BACKGROUND:Decitabine is standard therapy in patients with myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS). Current recommendations suggest a dose of 20 mg/m(2) intravenously (IV) daily for 5 days every 4 weeks. However, this therapy is associated with frequent grade 3/4 hematologic toxicity, requiring dose delays and/or dose reductions (DD/DR). RESULTS: We investigated the outcomes of 122 patients with MDS who had DD/DR of frontline decitabine therapy. Sixty-five patients (53%) had DR by at least 25% or DD (defined as a delay beyond 5 weeks between cycles). Thirty-five patients (29%) underwent DD/DR after achieving best objective response, 30 patients (25%) underwent DD/DR before best objective response, and 57 (54%) patients had no DD/DR. There was a trend for more durable responses in favor of patients requiring DD/DR after the achievement of best objective response (median not reached) (P = .161). Overall survival rates were significantly higher for patients who had DD/DR after best objective response compared with those who had DD/DR before best objective response or those with no DD/DR (30 vs. 22 vs. 11 months, respectively; P < .001). Progression-free survival (PFS) rates also trended higher for those with DD/DR after best objective response (median not reached) compared with those who required DD/DR before best objective response (median of 15 months) (P = .285). CONCLUSION: DD/DR may be safely accomplished once the patient has achieved best objective response (preferably complete remission [CR]) without impacting outcome. Prospective evaluation of an approach conceived of a loading dose for induction of a best objective response followed by a maintenance schedule is to be considered.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND:Decitabine is standard therapy in patients with myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS). Current recommendations suggest a dose of 20 mg/m(2) intravenously (IV) daily for 5 days every 4 weeks. However, this therapy is associated with frequent grade 3/4 hematologic toxicity, requiring dose delays and/or dose reductions (DD/DR). RESULTS: We investigated the outcomes of 122 patients with MDS who had DD/DR of frontline decitabine therapy. Sixty-five patients (53%) had DR by at least 25% or DD (defined as a delay beyond 5 weeks between cycles). Thirty-five patients (29%) underwent DD/DR after achieving best objective response, 30 patients (25%) underwent DD/DR before best objective response, and 57 (54%) patients had no DD/DR. There was a trend for more durable responses in favor of patients requiring DD/DR after the achievement of best objective response (median not reached) (P = .161). Overall survival rates were significantly higher for patients who had DD/DR after best objective response compared with those who had DD/DR before best objective response or those with no DD/DR (30 vs. 22 vs. 11 months, respectively; P < .001). Progression-free survival (PFS) rates also trended higher for those with DD/DR after best objective response (median not reached) compared with those who required DD/DR before best objective response (median of 15 months) (P = .285). CONCLUSION:DD/DR may be safely accomplished once the patient has achieved best objective response (preferably complete remission [CR]) without impacting outcome. Prospective evaluation of an approach conceived of a loading dose for induction of a best objective response followed by a maintenance schedule is to be considered.
Authors: Francesco Onida; Hagop M Kantarjian; Terry L Smith; Greg Ball; Michael J Keating; Elihu H Estey; Armand B Glassman; Maher Albitar; Monica I Kwari; Miloslav Beran Journal: Blood Date: 2002-02-01 Impact factor: 22.113
Authors: Hagop M Kantarjian; Susan O'Brien; Jianqin Shan; Ahmed Aribi; Guillermo Garcia-Manero; Elias Jabbour; Farhad Ravandi; Jorge Cortes; Jan Davisson; Jean-Pierre Issa Journal: Cancer Date: 2007-01-15 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Pierre Fenaux; Ghulam J Mufti; Eva Hellstrom-Lindberg; Valeria Santini; Carlo Finelli; Aristoteles Giagounidis; Robert Schoch; Norbert Gattermann; Guillermo Sanz; Alan List; Steven D Gore; John F Seymour; John M Bennett; John Byrd; Jay Backstrom; Linda Zimmerman; David McKenzie; Cl Beach; Lewis R Silverman Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2009-02-21 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: Hagop Kantarjian; Jean-Pierre J Issa; Craig S Rosenfeld; John M Bennett; Maher Albitar; John DiPersio; Virginia Klimek; James Slack; Carlos de Castro; Farhad Ravandi; Richard Helmer; Lanlan Shen; Stephen D Nimer; Richard Leavitt; Azra Raza; Hussain Saba Journal: Cancer Date: 2006-04-15 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: David P Steensma; Maria R Baer; James L Slack; Rena Buckstein; Lucy A Godley; Guillermo Garcia-Manero; Maher Albitar; Julie S Larsen; Sujata Arora; Michael T Cullen; Hagop Kantarjian Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2009-06-15 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Kamel Laribi; Delphine Bolle; Mustafa Alani; Habib Ghnaya; Anne Besançon; Jonathan Farhi; Kayane Mheidly; Nathalie Denizon; Alix Baugier de Materre Journal: Cancer Med Date: 2019-04-16 Impact factor: 4.452