Acute Myeloid Leukemia (AML): different treatment strategies versus a common standard arm--combined prospective analysis by the German AML Intergroup.

Büchner T, Schlenk RF, Schaich M, Döhner K, Krahl R, Krauter J, Heil G, Krug U, Sauerland MC, Heinecke A, Späth D, Kramer M, Scholl S, Berdel WE, Hiddemann W, Hoelzer D, Hehlmann R, Hasford J, Hoffmann VS, Döhner H, Ehninger G, Ganser A, Niederwieser DW, Pfirrmann M

Research article (journal) | Peer reviewed

Abstract

Identifying true therapeutic progress in patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) requires a comparison of treatment strategies and results on the basis of uniform patient selection. To foster comparability across five clinical studies, we introduced a common standard arm combined with a general upfront randomization and performed prospective analyses with adjustment for differences in prognostic baseline characteristics.Whereas the studies' own regimens differed in chemotherapies, risk adaption, and guidelines for allogeneic stem-cell transplantation, the standard arm contained uniform cytarabine- and anthracycline-based standard-dose remission induction and high-dose consolidation courses.Of 2,995 evaluable patients aged 16 to 60 years, 290 patients were randomly assigned to the common standard arm. Seventy percent of the 290 achieved complete remissions (62% with complete recovery, 8% with incomplete recovery; 95% CI, 65% to 76%). Five-year survival probabilities were 44.3% (95% CI, 37.7% to 50.7%) for overall survival, 44.8% (95% CI, 37.0% to 52.2%) for relapse-free survival, and 31.5% (95% CI, 25.7% to 37.4%) for event-free survival. Neither the unadjusted survival probabilities of the Kaplan-Meier method nor their adjustment for prognostic variables in multiple Cox regression models led to statistically significant different results in the three survival end points when the outcomes of each study were compared with the standard arm.A strictly prospective comparison of different treatment strategies in patients with AML did not show clinically relevant outcome differences when compared through a common standard treatment arm. The results provide a representative basis for further therapeutic approaches.

Details about the publication

JournalJournal of Clinical Oncology (J Clin Oncol)
Volume30
Issue29
Page range3604-3610
StatusPublished
Release year2012
Language in which the publication is writtenEnglish
KeywordsFemale; Proportional Hazards Models; Daunorubicin; Survival Analysis; Male; Adult; Prospective Studies; Adolescent; Middle Aged; Risk Assessment; Leukemia Myeloid Acute; Humans; Treatment Outcome; Sex Factors; Cytarabine; Young Adult; Age Factors; Dose-Response Relationship Drug; Germany; Prognosis; Infusions Intravenous; Kaplan-Meier Estimate; Disease-Free Survival; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Severity of Illness Index; Neoplasm Recurrence Local; Drug Administration Schedule; Confidence Intervals; Female; Proportional Hazards Models; Daunorubicin; Survival Analysis; Male; Adult; Prospective Studies; Adolescent; Middle Aged; Risk Assessment; Leukemia Myeloid Acute; Humans; Treatment Outcome; Sex Factors; Cytarabine; Young Adult; Age Factors; Dose-Response Relationship Drug; Germany; Prognosis; Infusions Intravenous; Kaplan-Meier Estimate; Disease-Free Survival; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Severity of Illness Index; Neoplasm Recurrence Local; Drug Administration Schedule; Confidence Intervals

Authors from the University of Münster

Berdel, Wolfgang Eduard
Medical Clinic of Internal Medicine A (Hematology, Oncology, and Oneumology) (Med A)
Krug, Utz
Medical Clinic of Internal Medicine A (Hematology, Oncology, and Oneumology) (Med A)
Sauerland, Maria Cristina
Institute of Biostatistics and Clinical Research (IBKF)