeloid Leukemia ◽  
Myeloid Leukemia ◽  
High Dose ◽  
Younger Patients ◽  
High Dose Cytarabine ◽  
Acute Myeloid

Optimization of Chemotherapy for Younger Patients With Acute Myeloid Leukemia: Results of the Medical Research Council AML15 Trial

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (27) ◽  
pp. 3360-3368 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alan K. Burnett ◽  
Nigel H. Russell ◽  
Robert K. Hills ◽  
Ann E. Hunter ◽  
Lars Kjeldsen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Acute Myeloid Leukemia ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Myeloid Leukemia ◽  
Remission Induction ◽  
High Dose ◽  
Younger Patients ◽  
High Risk Patients ◽  
High Dose Cytarabine ◽  
Risk Patients ◽  
Acute Myeloid

Purpose Treatment outcomes in younger patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) have improved, but optimization and new combinations are needed. We assess three combinations in induction and consolidation. Patients and Methods Younger untreated patients with AML (median age, 49 years; range, 0 to 73 years) were randomly allocated to two induction courses of daunorubicin and cytarabine (DA) with or without etoposide (ADE; n = 1983) or ADE versus fludarabine, cytarabine, granulocyte colony-stimulating factor, and idarubicin (FLAG-Ida; n = 1268), and to amsacrine, cytarabine, etoposide, and then mitoxantrone/cytarabine (MACE-MidAC) or high-dose cytarabine (n = 1,445) 3 g/m2 or 1.5 g/m2 (n = 657) in consolidation, and finally to a fifth course (cytarabine) or not (n = 227). Results Overall remission rates were similar for DA versus ADE (84% v 86%; P = .14) and ADE versus FLAG-Ida (86% v 85%; P = .7), with more course 1 remissions after FLAG-Ida (77%) reducing relapse (38% v 55%; P < .001) and improving relapse-free survival (45% v 34%; P = .01), overall and in subgroups, but with increased myelosuppression, reducing participation in the consolidation randomization. Overall outcomes were similar between MACE/MidAc and high-dose cytarabine (1.5/3.0 g/m2), but cytarabine required less supportive care. MACE/MidAc was superior for high-risk patients. A fifth course provided no benefit. The outcome for recipients of only two FLAG-Ida courses were not different from that with DA/ADE with consolidation. Conclusion FLAG-Ida is an effective remission induction treatment, with a high complete remission rate after course 1 and reduced relapse. Consolidation with MACE/MidAc is similar overall to high-dose cytarabine, but superior in high-risk patients. Cytarabine at 1.5 g/m2 is equivalent to a 3 g/m2 dose. A fifth course is unnecessary. In patients receiving FLAG-Ida (two courses) and cytarabine (two courses), 8-year survival was 63% for patients with intermediate-risk and 95% for those with favorable-risk disease.

Randomized Phase II Study of Clofarabine-Based Consolidation for Younger Adults With Acute Myeloid Leukemia in First Remission

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (11) ◽  
pp. 1223-1230 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xavier Thomas ◽  
Stéphane de Botton ◽  
Sylvie Chevret ◽  
Denis Caillot ◽  
Emmanuel Raffoux ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Acute Myeloid Leukemia ◽  
Myeloid Leukemia ◽  
High Dose ◽  
Younger Patients ◽  
Hazard Ratios ◽  
Randomized Phase Ii ◽  
Nonhematologic Toxicity ◽  
Donor Identification ◽  
First Remission ◽  
Acute Myeloid

Purpose To evaluate the efficacy and safety of a clofarabine-based combination (CLARA) versus conventional high-dose cytarabine (HDAC) as postremission chemotherapy in younger patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML). Patients and Methods Patients age 18 to 59 years old with intermediate- or unfavorable-risk AML in first remission and no identified donor for allogeneic stem-cell transplantation (SCT) were eligible. Two hundred twenty-one patients were randomly assigned to receive three CLARA or three HDAC consolidation cycles. The primary end point was relapse-free survival (RFS). To handle the confounding effect of SCT that could occur in patients with late donor identification, hazard ratios (HRs) of events were adjusted on the time-dependent treatment × SCT interaction term. Results At 2 years, RFS was 58.5% (95% CI, 49% to 67%) in the CLARA arm and 46.5% (95% CI, 37% to 55%) in the HDAC arm. Overall, 110 patients (55 in each arm) received SCT in first remission. On the basis of a multivariable Cox-adjusted treatment × SCT interaction, the HR of CLARA over HDAC before or in absence of SCT was 0.65 (95% CI, 0.43 to 0.98; P = .041). In a sensitivity analysis, when patients who received SCT in first remission were censored at SCT time, 2-year RFS was 53.3% (95% CI, 39% to 66%) in the CLARA arm and 31.0% (95% CI, 19% to 43%) in the HDAC arm (HR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.41 to 0.98; P = .043). Gain in RFS could be related to the lower cumulative incidence of relapse observed in the CLARA arm versus the HDAC arm (33.9% v 46.4% at 2 years, respectively; cause-specific HR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.40 to 0.94; P = .025). CLARA cycles were associated with higher hematologic and nonhematologic toxicity than HDAC cycles. Conclusion These results suggest that CLARA might be considered as a new chemotherapy option in younger patients with AML in first remission.

scholarly journals Varying intensity of postremission therapy in acute myeloid leukemia

Blood ◽  
1992 ◽  
Vol 79 (8) ◽  
pp. 1924-1930 ◽  
Author(s):  
PA Cassileth ◽  
E Lynch ◽  
JD Hines ◽  
MM Oken ◽  
JJ Mazza ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Acute Myeloid Leukemia ◽  
Mortality Rate ◽  
Maintenance Therapy ◽  
Myeloid Leukemia ◽  
High Dose ◽  
Allogeneic Bone ◽  
Consolidation Therapy ◽  
High Dose Cytarabine ◽  
Postremission Therapy ◽  
Acute Myeloid

The Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) conducted a randomized trial in patients less than or equal to 65 years old (median, 44 years) to determine whether increasing the intensity of postremission therapy in acute myeloid leukemia (AML) would improve the outcome. After uniform induction therapy, patients in complete remission (CR) who were less than 41 years old and who had a histocompatible sibling underwent allogeneic bone marrow transplantation (alloBMT) (54 patients). The remainder of patients in CR were randomized to receive either 2 years of continuous outpatient maintenance therapy with cytarabine and 6- thioguanine (83 patients) or a single course of inpatient consolidation therapy consisting of 6 days of high-dose cytarabine plus 3 days of amsacrine (87 patients). The median duration of follow-up is now 4 years, and patients are included in the analyses of outcome regardless of whether they relapsed before starting the intended treatment. Four- year event-free survival (EFS) was 27% +/- 10% for consolidation therapy versus 16% +/- 8% for maintenance therapy (P = .068) and 28% +/- 11% versus 15% +/- 9% (P = .047) in patients less than 60 years old. The outcome for patients receiving alloBMT was compared with the subset of patients less than 41 years old who received consolidation therapy (N = 29) or maintenance therapy (N = 21). Four-year EFS was 42% +/- 13% for alloBMT, 30% +/- 17% for consolidation therapy, and 14% +/- 15% for maintenance therapy. AlloBMT had a significantly better EFS (P = .013) than maintenance therapy, but was not different from consolidation therapy. In patients less than 41 years old, 4-year survival after alloBMT (42% +/- 14%) did not differ from consolidation therapy (43% +/- 18%), but both were significantly better than maintenance therapy (19% +/- 17%), P = .047 and .043, respectively. The mortality rate for maintenance therapy was 0%, consolidation therapy, 21%; and alloBMT, 36%. Consolidation therapy caused an especially high mortality rate in the patients greater than or equal to 60 years old (8 of 14 or 57%). The toxicity of combined high-dose cytarabine and amsacrine is unacceptable, especially in older patients, and alternative approaches to consolidation therapy such as high-dose cytarabine alone need to be tested. In AML, a single course of consolidation therapy or alloBMT after initial CR produces better results than lengthy maintenance therapy. Although EFS and survival of alloBMT and consolidation therapy do not differ significantly, a larger number of patients need to be studied before concluding that they are equivalent.

Safety and feasibility of outpatient high-dose cytarabine and intermediate-dose cytarabine for consolidation therapy in acute myeloid leukemia

2021 ◽  
pp. 107815522110465
Author(s):  
Wenhui Li ◽  
Katherine Richter ◽  
Jamie Lee ◽  
Kevin McCarthy ◽  
Timothy Kubal
Keyword(s):  
Acute Myeloid Leukemia ◽  
Myeloid Leukemia ◽  
Outpatient Setting ◽  
Cancer Center ◽  
High Dose ◽  
Consolidation Therapy ◽  
High Dose Cytarabine ◽  
Incidence Of Hospitalization ◽  
Acute Myeloid ◽  
Intermediate Dose

Introduction The standard of care consolidation therapy for acute myeloid leukemia is high-dose cytarabine or intermediate-dose cytarabine, which are traditionally given inpatient. At Moffitt Cancer Center, we have moved the administration of high-dose cytarabine and intermediate-dose cytarabine to the outpatient setting through the inpatient/outpatient program. To facilitate outpatient administration, high-dose cytarabine and intermediate-dose cytarabine are given in a shorter interval of every 10 h instead of 12 h. The safety of a shorter duration interval of high-dose cytarabine and intermediate-dose cytarabine is unknown. This study aims to assess the safety and feasibility of administering high-dose cytarabine and intermediate-dose cytarabine consolidation therapy in the inpatient/outpatient setting. Methods This is a retrospective chart review to analyze acute myeloid leukemia patients treated with inpatient/outpatient high-dose cytarabine or intermediate-dose cytarabine consolidation therapy at Moffitt Cancer Center from January 1, 2015, through November 1, 2018. The primary objective was to determine the incidence of hospitalization during the inpatient/outpatient administration of high-dose cytarabine or intermediate-dose cytarabine. Results Two hundred fifty-three of 255 cycles of high-dose cytarabine/intermediate-dose cytarabine were delivered outpatient over the reviewed time period to 118 patients. No patients receiving outpatient high-dose cytarabine/intermediate-dose cytarabine consolidation required hospitalization during chemotherapy. Our incidence of hospitalization (24%) after chemotherapy is consistent with the reported literature. Through the inpatient/outpatient administration of high-dose cytarabine and intermediate-dose cytarabine, 1265 inpatient days were saved with an approximate revenue of $3,135,176 generated in our study period. Conclusion Inpatient/outpatient administration of high-dose cytarabine and intermediate-dose cytarabine is both safe and feasible. Moving high-dose cytarabine/intermediate-dose cytarabine administration to the outpatient setting resulted in significant additional revenue vs. inpatient administration.

scholarly journals A randomized study of high-dose cytarabine in induction in acute myeloid leukemia [see comments]

Blood ◽  
1996 ◽  
Vol 87 (5) ◽  
pp. 1710-1717 ◽  
Author(s):  
JF Bishop ◽  
JP Matthews ◽  
GA Young ◽  
J Szer ◽  
A Gillett ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Acute Myeloid Leukemia ◽  
Myeloid Leukemia ◽  
Univariate Analysis ◽  
Disease Free Survival ◽  
Dose Effect ◽  
Induction Treatment ◽  
High Dose ◽  
Remission Duration ◽  
High Dose Cytarabine ◽  
Acute Myeloid

Abstract High-dose cytarabine (ara-c) may overcome cytarabine resistance in leukemic blasts. It has been used as a successful salvage and in postremission therapy but not as initial induction treatment. Patients aged 15 to 60 years, presenting with newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia (AML) were randomized to receive either high-dose cytarabine, 3 g/m2 12 hourly on days 1, 3, 5, and 7 for 8 doses, daunorubicin 50 mg/m2 days 1 to 3, etoposide 75 mg/m2 days 1 to 7, (HIDAC-3–7) or standard dose cytarabine 100 mg/m2 continuous intravenous infusion for 7 days with daunorubicin and etoposide at the same dose and schedule as above (7–3–7). Patients could receive a second or third induction course if complete remission (CR) was not achieved. All patients received the same postinduction consolidation therapy (5–2–5) for 2 courses. Eligible patients had no prior chemotherapy or myelodysplastic disease. Patients have been followed for a median of 4.5 years. Of 301 patients treated, complete response (CR) was achieved in 71% with HIDAC- 3–7 and 74% with 7–3–7. For patients in CR, the estimated median remission duration was 45 months with HIDAC-3–7 and 12 months with 7–3– 7 (P = .0005 univariate analysis, P = .0004 multivariate analysis). The estimated percentage of patients relapse free 5 years after achieving a CR was 49% on HIDAC-3–7 and 24% on 7–3–7. Patients in CR tended to survive longer with HIDAC-3–7 but there were no overall survival differences between the two arms. HIDAC-3–7 was associated with significantly more toxicity in induction with more leukopenia, thrombocytopenia, nausea, and vomiting and eye toxicity (all P < .001) but a similar incidence of severe central nervous system and cerebellar toxicity compared to 7–3–7. The consolidation treatment was the same in both arms but caused significantly more leukopenia and thrombocytopenia in patients previously treated with HIDAC-3–7 induction (P < .0001). We conclude that a dose-effect exists for cytarabine in AML and that HIDAC- 3–7 prolongs remission duration and disease-free survival and is tolerable when used as initial induction therapy in patients with de novo AML.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document