Low-Dose Cytarabine Plus G-CSF Induction in Pediatric M2 Acute Myeloid Leukemia: A Multicenter Study.

IF 3.5 2区 医学 Q2 ONCOLOGY
Cancer Medicine Pub Date : 2026-10-01 DOI:10.1002/cam4.72349
Wenxin Ou, Xiaohua Zhu, Jun Lu, Hongsheng Wang, Ning Liao, Yufeng Liu, Hua Jiang, Qi An, Xiaojun Yuan, Hailong He, Ningling Wang, Jixia Luo, Xiuli Ju, Qian-Fei Wang, Minghua Yang, Cheng Cheng, Peifang Xiao, Liangchun Yang, Li Gao, Raul C Ribeiro, Shaoyan Hu, Xiaowen Zhai
{"title":"Low-Dose Cytarabine Plus G-CSF Induction in Pediatric M2 Acute Myeloid Leukemia: A Multicenter Study.","authors":"Wenxin Ou, Xiaohua Zhu, Jun Lu, Hongsheng Wang, Ning Liao, Yufeng Liu, Hua Jiang, Qi An, Xiaojun Yuan, Hailong He, Ningling Wang, Jixia Luo, Xiuli Ju, Qian-Fei Wang, Minghua Yang, Cheng Cheng, Peifang Xiao, Liangchun Yang, Li Gao, Raul C Ribeiro, Shaoyan Hu, Xiaowen Zhai","doi":"10.1002/cam4.72349","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This retrospective secondary analysis of the multicenter randomized CALS III-AML18 trial evaluated the efficacy and safety of low-dose chemotherapy (LDC) compared with standard-dose chemotherapy (SDC) in children with M2 acute myeloid leukemia (AML-M2). A total of 221 children were included, with 109 in the LDC arm and 112 in the SDC arm. The complete remission (CR)/CR with incomplete recovery (CRi) rates after induction I and II were 67.0% versus 70.5% (p = 0.568) and 84.4% versus 89.3% (p = 0.740), respectively. The 3 year overall survival (OS) rates were 81.2% ± 3.9% and 86.9% ± 3.3% in the LDC and SDC arms, respectively (p = 0.304). The corresponding 3 year relapse-free survival (RFS) rates were 82.0% ± 3.8% and 88.1% ± 3.1% (p = 0.205), and the 3 year event-free survival (EFS) rates were 62.1% ± 4.8% and 70.8% ± 4.4% (p = 0.218). Among patients with KIT mutations, outcomes were poorer in the LDC arm than in the SDC arm, including 3 year OS (67.1% ± 8.7% vs. 91.5% ± 4.1%, p = 0.011), RFS (70.6% ± 7.8% vs. 87.5% ± 4.8%, p = 0.038), and EFS (49.2% ± 8.7% vs. 81.0% ± 5.7%, p = 0.002). Among patients who developed sepsis, grade 3-5 events were less frequent in the LDC arm than in the SDC arm (33.3% vs. 78.8%, p < 0.001). LDC was also associated with faster neutrophil and platelet recovery, lower transfusion requirements, and reduced treatment costs during induction. No statistically significant differences in remission or survival outcomes were observed between LDC and SDC, while the LDC regimen showed a lower treatment-related burden. These findings support further evaluation of LDC as a toxicity-sparing induction strategy in selected pediatric patients with AML-M2. The poorer outcomes observed among patients with KIT mutations warrant caution when considering treatment de-intensification in this subgroup.</p>","PeriodicalId":139,"journal":{"name":"Cancer Medicine","volume":"15 10","pages":"e72349"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13627885/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cancer Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/cam4.72349","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This retrospective secondary analysis of the multicenter randomized CALS III-AML18 trial evaluated the efficacy and safety of low-dose chemotherapy (LDC) compared with standard-dose chemotherapy (SDC) in children with M2 acute myeloid leukemia (AML-M2). A total of 221 children were included, with 109 in the LDC arm and 112 in the SDC arm. The complete remission (CR)/CR with incomplete recovery (CRi) rates after induction I and II were 67.0% versus 70.5% (p = 0.568) and 84.4% versus 89.3% (p = 0.740), respectively. The 3 year overall survival (OS) rates were 81.2% ± 3.9% and 86.9% ± 3.3% in the LDC and SDC arms, respectively (p = 0.304). The corresponding 3 year relapse-free survival (RFS) rates were 82.0% ± 3.8% and 88.1% ± 3.1% (p = 0.205), and the 3 year event-free survival (EFS) rates were 62.1% ± 4.8% and 70.8% ± 4.4% (p = 0.218). Among patients with KIT mutations, outcomes were poorer in the LDC arm than in the SDC arm, including 3 year OS (67.1% ± 8.7% vs. 91.5% ± 4.1%, p = 0.011), RFS (70.6% ± 7.8% vs. 87.5% ± 4.8%, p = 0.038), and EFS (49.2% ± 8.7% vs. 81.0% ± 5.7%, p = 0.002). Among patients who developed sepsis, grade 3-5 events were less frequent in the LDC arm than in the SDC arm (33.3% vs. 78.8%, p < 0.001). LDC was also associated with faster neutrophil and platelet recovery, lower transfusion requirements, and reduced treatment costs during induction. No statistically significant differences in remission or survival outcomes were observed between LDC and SDC, while the LDC regimen showed a lower treatment-related burden. These findings support further evaluation of LDC as a toxicity-sparing induction strategy in selected pediatric patients with AML-M2. The poorer outcomes observed among patients with KIT mutations warrant caution when considering treatment de-intensification in this subgroup.

低剂量阿糖胞苷加G-CSF诱导治疗小儿M2急性髓性白血病:一项多中心研究
这项多中心随机CALS III-AML18试验的回顾性二级分析评估了低剂量化疗(LDC)与标准剂量化疗(SDC)在儿童M2急性髓性白血病(AML-M2)中的疗效和安全性。共纳入221名儿童,其中109名来自最不发达国家,112名来自最不发达国家。诱导I和诱导II后的完全缓解(CR)/不完全恢复(CRi)率分别为67.0%对70.5% (p = 0.568)和84.4%对89.3% (p = 0.740)。最不发达组和最不发达组的3年总生存率分别为81.2%±3.9%和86.9%±3.3% (p = 0.304)。相应的3年无复发生存率(RFS)分别为82.0%±3.8%和88.1%±3.1% (p = 0.205), 3年无事件生存率(EFS)分别为62.1%±4.8%和70.8%±4.4% (p = 0.218)。在KIT突变患者中,LDC组的预后差于SDC组,包括3年OS(67.1%±8.7% vs. 91.5%±4.1%,p = 0.011)、RFS(70.6%±7.8% vs. 87.5%±4.8%,p = 0.038)和EFS(49.2%±8.7% vs. 81.0%±5.7%,p = 0.002)。在发生脓毒症的患者中,最不发达组的3-5级事件发生率低于最不发达组(33.3% vs. 78.8%, p
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Cancer Medicine
Cancer Medicine ONCOLOGY-
CiteScore
5.50
自引率
2.50%
发文量
907
审稿时长
19 weeks
期刊介绍: Cancer Medicine is a peer-reviewed, open access, interdisciplinary journal providing rapid publication of research from global biomedical researchers across the cancer sciences. The journal will consider submissions from all oncologic specialties, including, but not limited to, the following areas: Clinical Cancer Research Translational research ∙ clinical trials ∙ chemotherapy ∙ radiation therapy ∙ surgical therapy ∙ clinical observations ∙ clinical guidelines ∙ genetic consultation ∙ ethical considerations Cancer Biology: Molecular biology ∙ cellular biology ∙ molecular genetics ∙ genomics ∙ immunology ∙ epigenetics ∙ metabolic studies ∙ proteomics ∙ cytopathology ∙ carcinogenesis ∙ drug discovery and delivery. Cancer Prevention: Behavioral science ∙ psychosocial studies ∙ screening ∙ nutrition ∙ epidemiology and prevention ∙ community outreach. Bioinformatics: Gene expressions profiles ∙ gene regulation networks ∙ genome bioinformatics ∙ pathwayanalysis ∙ prognostic biomarkers. Cancer Medicine publishes original research articles, systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and research methods papers, along with invited editorials and commentaries. Original research papers must report well-conducted research with conclusions supported by the data presented in the paper.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书