Current Hematologic Malignancy Reports

, Volume 9, Issue 2, pp 100–108

Frontline Therapy of AML: Should the Older Patient be Treated Differently?

Acute Leukemias (F Ravandi, Section Editor)

Abstract

Optimal treatment of acute myeloid leukemia (AML) in older adults (age ≥60 years) remains largely undefined, in part because of the inadequate response to available therapies, the poor prognosis relative to younger adults, the heterogeneity of the population, and the difficulty in determining who is fit for intensive therapy. In contrast to younger patients, there remains uncertainty about disease biology and molecular prognostic factors in elderly AML. While almost all patients may benefit from treatment, with the exception of reduced intensity allogeneic transplantation, there is little evidence that further intensifying therapy will improve outcomes. In fact, recent studies suggest that de-intensified treatment may in fact be superior and allow access to therapy for more patients. Both the disease and the patient must be approached holistically in order to make the best frontline treatment choice together. It is critical that we support well-designed clinical trials to develop more effective frontline therapies, develop more informative biomarkers, and to better understand who is a candidate for curative treatment.

Keywords

Acute myeloid leukemia Frontline therapy Elderly patients De-intensified treatment 

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as:• Of importance

  1. 1.
    Kayser S, Dohner K, Krauter J, et al. The impact of therapy-related acute myeloid leukemia (AML) on outcome in 2853 adult patients with newly diagnosed AML. Blood. 2011;117(7):2137–45.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Grimwade D, Walker H, Harrison G, et al. The predictive value of hierarchical cytogenetic classification in older adults with acute myeloid leukemia (AML): analysis of 1065 patients entered into the United Kingdom Medical Research Council AML11 trial. Blood. 2001;98(5):1312–20.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Appelbaum FR, Gundacker H, Head DR, et al. Age and acute myeloid leukemia. Blood. 2006;107(9):3481–5.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Giles FJ, Borthakur G, Ravandi F, et al. The haematopoietic cell transplantation comorbidity index score is predictive of early death and survival in patients over 60 years of age receiving induction therapy for acute myeloid leukaemia. Br J Haematol. 2007;136(4):624–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.•
    Kantarjian H, Ravandi F, O’Brien S, et al. Intensive chemotherapy does not benefit most older patients (age 70 years or older) with acute myeloid leukemia. Blood. 2010;116(22):4422–9. This paper defines a group of Eldelry AML patients age >70 years who do not benefit from intensive therapy due to high induction mortality.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Siegel R, Ma J, Zou Z, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2014. CA Cancer J Clin. 2014;64(1):9–29.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Craig BM, Rollison DE, List AF, Cogle CR. Underreporting of myeloid malignancies by United States cancer registries. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2012;21(3):474–81.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Linet MS, Devesa SS, Morgan GJ. The leukemias. In: Schottenfeld D, Fraumeni JF, editors. Cancer Epidemiology and Prevention. Thirdth ed. New York, NY: Oxford University Press; 2006.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ross JA, Blair CK, Cerhan JR, et al. Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug and acetaminophen use and risk of adult myeloid leukemia. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2011;20(8):1741–50.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Weiss JR, Baker JA, Baer MR, Menezes RJ, Nowell S, Moysich KB. Opposing effects of aspirin and acetaminophen use on risk of adult acute leukemia. Leuk Res. 2006;30(2):164–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ross JA, Parker E, Blair CK, Cerhan JR, Folsom AR. Body mass index and risk of leukemia in older women. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2004;13(11 Pt 1):1810–3.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Larsson SC, Wolk A. Overweight and obesity and incidence of leukemia: a meta-analysis of cohort studies. Int J Cancer. 2008;122(6):1418–21.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Blair C, RM, Nguyen P, Cerhan J, Soler J, Ross J. Obesity at different times of life and the risk of AML. Proc 100th Annual Mtg of Am Assoc Cancer Res. 2009;82a.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Moorman AV, Roman E, Cartwright RA, Morgan GJ. Smoking and the risk of acute myeloid leukaemia in cytogenetic subgroups. Br J Cancer. 2002;86(1):60–2.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lichtman MA. Cigarette smoking, cytogenetic abnormalities, and acute myelogenous leukemia. Leukemia. 2007;21(6):1137–40.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Johnson KJ, Blair CM, Fink JM, et al. Medical conditions and risk of adult myeloid leukemia. Cancer Causes Control. 2012;23(7):1083–9.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hemminki K, Li X, Sundquist J, Sundquist K. Cancer risks in ulcerative colitis patients. Int J Cancer. 2008;123(6):1417–21.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Polychronakis I, Dounias G, Makropoulos V, Riza E, Linos A. Work-related leukemia: a systematic review. J Occup Med Toxicol. 2013;8(1):14.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Saberi Hosnijeh FCY, Peeters P, Romieu I, Xun W, Riboli E, Raaschou-Nielsen O, et al. Occupation and risk of lymphoid and myeloid leukaemia in the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC). Occup Environ Med. 2013;70(7):464–70.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Sinner PJ, Cerhan JR, Folsom AR, Ross JA. Positive association of farm or rural residence with acute myeloid leukemia incidence in a cohort of older women. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2005;14(10):2446–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Lang K, Earle CC, Foster T, Dixon D, Van Gool R, Menzin J. Trends in the treatment of acute myeloid leukaemia in the elderly. Drugs Aging. 2005;22(11):943–55.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Cornely OA, Maertens J, Winston DJ, et al. Posaconazole vs. fluconazole or itraconazole prophylaxis in patients with neutropenia. N Engl J Med. 2007;356(4):348–59.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.•
    McClune BL, Weisdorf DJ, Pedersen TL, et al. Effect of age on outcome of reduced-intensity hematopoietic cell transplantation for older patients with acute myeloid leukemia in first complete remission or with myelodysplastic syndrome. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28(11):1878–87. Demonstrates that increasing age does not predict worse outcome in patients selected for non-myeloablative allogeneic transplantation from an unrelated donor.Google Scholar
  24. 24.•
    Burnett AK, Milligan D, Prentice AG, et al. A comparison of low-dose cytarabine and hydroxyurea with or without all-trans retinoic acid for acute myeloid leukemia and high-risk myelodysplastic syndrome in patients not considered fit for intensive treatment. Cancer. 2007;109(6):1114–24. This was the first study to show a clear survival advantage of low intensity therapy with LDAC for intermediate risk AML over supportive care.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.•
    Fenaux P, Mufti GJ, Hellstrom-Lindberg E, et al. Azacitidine prolongs overall survival compared with conventional care regimens in elderly patients with low bone marrow blast count acute myeloid leukemia. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28(4):562–9. Important subgroup analysis of the AZA-001 study showing a survival advantage of azacitidine over conventional care regimens in pateints with 20–30 % blasts. PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Kornblith AB, Herndon 2nd JE, Silverman LR, et al. Impact of azacytidine on the quality of life of patients with myelodysplastic syndrome treated in a randomized phase III trial: a Cancer and Leukemia Group B study. J Clin Oncol. 2002;20(10):2441–52.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Gardin C, Chevret S, Pautas C, et al. Superior long-term outcome with idarubicin compared with high-dose daunorubicin in patients with acute myeloid leukemia age 50 years and older. J Clin Oncol. 2013;31(3):321–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Tilly H, Castaigne S, Bordessoule D, et al. Low-dose cytarabine versus intensive chemotherapy in the treatment of acute nonlymphocytic leukemia in the elderly. J Clin Oncol. 1990;8(2):272–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Lowenberg B, Zittoun R, Kerkhofs H, et al. On the value of intensive remission-induction chemotherapy in elderly patients of 65+ years with acute myeloid leukemia: a randomized phase III study of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Leukemia Group. J Clin Oncol. 1989;7(9):1268–74.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.•
    Juliusson G, Antunovic P, Derolf A, et al. Age and acute myeloid leukemia: real world data on decision to treat and outcomes from the Swedish Acute Leukemia Registry. Blood. 2009;113(18):4179–87. This population-based registry demonstrated a survival advantage for patients age 70–79 years treated with the intent of achieving a remission (in Sweden).Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Walter RB, Kantarjian HM, Huang X, et al. Effect of complete remission and responses less than complete remission on survival in acute myeloid leukemia: a combined Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group, Southwest Oncology Group, and M. D. Anderson Cancer Center Study. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28(10):1766–71.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Denzlinger C, Bowen D, Benz D, Gelly K, Brugger W, Kanz L. Low-dose melphalan induces favourable responses in elderly patients with high-risk myelodysplastic syndromes or secondary acute myeloid leukaemia. Br J Haematol. 2000;108(1):93–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Lowenberg B, Suciu S, Archimbaud E, et al. Mitoxantrone versus daunorubicin in induction-consolidation chemotherapy–the value of low-dose cytarabine for maintenance of remission, and an assessment of prognostic factors in acute myeloid leukemia in the elderly: final report. European Organization for the Research and Treatment of Cancer and the Dutch-Belgian Hemato-Oncology Cooperative Hovon Group. J Clin Oncol. 1998;16(3):872–81.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Wheatley K, Brookes CL, Howman AJ, et al. Prognostic factor analysis of the survival of elderly patients with AML in the MRC AML11 and LRF AML14 trials. Br J Haematol. 2009;145(5):598–605.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Krug U, Rollig C, Koschmieder A, et al. Complete remission and early death after intensive chemotherapy in patients aged 60 years or older with acute myeloid leukaemia: a web-based application for prediction of outcomes. Lancet. 2010;376(9757):2000–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Klepin HD, Geiger AM, Tooze JA, et al. Geriatric assessment predicts survival for older adults receiving induction chemotherapy for acute myelogenous leukemia. Blood. 2013;121(21):4287–94.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Sherman AE, Motyckova G, Fega KR, et al. Geriatric assessment in older patients with acute myeloid leukemia: a retrospective study of associated treatment and outcomes. Leuk Res. 2013;37(9):998–1003.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Bertoli S, Berard E, Huguet F, et al. Time from diagnosis to intensive chemotherapy initiation does not adversely impact the outcome of patients with acute myeloid leukemia. Blood. 2013;121(14):2618–26.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.•
    Patel JP, Gonen M, Figueroa ME, et al. Prognostic relevance of integrated genetic profiling in acute myeloid leukemia. N Engl J Med. 2012;366(12):1079–89. ECOG study showed the prevalance and clinical impact of occult mutations io younger AML patients receiving intensive treatment.Google Scholar
  40. 40.•
    Genomic and epigenomic landscapes of adult de novo acute myeloid leukemia. N Engl J Med. 2013;368(22):2059–74. Landmark paper from The Cancer Genome Atlas establishing incidence of baseline genetic lesions in AML. Its direct relevance to the large populations of Elderly AML patients remains a question.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Stirewalt DL, Kopecky KJ, Meshinchi S, et al. FLT3, RAS, and TP53 mutations in elderly patients with acute myeloid leukemia. Blood. 2001;97(11):3589–95.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Schlenk RF, Dohner K, Kneba M, et al. Gene mutations and response to treatment with all-trans retinoic acid in elderly patients with acute myeloid leukemia. Results from the AMLSG Trial AML HD98B. Haematologica. 2009;94(1):54–60.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Rollig C, Bornhauser M, Thiede C, et al. Long-term prognosis of acute myeloid leukemia according to the new genetic risk classification of the European LeukemiaNet recommendations: evaluation of the proposed reporting system. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29(20):2758–65.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Ferrara F, Criscuolo C, Riccardi C, et al. FLT3 mutations have no prognostic impact in elderly patients with acute myeloid leukemia and normal karyotype. Am J Hematol. 2009;84(8):532–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Su L, Li X, Gao SJ, et al. Cytogenetic and genetic mutation features of de novo acute myeloid leukemia in elderly chinese patients. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2014;15(2):895–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Whitman SP, Maharry K, Radmacher MD, et al. FLT3 internal tandem duplication associates with adverse outcome and gene- and microRNA-expression signatures in patients 60 years of age or older with primary cytogenetically normal acute myeloid leukemia: a Cancer and Leukemia Group B study. Blood. 2010;116(18):3622–6.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Becker H, Marcucci G, Maharry K, et al. Favorable prognostic impact of NPM1 mutations in older patients with cytogenetically normal de novo acute myeloid leukemia and associated gene- and microRNA-expression signatures: a Cancer and Leukemia Group B study. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28(4):596–604.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Nazha A, Bueso-Ramos C, Estey E, et al. The addition of all-trans retinoic acid to chemotherapy may not improve the outcome of patient with NPM1 mutated acute myeloid leukemia. Front Oncol. 2013;3:218.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Marcucci G, Metzeler KH, Schwind S, et al. Age-related prognostic impact of different types of DNMT3A mutations in adults with primary cytogenetically normal acute myeloid leukemia. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30(7):742–50.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Marcucci G, Yan P, Maharry K, et al. Epigenetics meets genetics in acute myeloid leukemia: clinical impact of a novel seven-gene score. J Clin Oncol. 2014;32(6):548–56.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Rowe JM, Neuberg D, Friedenberg W, et al. A phase 3 study of three induction regimens and of priming with GM-CSF in older adults with acute myeloid leukemia: a trial by the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group. Blood. 2004;103(2):479–85.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Goldstone AH, Burnett AK, Wheatley K, Smith AG, Hutchinson RM, Clark RE. 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.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Anderson JE, Kopecky KJ, Willman CL, et al. Outcome after induction chemotherapy for older patients with acute myeloid leukemia is not improved with mitoxantrone and etoposide compared to cytarabine and daunorubicin: a Southwest Oncology Group study. Blood. 2002;100(12):3869–76.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Fernandez HF, Sun Z, Yao X, et al. Anthracycline dose intensification in acute myeloid leukemia. N Engl J Med. 2009;361(13):1249–59.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Lowenberg B, Ossenkoppele GJ, van Putten W, et al. High-dose daunorubicin in older patients with acute myeloid leukemia. N Engl J Med. 2009;361(13):1235–48.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Attar EC, Johnson JL, Amrein PC, et al. Bortezomib added to daunorubicin and cytarabine during induction therapy and to intermediate-dose cytarabine for consolidation in patients with previously untreated acute myeloid leukemia age 60 to 75 years: CALGB (Alliance) study 10502. J Clin Oncol. 2013;31(7):923–9.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Kim I, Koh Y, Yoon SS, et al. Fludarabine, cytarabine, and attenuated-dose idarubicin (m-FLAI) combination therapy for elderly acute myeloid leukemia patients. Am J Hematol. 2013;88(1):10–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Kantarjian H, O’Brien S, Cortes J, et al. Results of intensive chemotherapy in 998 patients age 65 years or older with acute myeloid leukemia or high-risk myelodysplastic syndrome: predictive prognostic models for outcome. Cancer. 2006;106(5):1090–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Farag SS, Archer KJ, Mrozek K, et al. Pretreatment cytogenetics add to other prognostic factors predicting complete remission and long-term outcome in patients 60 years of age or older with acute myeloid leukemia: results from Cancer and Leukemia Group B 8461. Blood. 2006;108(1):63–73.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Burnett AK, Russell NH, Kell J, et al. European development of clofarabine as treatment for older patients with acute myeloid leukemia considered unsuitable for intensive chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28(14):2389–95.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Kantarjian HM, Erba HP, Claxton D, et al. Phase II study of clofarabine monotherapy in previously untreated older adults with acute myeloid leukemia and unfavorable prognostic factors. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28(4):549–55.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Burnett AK, Russell NH, Hills RK, et al. Addition of gemtuzumab ozogamicin to induction chemotherapy improves survival in older patients with acute myeloid leukemia. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30(32):3924–31.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Castaigne S, Pautas C, Terre C, et al. Effect of gemtuzumab ozogamicin on survival of adult patients with de-novo acute myeloid leukaemia (ALFA-0701): a randomised, open-label, phase 3 study. Lancet. 2012;379(9825):1508–16.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Amadori S, Suciu S, Stasi R, et al. Sequential combination of gemtuzumab ozogamicin and standard chemotherapy in older patients with newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia: results of a randomized phase III trial by the EORTC and GIMEMA consortium (AML-17). J Clin Oncol. 2013;31(35):4424–30.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Thépot S, Itzykson R, Seegers V, et al. Azacitidine in untreated acute myeloid leukemia: a report on 149 patients. Am J Hematol. 2014;89(4):410–6.Google Scholar
  66. 66.
    van der Helm LH, Veeger NJ, Kooy M, et al. Azacitidine results in comparable outcome in newly diagnosed AML patients with more or less than 30 % bone marrow blasts. Leuk Res. 2013;37(8):877–82.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Blum W, Garzon R, Klisovic RB, et al. Clinical response and miR-29b predictive significance in older AML patients treated with a 10-day schedule of decitabine. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2010;107(16):7473–8.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Cashen AF, Schiller GJ, O’Donnell MR, DiPersio JF. Multicenter, phase II study of decitabine for the first-line treatment of older patients with acute myeloid leukemia. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28(4):556–61.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Kantarjian HM, Thomas XG, Dmoszynska A, et al. Multicenter, randomized, open-label, phase III trial of decitabine versus patient choice, with physician advice, of either supportive care or low-dose cytarabine for the treatment of older patients with newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30(21):2670–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Craddock C, Quek L, Goardon N, et al. Azacitidine fails to eradicate leukemic stem/progenitor cell populations in patients with acute myeloid leukemia and myelodysplasia. Leukemia. 2013;27(5):1028–36.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Burnett AK, Hills RK, Hunter AE, et al. The addition of gemtuzumab ozogamicin to low-dose Ara-C improves remission rate but does not significantly prolong survival in older patients with acute myeloid leukaemia: results from the LRF AML14 and NCRI AML16 pick-a-winner comparison. Leukemia. 2013;27(1):75–81.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Burnett AK, Russell NH, Culligan D, et al. The addition of the farnesyl transferase inhibitor, tipifarnib, to low dose cytarabine does not improve outcome for older patients with AML. Br J Haematol. 2012;158(4):519–22.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Burnett AK, Hills RK, Hunter A, et al. The addition of arsenic trioxide to low-dose Ara-C in older patients with AML does not improve outcome. Leukemia. 2011;25(7):1122–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Macdonald DA, Assouline SE, Brandwein J, et al. A phase I/II study of sorafenib in combination with low dose cytarabine in elderly patients with acute myeloid leukemia or high-risk myelodysplastic syndrome from the National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group: trial IND.186. Leuk Lymphoma. 2013;54(4):760–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Ravandi F, Alattar ML, Grunwald MR, et al. Phase 2 study of azacytidine plus sorafenib in patients with acute myeloid leukemia and FLT-3 internal tandem duplication mutation. Blood. 2013;121(23):4655–62.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Cortes JE, Kantarjian H, Foran JM, et al. Phase I study of quizartinib administered daily to patients with relapsed or refractory acute myeloid leukemia irrespective of FMS-like tyrosine kinase 3-internal tandem duplication status. J Clin Oncol. 2013;31(29):3681–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Quintas-Cardama A, Ravandi F, Liu-Dumlao T, et al. Epigenetic therapy is associated with similar survival compared with intensive chemotherapy in older patients with newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia. Blood. 2012;120(24):4840–5.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.•
    Burnett AK, Russell NH, Hunter AE, et al. Clofarabine doubles the response rate in older patients with acute myeloid leukemia but does not improve survival. Blood. 2013;122(8):1384–94. Despite increasing the CR rate, clofarabine did not increase survival compared with LDAC, suggesting that CR is not an adequate surrogate endopint, and that we have still not optimally defined appropriate patients for lower versus higher intensity traement.Google Scholar
  79. 79.
    Hahn T, McCarthy Jr PL, Hassebroek A, et al. Significant improvement in survival after allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation during a period of significantly increased use, older recipient age, and use of unrelated donors. J Clin Oncol. 2013;31(19):2437–49.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Mawad R, Gooley TA, Sandhu V, et al. Frequency of allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation among patients with high- or intermediate-risk acute myeloid leukemia in first complete remission. J Clin Oncol. 2013;31(31):3883–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. 81.
    Devine SM, Owza K, Blum W, et al. A Phase II Study of Allogeneic Transplantation for Older Patients with AML in First Complete Remission Using a Reduced Intensity Conditioning Regimen: Results From CALGB 100103/BMT CTN 0502. Blood (Proc ASH). 2012;120:230a.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Mayo Clinic Cancer Center, Division of Hematology & Medical OncologyMayo Clinic FloridaJacksonvilleUSA

Personalised recommendations