CPX-351 (Liposomal Cytarabine and Daunorubicin) versus venetoclax plus hypomethylating agent therapy in newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia: a retrospective comparison involving 600 Mayo Clinic patients.
2/5 보강
PICO 자동 추출 (휴리스틱, conf 2/4)
유사 논문P · Population 대상 환자/모집단
600 patients with newly diagnosed AML treated with CPX-351 (N = 112) or Ven-HMA (N = 488).
I · Intervention 중재 / 시술
추출되지 않음
C · Comparison 대조 / 비교
추출되지 않음
O · Outcome 결과 / 결론
Our findings suggest that Ven-HMA is as effective and less toxic than CPX-351 in newly diagnosed AML, including AML-MR, despite selection of younger, fitter patients for CPX-351.
OpenAlex 토픽 ·
Acute Myeloid Leukemia Research
Retinoids in leukemia and cellular processes
Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia research
The comparative value of liposomal cytarabine/daunorubicin (CPX-351) versus venetoclax plus a hypomethylating agent (Ven-HMA) in the frontline treatment of older adults with primary (de novo) or secon
- 표본수 (n) 112
- p-value p < 0.01
- p-value p = 0.02
APA
Saubia Fathima, Lior Rokach, et al. (2026). CPX-351 (Liposomal Cytarabine and Daunorubicin) versus venetoclax plus hypomethylating agent therapy in newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia: a retrospective comparison involving 600 Mayo Clinic patients.. Blood cancer journal. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41408-026-01495-x
MLA
Saubia Fathima, et al.. "CPX-351 (Liposomal Cytarabine and Daunorubicin) versus venetoclax plus hypomethylating agent therapy in newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia: a retrospective comparison involving 600 Mayo Clinic patients.." Blood cancer journal, 2026.
PMID
41942467 ↗
Abstract 한글 요약
The comparative value of liposomal cytarabine/daunorubicin (CPX-351) versus venetoclax plus a hypomethylating agent (Ven-HMA) in the frontline treatment of older adults with primary (de novo) or secondary acute myeloid leukemia (AML) remains uncertain. In the current study, we retrospectively examined outcomes of 600 patients with newly diagnosed AML treated with CPX-351 (N = 112) or Ven-HMA (N = 488). AML subtypes included de novo (N = 277, 46%), post-myelodysplastic syndrome (post-MDS, N = 114,19%), post-myeloproliferative neoplasm (post-MPN, N = 70, 12%), post-MDS/MPN (N = 36, 6%), and t-AML (N = 103, 17%). Patients receiving CPX-351 were younger (median 65 vs. 73 years; p < 0.01), predominantly female (50% vs. 38%; p = 0.02), more likely to have secondary AML (68% vs. 51%; p < 0.01), and less likely to harbor NPM1 (5% vs. 12%; p = 0.02). Rates of complete response with or without count recovery (CR/CRi) were comparable between CPX-351 and Ven-HMA (55% vs. 60%; p = 0.30), including AML with myelodysplasia-related gene mutations or cytogenetic abnormalities (AML-MR 60% vs. 63%; p = 0.70). Ven-HMA use was associated with fewer infectious complications (62% vs. 83%; p < 0.01) and yielded higher CR/CRi rates in males (60% vs. 45%; p = 0.04), de novo AML (68% vs. 50%; p = 0.03), and in the presence of STAG2 (86% vs. 44%; p = 0.02), or CEBPA (88% vs. 50%; p = 0.03). Overall survival censored for transplant, was similar (median 10 vs. 13 months; p = 0.90), with Ven-HMA being superior in post-MDS AML (median 12 vs. 7 months; p = 0.02) and CPX-351 in the presence of SF3B1 (median not reached vs. 14 months; p < 0.01). Our findings suggest that Ven-HMA is as effective and less toxic than CPX-351 in newly diagnosed AML, including AML-MR, despite selection of younger, fitter patients for CPX-351.