...
首页> 外文期刊>Current medical research and opinion >Comparing nilotinib with dasatinib as second-line therapies in patients with chronic myelogenous leukemia resistant or intolerant to imatinib-a retrospective chart review analysis
【24h】

Comparing nilotinib with dasatinib as second-line therapies in patients with chronic myelogenous leukemia resistant or intolerant to imatinib-a retrospective chart review analysis

机译:尼洛替尼与达沙替尼作为二线治疗比较对伊马替尼耐药或不耐受的慢性粒细胞白血病的患者-回顾性图表回顾分析

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Introduction: This study compared progression, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and treatment changes among chronic myelogenous leukemia patients in chronic phase (CML-CP) receiving nilotinib or dasatinib as second-line therapy. Patients and methods: Information on CML-CP patients switched from imatinib to nilotinib or dasatinib as second-line therapy was collected retrospectively from 122 US hematologists and oncologists through an online medical chart review. Progression, PFS, and OS were compared using multivariate Cox proportional hazard models, and treatment changes using chi-square tests. Results: Of 597 imatinib resistant or intolerant patients, 301 initiated nilotinib and 296 dasatinib as second-line therapy. Nilotinib was associated with a lower risk of progression (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.27; p = 0.021) and longer PFS (HR = 0.48; p = 0.030) than dasatinib, with a median follow-up time of 11 months for nilotinib and 10 months for dasatinib. Nilotinib patients had a lower estimated hazard of mortality than dasatinib patients, though not statistically significant (HR = 0.46; p = 0.067). When treatment changes were classified by the physicians' justifications, fewer nilotinib patients had treatment changes due to ineffectiveness (2.0% vs. 5.1%, p = 0.041) or drug holidays due to intolerance (0.0% vs. 1.7%, p = 0.024) than dasatinib patients. Conclusions: Among CML-CP patients in this retrospective chart review who switched from imatinib to either nilotinib or dasatinib, nilotinib was associated with a significantly lower risk of progression and longer PFS than dasatinib. Nilotinib patients were also less likely than dasatinib patients to subsequently have treatment changes due to ineffectiveness or drug holidays due to intolerance. These findings could be subject to unobserved confounders.
机译:简介:本研究比较了接受尼洛替尼或达沙替尼作为二线治疗的慢性期(CML-CP)慢性粒细胞白血病患者的进展,无进展生存期(PFS),总生存期(OS)和治疗变化。患者和方法:通过在线医疗图表回顾性回顾性地收集了来自122位美国血液学家和肿瘤学家的二线治疗的CML-CP患者从伊马替尼转为尼洛替尼或达沙替尼的信息。使用多元Cox比例风险模型比较病程,PFS和OS,并使用卡方检验比较治疗变化。结果:在597名伊马替尼耐药或不耐受的患者中,有301名患者开始了尼罗替尼治疗,而296名达沙替尼开始了二线治疗。与达沙替尼相比,尼洛替尼的进展风险较低(危险比[HR] = 0.27; p = 0.021)和PFS较长(HR = 0.48; p = 0.030),尼洛替尼和尼洛替尼的中位随访时间为11个月。达沙替尼治疗10个月。尼洛替尼患者的估计死亡风险低于达沙替尼患者,尽管无统计学意义(HR = 0.46; p = 0.067)。当根据医生的理由对治疗变化进行分类时,因无效(2.0%vs. 5.1%,p = 0.041)或因不耐受导致的放假(0.0%vs. 1.7%,p = 0.024)导致尼罗替尼患者发生治疗变化的比例降低比达沙替尼患者高。结论:在本回顾性图表审查中,从伊马替尼转为尼洛替尼或达沙替尼的CML-CP患者中,尼洛替尼与达沙替尼相比具有显着更低的病情发展风险和更长的PFS。与达沙替尼患者相比,尼洛替尼患者因无效或因不耐受导致的药物休假而发生治疗变更的可能性也较小。这些发现可能受到无法观察的混杂因素的影响。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号