2023
Gilteritinib in Combination With Induction and Consolidation Chemotherapy and as Maintenance Therapy: A Phase IB Study in Patients With Newly Diagnosed AML
Pratz K, Cherry M, Altman J, Cooper B, Podoltsev N, Cruz J, Lin T, Schiller G, Jurcic J, Asch A, Wu R, Hill J, Gill S, James A, Rich E, Hasabou N, Perl A, Levis M. Gilteritinib in Combination With Induction and Consolidation Chemotherapy and as Maintenance Therapy: A Phase IB Study in Patients With Newly Diagnosed AML. Journal Of Clinical Oncology 2023, 41: 4236-4246. PMID: 37379495, DOI: 10.1200/jco.22.02721.Peer-Reviewed Original ResearchConceptsPhase Ib studyMaintenance therapyConsolidation chemotherapyDose escalationFLT3 inhibitorsIb studyHigh-dose cytarabine consolidationMedian overall survival timeSingle-agent maintenance therapyComplete response rateHigher trough levelsOverall survival timeCytarabine consolidationChemotherapy regimenDose expansionAdult patientsIntensive inductionTrough levelsCount recoveryMedian timeRandomized trialsInduction cyclesSurvival timeDay 1Response rate
2020
Maintenance therapy for acute myeloid leukemia: sustaining the pursuit for sustained remission.
Shallis RM, Podoltsev NA. Maintenance therapy for acute myeloid leukemia: sustaining the pursuit for sustained remission. Current Opinion In Hematology 2020, 28: 110-121. PMID: 33394722, DOI: 10.1097/moh.0000000000000637.Peer-Reviewed Reviews, Practice Guidelines, Standards, and Consensus StatementsMeSH KeywordsAntineoplastic AgentsAntineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsBiomarkers, TumorClinical Decision-MakingCombined Modality TherapyDisease ManagementDisease SusceptibilityHematopoietic Stem Cell TransplantationHumansLeukemia, Myeloid, AcuteMaintenance ChemotherapyRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicRemission InductionTreatment OutcomeConceptsAcute myeloid leukemiaMaintenance therapyMeasurable residual diseaseMyeloid leukemiaOral hypomethylating agentPost-transplant settingImmune checkpoint inhibitorsPlacebo-controlled trialHigh-risk diseaseAML patient populationRecent positive findingsMRD statusSustained remissionCheckpoint inhibitorsAML patientsRandomized trialsResidual diseasePatient populationHypomethylating agentMRD techniquesTherapyPositive findingsPatientsBcl-2Remission
2016
Comparative clinical effectiveness of azacitidine versus decitabine in older patients with myelodysplastic syndromes
Zeidan AM, Davidoff AJ, Long JB, Hu X, Wang R, Ma X, Gross CP, Abel GA, Huntington SF, Podoltsev NA, Hajime U, Prebet T, Gore SD. Comparative clinical effectiveness of azacitidine versus decitabine in older patients with myelodysplastic syndromes. British Journal Of Haematology 2016, 175: 829-840. PMID: 27650975, DOI: 10.1111/bjh.14305.Peer-Reviewed Original ResearchConceptsMyelodysplastic syndromeRAEB patientsMedian survivalClinical trialsMultivariate Cox proportional hazards modelCox proportional hazards modelKaplan-Meier methodPopulation-based survivalSignificant survival differenceComparative clinical effectivenessProportional hazards modelAgent azacitidineHMA initiationExcess blastsOlder patientsRandomized trialsHistological subtypesRefractory anemiaClinical effectivenessSurvival differencesSubset analysisSurvival advantageHazards modelPatientsDecitabine