BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: High-risk myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) and acute myeloid leukemia (AML) are mainly diseases of patients over the age of 60 years. In these patients, intensive chemotherapy and/or allogeneic blood stem cell transplantation are the only curative treatment approaches, while non-curative options include low-dose chemotherapy or best supportive care alone. The basis for treatment decision-making in this clinically and biologically heterogeneous group is not well defined. DESIGN AND METHODS: In order to investigate treatment stratification patterns and outcomes in this population, we performed a systematic literature search in MedLine for relevant clinical reports published between 1989 and 2006. Only large population-based investigations and publications of clinical trials with more than 40 patients were analyzed. RESULTS: In 36 AML studies involving a total of 12,370 patients (median age 70 years) median overall survival approached 30 weeks for intensively treated patients. In patients receiving best supportive care alone, or best supportive care plus non-intensive treatment, median overall survival was 7.5 and 12 weeks, respectively. The complete remission rate after induction was 44%, and in those patients who achieved complete remission age no longer influenced prognosis. In 18 large studies approximately 50% of AML patients received induction therapy, 30% non-intensive chemotherapy and 20% supportive care only. INTERPRETATION AND CONCLUSIONS: Due to the scarcity of randomized AML/MDS trials in which older patients are assigned to either induction or less intense therapy, predictors to identify older patients most likely to benefit from intensive therapy and novel tools to optimize (or even standardize) recommendations are needed. We propose that in this patient population in the future, geriatric assessment instruments and comorbidity scoring are implemented in treatment decision-making.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: High-risk myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) and acute myeloid leukemia (AML) are mainly diseases of patients over the age of 60 years. In these patients, intensive chemotherapy and/or allogeneic blood stem cell transplantation are the only curative treatment approaches, while non-curative options include low-dose chemotherapy or best supportive care alone. The basis for treatment decision-making in this clinically and biologically heterogeneous group is not well defined. DESIGN AND METHODS: In order to investigate treatment stratification patterns and outcomes in this population, we performed a systematic literature search in MedLine for relevant clinical reports published between 1989 and 2006. Only large population-based investigations and publications of clinical trials with more than 40 patients were analyzed. RESULTS: In 36 AML studies involving a total of 12,370 patients (median age 70 years) median overall survival approached 30 weeks for intensively treated patients. In patients receiving best supportive care alone, or best supportive care plus non-intensive treatment, median overall survival was 7.5 and 12 weeks, respectively. The complete remission rate after induction was 44%, and in those patients who achieved complete remission age no longer influenced prognosis. In 18 large studies approximately 50% of AMLpatients received induction therapy, 30% non-intensive chemotherapy and 20% supportive care only. INTERPRETATION AND CONCLUSIONS: Due to the scarcity of randomized AML/MDS trials in which older patients are assigned to either induction or less intense therapy, predictors to identify older patients most likely to benefit from intensive therapy and novel tools to optimize (or even standardize) recommendations are needed. We propose that in this patient population in the future, geriatric assessment instruments and comorbidity scoring are implemented in treatment decision-making.
Authors: John F Seymour; Pierre Fenaux; Lewis R Silverman; Ghulam J Mufti; Eva Hellström-Lindberg; Valeria Santini; Alan F List; Steven D Gore; Jay Backstrom; David McKenzie; C L Beach Journal: Crit Rev Oncol Hematol Date: 2010-05-06 Impact factor: 6.312
Authors: Mohamed L Sorror; Sergio Giralt; Brenda M Sandmaier; Marcos De Lima; Munir Shahjahan; David G Maloney; H Joachim Deeg; Frederick R Appelbaum; Barry Storer; Rainer Storb Journal: Blood Date: 2007-09-14 Impact factor: 22.113
Authors: Barbara Deschler; Gabriele Ihorst; Uwe Platzbecker; Ulrich Germing; Eva März; Marcelo de Figuerido; Kurt Fritzsche; Peter Haas; Helmut R Salih; Aristoteles Giagounidis; Dominik Selleslag; Boris Labar; Theo de Witte; Pierre Wijermans; Michael Lübbert Journal: Haematologica Date: 2012-08-08 Impact factor: 9.941
Authors: R Martino; A Henseler; M van Lint; N Schaap; J Finke; D Beelen; S Vigouroux; E P Alessandrino; G J Mufti; J H Veelken; B Bruno; I Yakoub-Agha; L Volin; J Maertens; R Or; V Leblond; M Rovira; P Kalhs; A F Alvarez; A Vitek; J Sierra; E Wagner; M Robin; T de Witte; N Kröger Journal: Bone Marrow Transplant Date: 2017-03-20 Impact factor: 5.483
Authors: Lori S Muffly; Masha Kocherginsky; Wendy Stock; Quynh Chu; Michael R Bishop; Lucy A Godley; Justin Kline; Hongtao Liu; Olatoyosi M Odenike; Richard A Larson; Koen van Besien; Andrew S Artz Journal: Haematologica Date: 2014-05-09 Impact factor: 9.941
Authors: Farhat L Khanim; Rachel E Hayden; Jane Birtwistle; Alessia Lodi; Stefano Tiziani; Nicholas J Davies; Jon P Ride; Mark R Viant; Ulrich L Gunther; Joanne C Mountford; Heinrich Schrewe; Richard M Green; Jim A Murray; Mark T Drayson; Chris M Bunce Journal: PLoS One Date: 2009-12-07 Impact factor: 3.240