The trial ALL-BFM 95 for treatment of childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia was designed to reduce acute and longterm toxicity in selected patient groups with favorable prognosis and to improve outcome in poor-risk groups by treatment intensification. These aims were pursued through a stratification strategy using white blood cell count, age, immunophenotype, treatment response, and unfavorable genetic aberrations providing an excellent discrimination of risk groups.
In the randomized trial AML-BFM 93 we compared 60 mg/m 2 /day daunorubicin with 12 mg/m 2 /day idarubicin for 3 days each, combined with cytarabine and etoposide during induction. Results showed a significant better blast cell reduction in the bone marrow on day 15 in patients of the idarubicin arm (25 of 144 = 17% of patients with у5% blasts compared to 46 of 149 = 31% of patients after daunorubicin, P 2 = 0.01). This was, however, mainly seen in high risk patients treated with idarubicin (19% vs 38%, P 2 = 0.007). Cardiotoxicity, WHO grade 1-3 shortening fraction reduction after induction occurred in 6% patients in both arms. Bone marrow toxicity differed slightly with a median recovery time of neutrophils Ͼ500/ l of 25 days (daunorubicin) compared to 27 days (idarubicin), P = 0.05. In the total group of patients probabilities of 5 years event-free survival and disease-free survival were similar for patients treated with daunorubicin or idarubicin (49% ± 4% vs 55% ± 4% and 57% ± 4% vs 64% ± 4%, P logrank 0.29 and 0.15, respectively). However, in patients presenting with more than 5% blasts on day 15 there was a trend for a better outcome after treatment with idarubicin (P logrank 0.06). Together with the early effect seen for high risk patients these results indicate a better efficacy of idarubicin than of daunorubicin during induction with a similar rate of toxicity. Leukemia (2001) 15, 348-354.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.