A comparison between priming induction regimen and standard chemical therapy in treatment of de novo acute myeloid leukemia

Jianyi ZHU,Shasha LU,Fangyuan CHEN,Jiayi CAI,Xiaofeng HAN,Honghui HUANG,Hua ZHONG,Lu ZHONG
DOI: https://doi.org/10.16138/j.1673-6087.2017.03.008
2017-01-01
Abstract:Objective To compare the efficacy,side effects and survival between priming induction regimen and standard chemical therapy in de novo patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML).Methods There were 175 de novo AML patients included in this study:115 patients were treated with standard induction regimen (IA/DA,idarubicin and cytarabine/daunorubicin and cytarabine);60 patients were treated with priming induction regimen (CAG/IAG,cytarabine,aclarubicin and granulocyte colony-stimulating factor/idarubicin,cytarabine and granulocyte colony-stimulating factor).After reaching complete remission (CR) with one or two course of induction chemotherapy,the patients in the two groups received the respective same regimen as induction chemotherapy for consolidation followed by maintenance therapy.Results There were no significant differences in the rate of CR and overall response,disease free survival and overall survival between the two groups (all P>0.05).But the recovery time of bone marrow,incidence of infection and platelet transfusion in priming induction group was significantly shorter or lower than that in standard chemical therapy group (all P< 0.05).Conclusions Our study suggested that the priming induction regimen was similar to standard chemical therapy in treatment efficacy and survival.But the adverse effects,including myelosuppression and infection,were mild in priming induction regimen.Therefore,the priming induction regimen can be considered as the alternative therapy regimens for de novo AML patients.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?