Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Trends in the Treatment of Acute Myeloid Leukaemia in the Elderly

  • Original Research Article
  • Published:
Drugs & Aging Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Introduction

Acute myeloid leukaemia (AML) is the most common type of leukaemia among adults in the US. However, data on longitudinal treatment patterns and outcomes associated with AML and its relapse are sparse, particularly among the elderly. This study documents changes in treatment patterns and outcomes among elderly AML patients over the past decade.

Methods

Using the linked Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare database, we retrospectively evaluated trends in mortality, treatment patterns, healthcare resource utilisation and Medicare payments associated with AML and its relapse among Medicare beneficiaries ≥65 years of age who were initially diagnosed with AML in a SEER registry between 1991 and 1999. Chemotherapy was ascertained from examination of inpatient and outpatient bills. AML relapse and retreatment were identified using a validated algorithm. Costs of care were based on total Medicare payments.

Results

A total of 3439 elderly patients with AML were identified. Median survival across all study patients was 2.4 months (mean ± SD 5.6 ± 6.8 months), with medians of 3.9, 2.2 and 1.4 months for patients 65–74 years of age, 75–84 years of age and ≥85 years of age, respectively. Fewer than 7% of patients were alive at 2 years, and there was very little variation during the decade of our analysis. Costs and overall healthcare utilisation patterns also changed very little, with the exception of those relating to hospice use and chemotherapy. Hospice use more than doubled during the decade (from 12% to 29% among patients diagnosed in 1991 and 1999, respectively; p < 0.0001), mostly among the oldest patients. Administration of chemotherapy also increased from 29% of patients diagnosed in 1991 to 38% of patients diagnosed in 1999 (p = 0.014), with the increase being seen mostly among younger patients and those treated in teaching hospitals. Average total costs (± SD) were US$51 888 ± $54 825 and declined by age as a result of lower survival. A total of 192 patients (16% of treated patients) relapsed and received retreatment with chemotherapy. These patients survived a median 18 months, with a median duration of remission of 8 months, and average total costs three times higher than the overall sample.

Conclusions

The high early mortality and costs associated with AML have not changed significantly over the past decade. However, treatment patterns appear to be changing, with increasing use of chemotherapy and hospice care. The on going introduction of new treatments for AML in the elderly is likely to further impact treatment patterns, and may change the economic burden of the disease. Our findings can be used as a baseline against which the benefits of new therapies can be compared.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Table I
Fig. 1
Table II
Fig. 2
Table III
Fig. 3
Table IV

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. American Cancer Society. Cancer facts and figures 2005. Atlanta (GA): American Cancer Society, 2005 [online]. Available from URL: http://www.cancer.org/downloads/STT/CAFF2005f4PWSecured.pdf [Accessed 2005 Sep 26]

    Google Scholar 

  2. Williams JP, Handler HL. Antibody-targeted chemotherapy for the treatment of relapsed acute myeloid leukemia. Am J Manag Care. 2000; 6Suppl. 18: S975–85

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Oberg G, Killander A, Bjoreman M, et al. Long-term follow-up of patients ≥ 60 yr old with acute myeloid leukaemia treated with intensive chemotherapy. Eur J Haematol 2002; 68(6): 376–81

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Goldstone AH, Burnett AK, Wheatley K, et al. Attempts to improve treatment outcomes in acute myeloid leukemia (AML) in older patients: the results of the United Kingdom Medical Research Council AML11 trial. Blood 2001; 98(5): 1302–11

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Baudard M, Beauchamp-Nicoud A, Delmer A, et al. Has the prognosis of adult patients with acute myeloid leukemia improved over years? A single institution experience of 784 consecutive patients over a 16-year period. Leukemia 1999; 13(10): 1481–90

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Hann IM, Stevens RF, Goldstone AH, et al. Randomized comparison of DAT versus ADE as induction chemotherapy in children and younger adults with acute myeloid leukemia: results of the Medical Research Council’s 10th AML trial (MRC AML10). Adult and Childhood Leukaemia Working Parties of the Medical Research Council. Blood 1997; 89(7): 2311–8

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Rees JK, Gray RG, Wheatley K. Dose intensification in acute myeloid leukaemia: greater effectiveness at lower cost. Principal report of the Medical Research Council’s AML9 study: MRC Leukaemia in Adults Working Party. Br J Haematol 1996; 94(1): 89–98

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Mayer RJ, Davis RB, Schiffer CA, et al. Intensive postremission chemotherapy in adults with acute myeloid leukemia: Cancer and Leukemia Group B. N Engl J Med 1994; 331(14): 896–903

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Cassileth PA, Lynch E, Hines JD, et al. Varying intensity of postremission therapy in acute myeloid leukemia. Blood 1992; 79(8): 1924–30

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Dillman RO, Davis RB, Green MR, et al. A comparative study of two different doses of cytarabine for acute myeloid leukemia: a phase III trial of Cancer and Leukemia Group B. Blood 1991; 78(10): 2520–6

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Buchner T, Hiddemann W, Berdel W, et al. Acute myeloid leukemia: treatment over 60. German AML Co-Operative Group. Rev Clin Exp Hematol 2002; 6(1) 46–59

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Sekeres MA, Stone R. Older adults with acute myeloid leukemia. Curr Oncol Rep 2002; 4(5): 403–9

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Jackson GH, Taylor PR. Acute myeloid leukaemia: optimising treatment in elderly patients. Drugs Aging 2002; 19(8): 571–81

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Kimby E, Nygren P, Glimelius B, et al. A systematic overview of chemotherapy effects in acute myeloid leukaemia: SBU-group, Swedish Council of Technology Assessment in Health Care. Acta Oncol 2001; 40(2–3): 231–52

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. SEER. Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Program, SEER *Stat Database: incidence — SEER 9 Regs Public Use, Nov 2004 sub (1973–2002), National Cancer Institute, DCCPS, Surveillance Research Program, Cancer Statistics Branch, released April 2005, based on November 2004 submission [online]. Available from URL: http://www.seer.cancer.gov [Accessed 2005 Sep 26]

  16. Löwenberg B, Downing JR, Burnett A. Acute myeloid leukemia. N Engl J Med. 1999; 341: 1051–62

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Menzin J, Lang K, Earle CC, et al. The outcomes and costs of acute myeloid leukemia among the elderly. Arch Int Med 2002; 162: 1597–603

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Estey EH. How I treat older patients with AML. Blood. 2000; 96(5): 1670–3

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Leith CP, Kopecky KJ, Godwin J, et al. Acute myeloid leukemia in the elderly: assessment of multidrug resistance (MDR1) and cytogenetics distinguishes biologic subgroups with remarkably distinct responses to standard chemotherapy: a Southwest Oncology Group study. Blood 1997; 89(9): 3323–9

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Giles F, Estey E, O’Brien S. Gemtuzumab ozogamicin in the treatment of acute myeloid leukemia. Cancer 2003; 98(10): 2095–104

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Sievers EL, Larson RA, Stadtmauer EA, et al. Efficacy and safety of gemtuzumab ozogamicin in patients with CD33-positive acute myeloid leukemia in first relapse: Mylotarg Study Group. J Clin Oncol 2001; 19(13): 3244–54

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Bross PF, Beitz J, Chen G, et al. Approval summary: gemtuzumab ozogamicin in relapsed acute myeloid leukemia. Clin Cancer Res 2001; 7(6): 1490–6

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Lancet JE, Karp JE. Farnesyltransferase inhibitors in hematologic malignancies: new horizons in therapy. Blood 2003; 102(12): 3880–9

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Karp JE, Lancet JE, Kaufmann SH, et al. Clinical and biologic activity of the farnesyltransferase inhibitor R1 15777 in adults with refractory and relapsed acute leukemias: a phase 1 clinical-laboratory correlative trial. Blood 2001; 97(11); 3361–69

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Hematologic Malignancy Diagnostic Service. Acute myeloid leukemia [online]. Available from URL: http://www.hmds.org.uk/aml.html. [Accessed 2005 Sep 26]

  26. Earle C, Menzin J, Lang K, et al. Validating the use of administrative claims data for assessing cancer relapse: the case of acute myeloid leukemia (AML) [abstract]. Blood 1999; 94 (10 Suppl. 1): 185a

    Google Scholar 

  27. Deyo RA, Cherkin DC, Ciol MA. Adapting a clinical comorbidity index for use with ICD-9-CM administrative databases. J Clin Epidemiol 1992; 45(6): 613–9

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Estey E. Prognostic factors in clinical cancer trials. Clin Cancer Res 1997; 3 (12 Pt 2): 2591–3

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Ravandi F, Kantarjian H, Giles F, et al. New agents in acute myeloid leukemia and other myeloid disorders. Cancer 2004; 100(3): 441–54

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Cortes J, Giles F, O’Brien S, et al. Results of imatinib mesylate therapy in patients with refractory or recurrent acute myeloid leukemia, high-risk myelodysplastic syndrome, and myeloproliferative disorders. Cancer 2003; 97(11): 2760–6

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Cortes J. Farnesyltransferase inhibitors in acute myeloid leukemia and myelodysplastic syndromes. Clin Lymphoma 2003; 4Suppl. 1: S30–5

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Lancet J, Gotlib J, Gojo I, et al. Tipifarnib (ZARNESTRA™) in previously untreated poor-risk AML of the elderly: updated results of a multicenter phase 2 trial. Proceedings from the 2004 Annual Meeting of the American Society of Hematology [abstract no. 874]. Blood. 204; 104: 249a

  33. Health Care Financing Administration. Figure 39: trends in Medicare Hospice Benefit Program payments. CYs 1986–1999. Issue: Medicare and Medicaid statistical supplement. Health Care Financ Rev 2001: 59

    Google Scholar 

  34. Zerzan J, Stearns S, Hanson L. Access to palliative care and hospice in nursing homes. JAMA 2000; 284(19): 2489–93

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Iezzoni LI. Assessing quality using administrative data. Ann Intern Med 1997; 127: 666–74

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Frey CM, McMillen MM, Cowan CD, et al. Representativeness of the surveillance, epidemiology, and end results program data: recent trends in cancer mortality rates. J Natl Cancer Inst 1992; 84: 872–7

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Warren JL, Riley GF, McBean AM, et al. Use of Medicare data to identify incident breast cancer cases. Health Care Financ Rev 1996; 18(1): 237–46

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Du X, Freeman JL, Goodwin JS. Information on radiation treatment in patients with breast cancer: the advantages of the linked Medicare and SEER data. J Clin Epidemiol 1999; 52(5): 463–70

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Schapira MS, McAuliffe TL, Nattinger AB. Underutilization of mammography in older breast cancer survivors. Med Care 2000; 38(3): 281–9

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Riley GF, Potosky AL, Lubitz JD, et al. Medicare payments from diagnosis to death for elderly cancer patients by stage at diagnosis. Med Care 1995; 33: 828–41

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Etzioni R, Urban N, Baker M. Estimating the costs attributable to a disease with application to ovarian cancer. J Clin Epidemiol 1996; 49: 95–103

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Fireman BH, Quesenberry CP, Somkin CP, et al. Cost of care for cancer in a Health Maintenance Organization. Health Care Financ Rev 1997; 18: 51–76

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Potosky AL, Riley GF, Lubitz JD, et al. Potential for cancer related health services research using a linked Medicare tumor registry database. Med Care 1993; 31: 732–48

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Potosky AL, Warren JL, Riedel ER, et al. Measuring complications of cancer treatment using the SEER-Medicare data. Med Care 2002; 40(8 Suppl.): IV62–8

    Google Scholar 

  45. Deleyiannis FW, Weymuller Jr EA, Garcia I, et al. Geographic variation in the utilization of esophagoscopy and bronchoscopy in head and neck cancer. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1997; 123: 1203–10

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  46. Cooper GS, Yuan Z, Stange KC, et al. The utility of the Medicare claims data for measuring cancer stage. Med Care 1999; 37(7): 706–11

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. Cooper GS, Yuan Z, Stange KC, et al. The sensitivity of Medicare claims data for case ascertainment of six common cancers. Med Care 1999; 37: 436–44

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  48. Warren JL, Feuer E, Potosky AL, et al. Use of Medicare hospital and physician data to assess breast cancer incidence. Med Care 1999; 37: 445–56

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  49. Warren JL, Brown ML, Fay MP, et al. Costs of treatment for elderly women with early-stage breast cancer in fee-for-service settings. J Clin Oncol 2002; 20(1): 307–16

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Yao SL, Lu-Yao G. Interval after prostate specific antigen testing and subsequent risk of incurable prostate cancer. J Urol 2001; 166(3): 861–5

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors acknowledge the efforts of the Applied Research Program, National Cancer Institute; the Office of Research, Development and Information, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services; Information Management Services, Inc.; and the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Program tumour registries in the creation of the SEER-Medicare database. The interpretation and reporting of these data are the sole responsibility of the authors.

This study was funded in part by Johnson and Johnson Pharmaceutical Services.

Kathleen Lang is now an employee of Innovus Research Inc., Medford, MA, USA. Renilt Van Gool is now an employee of Schering AG, Berlin, Germany

The authors have no conflicts of interest that are directly relevant to the content of this study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Boston Health Economics Inc., 20 Fox Road, Waltham, Massachusetts, 02451, USA

    Kathleen Lang, Talia Foster, Deirdre Dixon &  Joseph Menzin

  2. Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts, USA

    Craig C. Earle

  3. Johnson and Johnson Pharmaceutical Services, Beerse, Belgium

    Renilt Van Gool

Authors
  1. Kathleen Lang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Craig C. Earle
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Talia Foster
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Deirdre Dixon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Renilt Van Gool
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Joseph Menzin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Joseph Menzin.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lang, K., Earle, C.C., Foster, T. et al. Trends in the Treatment of Acute Myeloid Leukaemia in the Elderly. Drugs Aging 22, 943–955 (2005). https://doi.org/10.2165/00002512-200522110-00004

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.2165/00002512-200522110-00004

Keywords

Search

Navigation