Key Points• Azacitidine increased median overall survival by 3.8 months vs current commonly used AML treatments (10.4 vs 6.5 months; P 5 .1009).• Azacitidine safety in patients age $65 years with AML (.30% blasts) was consistent with its known safety profile in other trials.This multicenter, randomized, open-label, phase 3 trial evaluated azacitidine efficacy and safety vs conventional care regimens (CCRs) in 488 patients age ‡65 years with newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia (AML) with >30% bone marrow blasts. Before randomization, a CCR (standard induction chemotherapy, low-dose ara-c, or supportive care only) was preselected for each patient. Patients then were assigned 1:1 to azacitidine (n 5 241) or CCR (n 5 247). Patients assigned to CCR received their preselected treatment. Median overall survival (OS) was increased with azacitidine vs CCR: 10.4 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 8.0-12.7 months) vs 6.5 months (95% CI, 5.0-8.6 months), respectively (hazard ratio [HR] was 0.85; 95% CI, 0.69-1.03; stratified log-rank P 5 .1009). One-year survival rates with azacitidine and CCR were 46.5% and 34.2%, respectively (difference, 12.3%; 95% CI, 3.5%-21.0%). A prespecified analysis censoring patients who received AML treatment after discontinuing study drug showed median OS with azacitidine vs CCR was 12.1 months (95% CI, 9.2-14.2 months) vs 6.9 months (95% CI, 5.1-9.6 months; HR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.60-0.96; stratified log-rank P 5 .0190). Univariate analysis showed favorable trends for azacitidine compared with CCR across all subgroups defined by baseline demographic and disease features. Adverse events were consistent with the well-established safety profile of azacitidine. Azacitidine may be an important treatment option for this difficult-to-treat AML population. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT01074047. (Blood. 2015;126(3):291-299)

The multicenter retrospective study conducted in 38 centers from 20 countries including 172 adult patients with CNS MM aimed to describe the clinical and pathological characteristics and outcomes of patients with multiple myeloma (MM) involving the central nervous system (CNS). Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to identify prognostic factors for survival. The median time from MM diagnosis to CNS MM diagnosis was 3 years. Thirty-eight patients (22%) were diagnosed with CNS involvement at the time of initial MM diagnosis and 134 (78%) at relapse/progression. Upon diagnosis of CNS MM, 97% patients received initial therapy for CNS disease, of which 76% received systemic therapy, 36% radiotherapy and 32% intrathecal therapy. After a median follow-up of 3.5 years, the median overall survival (OS) from the onset of CNS involvement for the entire group was 7 months. Untreated and treated patients had median OS of 2 and 8 months, respectively (p<0.001). At least one previous line of therapy for MM before the diagnosis of CNS disease and >1 cytogenetic abnormality detected by FISH were independently associated with worse OS. The median OS for patients with 0, 1 and 2 of these risk factors were 25 months, 5.5 months and 2 months, respectively (p<0.001). Neurological manifestations, not considered chemotherapy-related, observed at any time after initial diagnosis of MM should raise a suspicion of CNS involvement. Although prognosis is generally poor, the survival of previously untreated patients and patients with favorable cytogenetic profile might be prolonged due to systemic treatment and/or radiotherapy.

Iron deficiency (ID) is frequent in heart failure (HF), linked with exercise intolerance and poor prognosis. Intravenous iron repletion improves clinical status in HF patients with left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≤45%. However, uncertainty exists about the accuracy of serum biomarkers in diagnosing ID. The aims of this study were (i) to identify the iron biomarker with the greatest accuracy for the diagnosis of ID in bone marrow in patients with ischaemic HF, and (ii) to establish the prevalence of ID using this biomarker and its prognostic value in HF patients.

BackgroundAcute myeloid leukemia (AML) is a heterogeneous neoplasm of the bone marrow with poor prognosis. In clinical practice new prognostic factors are still needed. MicroRNAs (miRs), small endogenous noncoding RNAs, play an essential role in the development and progression of acute leukemia. The aim of the study was to evaluate miR-204 expression in patients with AML at diagnosis and after induction chemotherapy, in comparison to healthy controls. We also investigated, if miR-204 expression correlates with clinical features of AML patients.MethodsmiR-204 expression has been analyzed using RT-PCR in 95 bone marrow specimens from newly diagnosed AML patients in comparison to 20 healthy subject.ResultsWe showed down-regulated miR-204 expression in AML patients, which was associated with shorter patients’ survival. Higher expression of miR-204 in patients after induction therapy was correlated with complete remission achieving.ConclusionsWe showed low miR-204 expression in AML and found it to be an independent prognostic factor in this patient population.

BackgroundCompared with World Health Organization-defined acute myeloid leukaemia (AML) not otherwise specified, patients with AML with myelodysplasia-related changes (AML-MRC) are generally older and more likely to have poor-risk cytogenetics, leading to poor response and prognosis. More than one-half of all older (≥65 years) patients in the phase 3 AZA-AML-001 trial had newly diagnosed AML-MRC.MethodsWe compared clinical outcomes for patients with AML-MRC treated with azacitidine or conventional care regimens (CCR; induction chemotherapy, low-dose cytarabine, or supportive care only) overall and within patient subgroups defined by cytogenetic risk (intermediate or poor) and age (65–74 years or ≥75 years). The same analyses were used to compare azacitidine with low-dose cytarabine in patients who had been preselected to low-dose cytarabine before they were randomized to receive azacitidine or CCR (ie, low-dose cytarabine).ResultsMedian overall survival was significantly prolonged with azacitidine (n = 129) versus CCR (n = 133): 8.9 versus 4.9 months (hazard ratio 0.74, [95%CI 0.57, 0.97]). Among patients with intermediate-risk cytogenetics, median overall survival with azacitidine was 16.4 months, and with CCR was 8.9 months (hazard ratio 0.73 [95%CI 0.48, 1.10]). Median overall survival was significantly improved for patients ages 65–74 years treated with azacitidine compared with those who received CCR (14.2 versus 7.3 months, respectively; hazard ratio 0.64 [95%CI 0.42, 0.97]). Within the subgroup of patients preselected to low-dose cytarabine before randomization, median overall survival with azacitidine was 9.5 months versus 4.6 months with low-dose cytarabine (hazard ratio 0.77 [95%CI 0.55, 1.09]). Within the low-dose cytarabine preselection group, patients with intermediate-risk cytogenetics who received azacitidine had a median overall survival of 14.1 months versus 6.4 months with low-dose cytarabine, and patients aged 65–74 years had median survival of 14.9 months versus 5.2 months, respectively. Overall response rates were similar with azacitidine and CCR (24.8% and 17.3%, respectively), but higher with azacitidine versus low-dose cytarabine (27.2% and 13.9%). Adverse events were generally comparable between the treatment arms.ConclusionsAzacitidine may be the preferred treatment for patients with AML-MRC who are not candidates for intensive chemotherapy, particularly patients ages 65–74 years and those with intermediate-risk cytogenetics.Trial registrationThis study was registered at clinicalTrials.gov on February 16, 2010 (NCT01074047).

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract