Literature DB >> 22699418

Nilotinib vs imatinib in patients with newly diagnosed Philadelphia chromosome-positive chronic myeloid leukemia in chronic phase: ENESTnd 3-year follow-up.

R A Larson1, A Hochhaus, T P Hughes, R E Clark, G Etienne, D-W Kim, I W Flinn, M Kurokawa, B Moiraghi, R Yu, R E Blakesley, N J Gallagher, G Saglio, H M Kantarjian.   

Abstract

Evaluating Nilotinib Efficacy and Safety in Clinical Trials Newly Diagnosed Patients compares nilotinib and imatinib in patients with newly diagnosed chronic myeloid leukemia in chronic phase (CML-CP). With a minimum follow-up of 3 years, major molecular response, molecular response of BCR-ABL≤ 0.01% expressed on the international scale (BCR-ABL(IS); MR(4)) and BCR-ABL(IS)≤ 0.0032% (MR(4.5)) rates were significantly higher with nilotinib compared with imatinib, and differences in the depth of molecular response between nilotinib and imatinib have increased over time. No new progressions occurred on treatment since the 2-year analysis. Nilotinib was associated with a significantly lower probability of progression to accelerated phase/blast crisis vs imatinib (two (0.7%) progressions on nilotinib 300 mg twice daily, three (1.1%) on nilotinib 400 mg twice daily and 12 (4.2%) on imatinib). When considering progressions occurring after study treatment discontinuation, the advantage of nilotinib over imatinib in preventing progression remained significant (nine (3.2%) progressions on nilotinib 300 mg twice daily, six (2.1%) on nilotinib 400 mg twice daily and 19 (6.7%) on imatinib). Both nilotinib and imatinib were well tolerated, with minimal changes in safety over time. Nilotinib continues to demonstrate superior efficacy in all key response and outcome parameters compared with imatinib for the treatment of patients with newly diagnosed CML-CP.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22699418     DOI: 10.1038/leu.2012.134

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Leukemia        ISSN: 0887-6924            Impact factor:   11.528


  138 in total

Review 1.  Practical management of patients with chronic myeloid leukemia who develop tyrosine kinase inhibitor-resistant BCR-ABL1 mutations.

Authors:  Jing Ai; Ramon V Tiu
Journal:  Ther Adv Hematol       Date:  2014-08

2.  First-line imatinib vs second- and third-generation TKIs for chronic-phase CML: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Claudia Vener; Rita Banzi; Federico Ambrogi; Annalisa Ferrero; Giuseppe Saglio; Gabriella Pravettoni; Milena Sant
Journal:  Blood Adv       Date:  2020-06-23

3.  Long-term response to imatinib is not affected by the initial dose in patients with Philadelphia chromosome-positive chronic myeloid leukemia in chronic phase: final update from the Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitor Optimization and Selectivity (TOPS) study.

Authors:  Michele Baccarani; Brian J Druker; Susan Branford; Dong-Wook Kim; Fabrizio Pane; Lidia Mongay; Manisha Mone; Christine-Elke Ortmann; Hagop M Kantarjian; Jerald P Radich; Timothy P Hughes; Jorge E Cortes; François Guilhot
Journal:  Int J Hematol       Date:  2014       Impact factor: 2.490

4.  Exploratory study on the impact of switching to nilotinib in 18 patients with chronic myeloid leukemia in chronic phase with suboptimal response to imatinib.

Authors:  Sikander Ailawadhi; Luke P Akard; Carole B Miller; Anand Jillella; Daniel J DeAngelo; Solveig G Ericson; Felice Lin; Ghulam Warsi; Jerald Radich
Journal:  Ther Adv Hematol       Date:  2016-11-24

Review 5.  Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors in Leukemia and Cardiovascular Events: From Mechanism to Patient Care.

Authors:  Ali Manouchehri; Elishama Kanu; Michael J Mauro; Aaron W Aday; Jonathan R Lindner; Javid Moslehi
Journal:  Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol       Date:  2019-12-26       Impact factor: 8.311

6.  Patient preferences for stopping tyrosine kinase inhibitors in chronic myeloid leukemia.

Authors:  D Sanford; R Kyle; A Lazo-Langner; A Xenocostas; I Chin-Yee; K Howson-Jan; C Hsia
Journal:  Curr Oncol       Date:  2014-04       Impact factor: 3.677

Review 7.  The argument for using imatinib in CML.

Authors:  Simone Claudiani; Jane F Apperley
Journal:  Hematology Am Soc Hematol Educ Program       Date:  2018-11-30

8.  Second generation tyrosine kinase inhibitors prevent disease progression in high-risk (high CIP2A) chronic myeloid leukaemia patients.

Authors:  C M Lucas; R J Harris; A K Holcroft; L J Scott; N Carmell; E McDonald; F Polydoros; R E Clark
Journal:  Leukemia       Date:  2015-03-13       Impact factor: 11.528

9.  Impact of comorbidities on overall survival in patients with chronic myeloid leukemia: results of the randomized CML study IV.

Authors:  Susanne Saussele; Marie-Paloma Krauss; Rüdiger Hehlmann; Michael Lauseker; Ulrike Proetel; Lida Kalmanti; Benjamin Hanfstein; Alice Fabarius; Doris Kraemer; Wolfgang E Berdel; Martin Bentz; Peter Staib; Maike de Wit; Martin Wernli; Florian Zettl; Holger F Hebart; Markus Hahn; Jochen Heymanns; Ingo Schmidt-Wolf; Norbert Schmitz; Michael J Eckart; Winfried Gassmann; Andrea Bartholomäus; Antonio Pezzutto; Elisabeth Oppliger Leibundgut; Dominik Heim; Stefan W Krause; Andreas Burchert; Wolf-Karsten Hofmann; Joerg Hasford; Andreas Hochhaus; Markus Pfirrmann; Martin C Müller
Journal:  Blood       Date:  2015-04-27       Impact factor: 22.113

10.  The patient journey in chronic myeloid leukemia patients on tyrosine kinase inhibitor therapies: qualitative insights using a global ethnographic approach.

Authors:  François Guilhot; John Coombs; Tomasz Szczudlo; Oleg Zernovak; Marc Paolantonio; Christina Bender; Nancy J Macdonald; Ari Shapiro
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2013       Impact factor: 3.883

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.