Objective: To compare the therapeutic efficacies of high dose dexamethasone, prednisone and rituximab in combination with dexamethasone for newly diagnosed ITP (Immune Thrombocytopenia, ITP) patients.Methods and results: Relevant publications for this study were obtained by searching PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and CNKI (National Knowledge Infrastructure, CNKI) databases following the PRISMA guidelines. A total of, 15 publications were retrieved that contained sufficient data from 1,362 patients for high quality analysis of this study endpoints. Data analysis was carried out using Stata 11.0 software.The primary outcomes were OR (Overall Response, OR) at 1 month after intervention and SR at 6 and 12 months. The secondary outcomes were AEs and relapse. There were no differences in the OR, while the SR was higher at 6 months (p = 0.001) as well as 12 months (p < 0.001) in the rituximab + dexamethasone group. In addition, the incidences of AEs (p = 0.008) were also higher in the rituximab + dexamethasone group. Dexamethasone was superior to prednisone based on OR (p = 0.006). We found no differences in SR at 6 months between dexamethasone and prednisone but SR at 12 months was higher in the dexamethasone group (p = 0.014). The relapse rate was higher in the high dose dexamethasone group compared to the rituximab + dexamethasone group (p = 0.042).Conclusion: This demonstrated that new treatment options such as Rituximab + dexamethasone, could be a good alternative to traditional therapy in improving long-term response and reducing the rate of relapse. However, further studies are required on the increased risk of AEs associated with Rituximab + dexamethasone.

Objective: To ascertain the efficacy and safety of daunorubicin combined with cytarabine comparing with idarubicin combined with cytarabine as a standard induction therapy for acute Myeloid leukemia by a meta-analysis. Methods: The randomized controlled trials included were retrieved from PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane library. We evaluated and cross-checked the randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing daunorubicin combined with cytarabine (DA) and idarubicin combined with cytarabine (IA) by two reviewers independently according to Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviewers of Interventions. The data of meta-analysis was conducted using Review Manager 5.3 and Stata 12.0 software. Results: A total of 6 studies containing 3140 patients were included. The primary outcomes were complete remission (CR), CR in one course (CR1), CR in two courses (CR2), overall survival (OS), and relapse rate. The secondary outcomes included adverse events and cytogenetic risk in subgroup analyses. IA showed a statistically significant in CR (RR = 1.05; 95%CI = 1.00–1.09, P = .03) and CR1 (RR = 1.11; 95%CI = 1.04–1.18, P = .003), but not in CR2 (RR = 0.97; 95%CI = 0.77–1.24, P = .83), and relapse rate (RR = 1.08; 95%CI = 0.98–1.43, P = .08). In high dose daunorubicin group, OS was significantly improved with IA compared to DA (HR = 0.89, 95%CI = 0.8–1.0, P = .041, I 2 = 0). At grade 3/4 adverse events, the difference between IA and DA was not statistically significant (infection, P = .28; cardiac toxicity, P = .15; bleeding, P = .29). In the subgroup analysis, the genotypes of the IA and DA groups were not statistically significant for comparison of CR between the two groups (P = .07). Conclusion: This meta-analysis showed that IA had a better efficacy in the treatment of acute myeloid leukemia than DA, even with increased doses of DA. The OS of a standard dose of IA patients was longer than that of DA patients. Our research shows that anthracycline dose intensification of daunorubicin is of no clinically relevant benefit in AML patients comparing with a standard dose of IA. When it comes to adverse drug reactions, it is not a significant difference. Therefore, in clinical practice, IA should be the first choice for induction regimen in patients with acute myeloid leukemia.