© F e r r a t a S t o r t i F o u n d a t i o nwhere. 2,9,10 Briefly, chlorambucil was one of the arms in every trial.
11The comparators were the combination of COP (cyclophosphamide, oncovin and prednisolone) and splenic irradiation in CLL1, chlorambucil plus prednisolone and splenic irradiation in CLL2, chlorambucil plus epirubicin in CLL3, and fludarabine with or without cyclophosphamide in LRF CLL4. Biological, cytogenetic and molecular markers were available from patients entered in the LRF CLL4 trial and have been reported elsewhere, together with a full description of the cutoffs used to define positivity. 12,13 Causes of death were centrally categorized using the patients' death certificates and/or reports from the participating centers. Follow-up (overall survival only) was to June 2012 for the trials and June 2010 for the registration series, with a median follow-up for each trial of at least 9 years.Statistical analyses used the chi square test for comparisons of incidence, response to therapy and toxicities. Kaplan-Meier survival curves were calculated and compared by the log-rank test. Overall survival was calculated from randomization to death from any cause. Progression-free survival in the LRF CLL4 trial was defined as the time from randomization to relapse needing further treatment, progression, or death from any cause. For non-responders and progressive disease, date of progression was when no response or progressive disease was recorded. Multivariate analyses of variables significantly associated with response and overall survival in univariate tests were performed by means of stepwise generalized linear modeling and the Cox proportional hazards model respectively. Values of P≤0.05 (two sided) were considered statistically significant. Analyses were performed using the STA-TISTICA software from StatSoft, a wholly owned subsidiary of Dell, Inc.The LRF CLL4 trial was registered as an International Standard Randomized Trial, number ISRCTN58585610 and was approved by the UK multicenter research ethics committee (MREC). All four trials followed the UK Medical Research Council guidelines for good clinical practice. All patients provided informed consent. All authors had access to the primary clinical trial data. The main trial endpoints have been previously reported.
2,9,10
ResultsThe main characteristics of the patients in both series are shown in Table 1. The proportion of females was significantly higher in the registration series than in the randomized series. Women were more likely than men to be aged ≥70 years in both series. They were more likely to have Binet stage A-progressive disease than stage B or C in the randomized series and slightly more likely to have Rai stage 0 disease than Rai stages I-II in the registration series.Overall survival was significantly longer in women both in the randomized series [hazard ratio (HR): 0.72, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.64-0.81, P<0.0001; Figure 2A Figure 2B). At 10 years, the overall survival rate in the randomized series was 27% (95% CI...