Cited by 120Acute Myeloid Leukemia ResearchRetinoids in leukemia and cellular processesHematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation

Treatment with a 5-day versus a 10-day schedule of decitabine in older patients with newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukaemia: a randomised phase 2 trial

Open access
Short, Nicholas J, Kantarjian, Hagop M, Loghavi, Sanam, Huang, Xuelin, Qiao, Wei, Borthakur, Gautam, Kadia, Tapan M, Daver, Naval +19 more·2019·The Lancet Haematology

Abstract

Background Hypomethylating agents, such as decitabine, are the standard of care for older patients with newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukaemia. Single-arm studies have suggested that a 10-day schedule of decitabine cycles leads to better outcomes than the usual 5-day schedule. We compared the efficacy and safety of these two schedules.Methods Eligible patients were aged 60 years or older with acute myeloid leukaemia but unsuitable for intensive chemotherapy (or <60 years if unsuitable for intensive chemotherapy with an anthracycline plus cytarabine). The first 40 patients were allocated equally to the two treatment groups by computer-generated block randomisation (block size 40), after which a response-adaptive randomisation algorithm used all previous patients' treatment and response data to decide the allocation of each following patient favouring the group with superior response. Patients were assigned to receive 20 mg/m 2 decitabine intravenously for 5 or 10 consecutive days as induction therapy, every 4-8 weeks for up to three cycles. Responding patients received decitabine as consolidation therapy on a 5-day schedule for up to 24 cycles. We assessed a composite primary endpoint of complete remission, complete remission with incomplete platelet recovery (CRp), and complete remission with incomplete haematological recovery (CRi) achieved at any time and assessed by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01786343.Findings Between Feb 28, 2013, and April 12, 2018, 71 patients were enrolled. 28 received decitabine for 5 days and 43 for 10 days, and all were assessable for efficacy and safety. The primary endpoint was achieved in similar proportions of patients in the two treatment groups (12 [43%] of 28 in the 5-day schedule group, 95% credible interval 26-60, and 17 [40%] of 43 in the 10-day schedule group, 26-54, p=0·78; difference 3%, -21 to 27). Total follow-up was 38·2 months, during which the median duration of overall survival was 5·5 months (IQR 2·1-11·7) in the 5-day group and 6·0 months (1·9-11·7) in the 10-day group. 1-year overall survival was 25% in both groups. Complete remission, CRp, CRi, and overall survival did not differ between groups when stratified by cytogenetics, de-novo versus secondary or therapy-related acute myeloid leukaemia, or TP53 mut status. The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were neutropenic fever (seven patients [25%] in the 5-day group and 14 [33%] in the 10-day group) and infection (five [18%] and 16 [37%], respectively). One patient (4%) died from sepsis in the context of neutropenic fever, infection, and haemorrhage in the 5-day group, and in the 10-day group six patients (14%) died from infection. Early mortality was similar in the two groups.Interpretation In older patients with newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukaemia, efficacy and safety did not differ by the 5-day or the 10-day decitabine schedule.Funding University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center and National Cancer Institute Specialized Programs of Research Excellence.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s2352-3026(18)30182-0

Cites

37 of 37 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Increased HMA duration, such as 10-day decitabine, initially suggested improved outcomes in a limited number of patients with TP53-mutant myeloid malignancies, but there was no improvement in CR or OS in a prospective randomized study comparing 10-day versus 5-day decitabine in AML.

    “Increased HMA duration, such as 10-day decitabine, initially suggested improved outcomes in a limited number of patients with TP53-mutant myeloid malignancies (patients with MDS; n = 9),18 but there was no improvement in CR or OS in a prospective randomized study comparing 10-day versus 5-day decitabine in AML, and this treatment schedule has not been widely adopted.19,20”

    From Eprenetapopt (APR-246) and Azacitidine in <i>TP53</i> -Mutant Myelodysplastic Syndromes (2021) · cites this paper as [19]

    Split into 2 atoms — 1 confirmed, 1 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Short, N. J., Kantarjian, H. M., Loghavi, S., Huang, X., Qiao, W., Borthakur, G., Kadia, T. M., Daver, N., Ohanian, M., Dinardo, C. D., Estrov, Z., Kanagal-Shamanna, R., Maiti, A., Benton, C. B., Bose, P., Alvarado, Y., Jabbour, E., Kornblau, S. M., Pemmaraju, N., Jain, N., Gasior, Y., Richie, M. A., Pierce, S., Cortes, J., Konopleva, M., Garcia-Manero, G., & Ravandi, F.
Affiliations
The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center (US)
Corresponding author
Ravandi, Farhad
Venue
The Lancet Haematology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2019-01
Volume
6
Issue
1
Pages
e29-e37
ISSN
2352-3026 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2905325447
Cited by
120
References
37
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 20 · 2021: 19 · 2020: 22 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 1
FWCI
9.32
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The Lancet Haematology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Cancer Institute (P30CA016672, K12CA088084)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Hematology › Acute Myeloid Leukemia Research
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Retinoids in leukemia and cellular processes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Hematology › Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation
Keywords
decitabine, acute myeloid leukemia, elderly patients, hypomethylating agents, treatment schedule comparison, complete remission, consolidation therapy, induction therapy, overall survival, hematologic toxicity, haematological recovery, frailty index, prognostic factors
MeSH terms
Decitabine, Antimetabolites, Antineoplastic, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Leukemia, Myeloid, Acute, Treatment Outcome

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review