Comparing Arsenic-Containing Qinghuang Powder and Low-Intensity Chemotherapy in Elderly Patients with Acute Myeloid Leukemia.
10.1007/s11655-023-3603-6
- Author:
Yu-He WU
1
;
Hai-Yan XIAO
1
;
Ri-Cheng QUAN
1
;
Xu-Dong TANG
1
;
Wei-Yi LIU
1
;
Yan LYU
1
;
Zhuo CHEN
1
;
Chi LIU
1
;
Xiao-Mei HU
2
Author Information
1. Department of Hematology, Xiyuan Hospital, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences, Beijing, 100091, China.
2. Department of Hematology, Xiyuan Hospital, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences, Beijing, 100091, China. huxiaomei_2@163.com.
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
Chinese medicine;
Qinghuang Powder;
acute myeloid leukemia;
elderly;
low-intensity chemotherapy
- MeSH:
Humans;
Aged;
Arsenic/therapeutic use*;
Powders/therapeutic use*;
Retrospective Studies;
Leukemia, Myeloid, Acute/drug therapy*;
Prognosis;
Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/therapeutic use*
- From:
Chinese journal of integrative medicine
2023;29(9):832-837
- CountryChina
- Language:English
-
Abstract:
OBJECTIVE:To compare the clinical effect of arsenic-containing Qinghuang Powder (QHP) and low-intensity chemotherapy (LIC) in treatment of elderly acute myeloid leukemia (eAML) patients.
METHODS:Clinical data of 80 eAML patients treated at Xiyuan Hospital of China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences from January 2015 to December 2020 were retrospectively analyzed. The treatment scheme was designed by real world study according to patients' preference, and patients were divided into a QHP group (35 cases) and a LIC group (45 cases). The median overall survival (mOS), 1-, 2-, and 3-year OS rates, and incidence of adverse events were compared between the two groups.
RESULTS:The mOS of 80 patients was 11 months, and the 1-, 2-, and 3-year OS rates were 45.51%, 17.96%, and 11.05%, respectively. The QHP and LIC groups demonstrated no significant difference in mOS (12 months vs. 10 months), 1- (48.57% vs. 39.65%), 2- (11.43% vs. 20.04%), and 3-year OS rates (5.71% vs. 13.27%, all P>0.05). Moreover, the related factors of mOS demonstrated no significant difference in patients with age>75 years (11 months vs. 8 months), secondary AML (11 months vs. 8 months), poor genetic prognosis (9 months vs. 7 months), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score ⩾ 3 (10 months vs. 7 months) and hematopoietic stem cell transplant comorbidity index ⩾ 4 (11 months vs. 7 months) between the QHP and LIC groups (all P>0.05). However, the incidence of myelosuppression was significantly lower in the QHP group than that in the LIC group (28.57% vs. 73.33%, P<0.01).
CONCLUSIONS:QHP and LIC had similar survival rates in eAML patients, but QHP had a lower myelosuppression incidence. Hence, QHP can be an alternative for eAML patients who do not tolerate LIC.
