Sherlly Xie1, Md Jobayer Hossain2. 1. Biostatistics Core, Nemours Biomedical Research, A I duPont Hospital for Children, Wilmington, DE 19803, United States. 2. Biostatistics Core, Nemours Biomedical Research, A I duPont Hospital for Children, Wilmington, DE 19803, United States; Department of Applied Economics and Statistics, University of Delaware, Newark, DE 19716, United States. Electronic address: jhossain@nemours.org.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Acute myeloid leukemia (AML) is a serious disease with complex etiology and marked variation in survival. Known prognostic factors include AML subtypes, age at diagnosis and sex. However, survival outcomes may vary across healthcare systems. In this study, we evaluated the survival patterns in individuals diagnosed with AML at ages 0-24 years in the US and England between prognostic features and across countries. METHODS: We obtained data on 4387 and 2194 subjects from the US Surveillance Epidemiology and End Result registries and UK National Cancer Data Repository. Subjects were diagnosed and followed in 1995-2014. Kaplan-Meier curve and stratified Cox proportional hazards regression were used in the analysis. RESULTS: Overall risk of mortality was 23% lower in English patients compared to that in the US patients (adjusted hazard ratio (aHR), 95% confidence Interval (CI): 0.77, 0.71-0.84). Survival difference of similar extent was observed in subgroups of sex and age at diagnosis. However, mortality risks between two countries varied substantially across AML subtypes, especially in AML inv(16) (1.81, 0.61-5.34), AML with minimal differentiation (0.54, 0.25-1.17), AML without maturation (0.38, 0.20-0.74) and AML with maturation (0.52, 0.31-0.86). CONCLUSIONS: Similar to the population trend, mortality risk across sex, age at diagnosis, and most AML subtypes was lower in England. Survival outcome for AML with and without maturation in England was better than the population trend, while that for AML inv(16) was worse. Our findings suggest that future etiologic and policy research may uncover the underlying mechanisms and contribute to closing these morality gaps.
BACKGROUND:Acute myeloid leukemia (AML) is a serious disease with complex etiology and marked variation in survival. Known prognostic factors include AML subtypes, age at diagnosis and sex. However, survival outcomes may vary across healthcare systems. In this study, we evaluated the survival patterns in individuals diagnosed with AML at ages 0-24 years in the US and England between prognostic features and across countries. METHODS: We obtained data on 4387 and 2194 subjects from the US Surveillance Epidemiology and End Result registries and UK National Cancer Data Repository. Subjects were diagnosed and followed in 1995-2014. Kaplan-Meier curve and stratified Cox proportional hazards regression were used in the analysis. RESULTS: Overall risk of mortality was 23% lower in English patients compared to that in the US patients (adjusted hazard ratio (aHR), 95% confidence Interval (CI): 0.77, 0.71-0.84). Survival difference of similar extent was observed in subgroups of sex and age at diagnosis. However, mortality risks between two countries varied substantially across AML subtypes, especially in AML inv(16) (1.81, 0.61-5.34), AML with minimal differentiation (0.54, 0.25-1.17), AML without maturation (0.38, 0.20-0.74) and AML with maturation (0.52, 0.31-0.86). CONCLUSIONS: Similar to the population trend, mortality risk across sex, age at diagnosis, and most AML subtypes was lower in England. Survival outcome for AML with and without maturation in England was better than the population trend, while that for AML inv(16) was worse. Our findings suggest that future etiologic and policy research may uncover the underlying mechanisms and contribute to closing these morality gaps.
Authors: Bassem I Razzouk; Elihu Estey; Stanley Pounds; Shelly Lensing; Sherry Pierce; Mark Brandt; Jeffrey E Rubnitz; Raul C Ribeiro; Michael Rytting; Ching-Hon Pui; Hagop Kantarjian; Sima Jeha Journal: Cancer Date: 2006-06-01 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Michael D Kogan; Paul W Newacheck; Stephen J Blumberg; Reem M Ghandour; Gopal K Singh; Bonnie B Strickland; Peter C van Dyck Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2010-08-26 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Richard Aplenc; Todd A Alonzo; Robert B Gerbing; Franklin O Smith; Soheil Meshinchi; Julie A Ross; John Perentesis; William G Woods; Beverly J Lange; Stella M Davies Journal: Blood Date: 2006-03-14 Impact factor: 22.113
Authors: Maya Schulpen; Bianca F Goemans; Gertjan J L Kaspers; Marc H G P Raaijmakers; C Michel Zwaan; Henrike E Karim-Kos Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2021-12-16 Impact factor: 7.316