Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Systematic review and meta-analysis of standard-dose imatinib vs. high-dose imatinib and second generation tyrosine kinase inhibitors for chronic myeloid leukemia

  • Original Article – Clinical Oncology
  • Published:
Journal of Cancer Research and Clinical Oncology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Most randomized clinical trials evaluating second generation tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) for the first-line treatment of Chronic Myeloid Leukemia used as comparator the ‘standard’ dose of 400 mg imatinib daily. Several studies showed higher rates of major molecular remission (MMR) at 12 months with 800 mg compared to 400 mg, suggesting that high-dose imatinib may be the appropriate comparator rather than 400 mg.

Methods

We systematically reviewed randomized trials comparing the two dosages, calculated a common estimator and compared the result to a common estimator of trials evaluating a second generation TKI in comparison with 400 mg imatinib daily.

Results

We identified three trials comparing 400–800 mg imatinib resulting in a common relative risk of 1.30 (1.13–1.49) and indicating a significantly higher rate of MMR in patients treated with 800 mg imatinib (p = 0.0003). We identified five trials comparing 400 mg imatinib daily to a second generation TKI. The common relative risk for MMR at 12 months was 1.69 (1.50–1.90, p < 0.0001). Differences in the prognostic profiles precluded a direct comparison of the common efficacy estimates.

Conclusions

We conclude that imatinib was probably not licensed at the optimal dose initially. We suggest that in the future, new TKIs are compared with a higher dose of imatinib. In addition, high-dose imatinib should be considered more often for routine clinical decisions based on the characteristics of the individual patient.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

Download references

Author contributions

VH and JH designed the work. VH extracted the data and performed the statistical analysis. All authors interpreted the results. VH wrote the manuscript draft; all authors participated in the revision. All authors approved the final version.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Verena S. Hoffmann.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

VH received research funding form Novartis Oncology Europe and received honoraria from BMS. JH received research funding form Novartis Oncology Europe; MD researched research funding from BMS, Novartis, Celgene, Genzyme, and Gilead, and is on the advisory board and consultant for BMS, ARIAD, Novartis, Incyte, and Pfizer. JC has received research support from and has acted as a consultant for Ariad, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Novartis, and Pfizer; has received research support from Teva; and has been paid for travel expenses by Bristol-Myers Squibb, Novartis, and Pfizer. MB served on the speakers’ bureau of and received honoraria from ARIAD, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Novartis and Pfizer and acted as a consultant for ARIAD and Novartis. RH received research support from Novartis, consultation fees from BMS.

Ethical approval

All studies that were included in this systematic review stated to be in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed consent

The studies included in this systematic review stated that informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the respective studies.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 15 KB)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hoffmann, V.S., Hasford, J., Deininger, M. et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of standard-dose imatinib vs. high-dose imatinib and second generation tyrosine kinase inhibitors for chronic myeloid leukemia. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 143, 1311–1318 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00432-017-2385-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00432-017-2385-7

Keywords

Navigation