BACKGROUND: Acute myeloid leukemia (AML) is associated with a poor prognosis, particularly in older patients. To the authors' knowledge, few population-based studies of AML treatment patterns and outcomes exist to date. METHODS: The authors used the Ontario Cancer Registry to identify all patients diagnosed with AML between 1965 and 2003. Referral to specialized cancer centers (SCCs) and receipt of chemotherapy were examined as quality of care indicators. Survival outcomes were examined using logistic regression at 30 days, 1 year, and 3 years. RESULTS: A total of 9365 patients (mean age, 58.1 years; range, 0 to 103 years) developed AML between 1965 and 2003. Overall, 75.1%, 32.9%, and 17.3% of patients survived to 30 days, 1 year, and 3 years, respectively. Although survival improved over time among patients aged 19 to 59 years, similar improvements were not seen among older patients. The proportion of patients receiving chemotherapy declined with age (59.0% vs 29.3% among patients ages 19-59 vs > or =60 years). Fewer patients aged > or =60 years were referred to a SCC compared with younger patients (20.8% vs 29.9%). Younger age, less comorbidity, later year of diagnosis, receipt of chemotherapy, and being referred to a SCC were associated with better 30-day and long-term survival in multivariate models. CONCLUSIONS: Although the prognosis has improved over time among younger adults, it remains poor among those aged > or =60 years. Fewer older patients were referred to SCCs or treated with chemotherapy compared with younger patients, whereas both factors were associated with improved survival. Opportunities may exist to improve the quality of care and outcomes among older adults with AML.
BACKGROUND:Acute myeloid leukemia (AML) is associated with a poor prognosis, particularly in older patients. To the authors' knowledge, few population-based studies of AML treatment patterns and outcomes exist to date. METHODS: The authors used the Ontario Cancer Registry to identify all patients diagnosed with AML between 1965 and 2003. Referral to specialized cancer centers (SCCs) and receipt of chemotherapy were examined as quality of care indicators. Survival outcomes were examined using logistic regression at 30 days, 1 year, and 3 years. RESULTS: A total of 9365 patients (mean age, 58.1 years; range, 0 to 103 years) developed AML between 1965 and 2003. Overall, 75.1%, 32.9%, and 17.3% of patients survived to 30 days, 1 year, and 3 years, respectively. Although survival improved over time among patients aged 19 to 59 years, similar improvements were not seen among older patients. The proportion of patients receiving chemotherapy declined with age (59.0% vs 29.3% among patients ages 19-59 vs > or =60 years). Fewer patients aged > or =60 years were referred to a SCC compared with younger patients (20.8% vs 29.9%). Younger age, less comorbidity, later year of diagnosis, receipt of chemotherapy, and being referred to a SCC were associated with better 30-day and long-term survival in multivariate models. CONCLUSIONS: Although the prognosis has improved over time among younger adults, it remains poor among those aged > or =60 years. Fewer older patients were referred to SCCs or treated with chemotherapy compared with younger patients, whereas both factors were associated with improved survival. Opportunities may exist to improve the quality of care and outcomes among older adults with AML.
Authors: Joel M Michalski; Elizabeth R Lyden; Andrea J Lee; Zaid S Al-Kadhimi; Lori J Maness; Krishna Gundabolu; Vijaya Raj Bhatt Journal: Future Oncol Date: 2019-06-07 Impact factor: 3.404
Authors: Matthew M Clark; Pamela J Atherton; Maria I Lapid; Sarah M Rausch; Marlene H Frost; Andrea L Cheville; Jean M Hanson; Yolanda I Garces; Paul D Brown; Jeff A Sloan; Jarrett W Richardson; Katherine M Piderman; Teresa A Rummans Journal: Am J Hosp Palliat Care Date: 2013-02-21 Impact factor: 2.500
Authors: Brandon A Carter-Cooper; Steven Fletcher; Dana Ferraris; Eun Yong Choi; Dahlia Kronfli; Smaraki Dash; Phuc Truong; Edward A Sausville; Rena G Lapidus; Ashkan Emadi Journal: Bioorg Med Chem Lett Date: 2016-11-17 Impact factor: 2.823
Authors: L S G Østgård; J M Nørgaard; H Sengeløv; M Severinsen; L S Friis; C W Marcher; I H Dufva; M Nørgaard Journal: Leukemia Date: 2014-08-05 Impact factor: 11.528
Authors: Tamjeed Ahmed; Scott Holwerda; Heidi D Klepin; Scott Isom; Leslie R Ellis; Susan Lyerly; Megan Manuel; Sarah Dralle; Dmitriy Berenzon; Bayard L Powell; Timothy S Pardee Journal: Leuk Res Date: 2015-06-01 Impact factor: 3.156
Authors: Stephen H Petersdorf; Kenneth J Kopecky; Marilyn Slovak; Cheryl Willman; Thomas Nevill; Joseph Brandwein; Richard A Larson; Harry P Erba; Patrick J Stiff; Robert K Stuart; Roland B Walter; Martin S Tallman; Leif Stenke; Frederick R Appelbaum Journal: Blood Date: 2013-04-16 Impact factor: 22.113