论文部分内容阅读
目的:比较地西他滨(DAC)单药与HAG方案单用及二者联合应用治疗老年急性髓系白血病(AML)的临床疗效及安全性。方法:回顾性分析74例年龄≥60岁老年AML患者以DAC和HAG方案为基础的化疗疗效,其中单药DAC 20mg/m2×5d组23例、HAG方案组27例、两者联合组24例,比较3组患者完全缓解(CR)率、总反应率(ORR)、总生存(OS)及不良反应率。结果:DAC单药组、HAG组、DAC+HAG组1个疗程的CR率分别为21.7%、48.1%和58.3%,后2组1个疗程CR率显著高于DAC单药组(P=0.033);3组的2个疗程CR率和ORR差异无统计学意义。3组的早期死亡率、复发率、总的死亡率、OS时间、2年OS率均差异无统计学意义。3组患者的耐受性均良好。结论:DAC单药、HAG方案及DAC联合HAG方案对老年AML均有较好的疗效,但DAC联合HAG方案CR率最高;HAG组与DAC+HAG组的1个疗程CR率显著高于DAC单药组,但总的CR率、ORR差异无统计学意义。
Objective: To compare the clinical efficacy and safety of decitabine (DAC) monotherapy with HAG regimen alone and in combination for the treatment of senile acute myeloid leukemia (AML). Methods: A retrospective analysis of 74 patients with AML aged ≥ 60 years with DAC and HAG regimen based on the efficacy of chemotherapy, including single-drug DAC 20mg / m2 × 5d group 23 cases, HAG group 27 cases, the combination of 24 cases The complete remission (CR) rate, total response rate (ORR), overall survival (OS) and adverse reaction rate were compared between the three groups. Results: The CR rates in one course of DAC single group, HAG group and DAC + HAG group were 21.7%, 48.1% and 58.3%, respectively. The CR rates of one course of treatment in DAC group were significantly higher than those in DAC single group (P = 0.033 ); 3 groups of 2 courses of CR rate and ORR difference was not statistically significant. There was no significant difference in the early mortality, recurrence, total mortality, OS time and 2-year OS rate among the 3 groups. All three groups were well tolerated. Conclusions: DAC single drug, HAG and DAC combined with HAG have better curative effect on elderly AML, but the CR rate of DAC combined with HAG is the highest. CR rate of one course of HAG and DAC + HAG is significantly higher than that of DAC However, the overall CR rate and ORR showed no significant difference.