This Article Abstract Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Kantarjian, H. Articles by Talpaz, M. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Kantarjian, H. Articles by Talpaz, M.

Survival Advantage with Imatinib Mesylate Therapy in Chronic-Phase Chronic Myelogenous Leukemia (CML-CP) after IFN- Failure and in Late CML-CP, Comparison with Historical Controls

¹Departments of Leukemia and² Bioimmunotherapy, University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas

	ABSTRACT

Top ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION MATERIALS AND METHODS RESULTS DISCUSSION REFERENCES

 
Purpose: The purpose of this research was to compare the survival of patients with Philadelphia chromosome (Ph) -positive chronic myelogenous leukemia (CML) post-IFN- failure treated with imatinib to historical experiences with standards of care or other therapies.

Experimental Design: The outcome of 261 patients with Ph-positive chronic phase CML post-IFN failure treated with imatinib was compared with 204 historical control patients treated for a similar disease status with existing therapies. A subset of 147 patients in late chronic phase CML and 100% Ph-positive status treated with imatinib was compared with 95 patients in a similar disease status treated with IFN. Multivariate analyses were conducted to assess the independent prognostic effect of therapy (imatinib versus other) on survival.

Results: In the first analysis involving 261 patients on imatinib plus 204 historical patients, the complete cytogenetic response rates were 62% and 19%, respectively (P < 0.001). A multivariate analysis identified pretreatment peripheral blasts and thrombocytosis to be independent poor prognostic factors for survival. Imatinib therapy (versus others) was a significant independent favorable prognostic factor for survival (hazard ratio, 0.17; P < 0.0001). In the second analysis involving the subset of 147 patients receiving imatinib plus 95 historical patients treated with IFN regimens, the complete cytogenetic response rates were 41% and 7%, respectively (P < 0.001). A multivariate analysis selected pretreatment anemia and peripheral blasts to be significant independent poor prognostic factors for survival. Imatinib therapy (versus IFN) was an independent favorable prognostic factor for survival (hazard ratio, 0.20; P < 0.0001). Three-month and 6-month landmark analyses showed that patients in all cytogenetic response categories (major, minor, and none) after imatinib therapy had survival outcomes better than the historical control population. Within each cytogenetic response category, survival was also better with imatinib than with other therapies.

Conclusions: This analysis provides evidence for a survival advantage with imatinib versus other therapies in chronic-phase CML post-IFN failure, and for a survival advantage with imatinib versus IFN in late chronic-phase CML.

	INTRODUCTION

Top ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION MATERIALS AND METHODS RESULTS DISCUSSION REFERENCES

 
Imatinib mesylate (Gleevec, STI571) is a selective Bcr-Abl tyrosine kinase inhibitor with significant activity in the treatment of Philadelphia chromosome (Ph) -positive chronic myelogenous leukemia (CML) in chronic, accelerated, and blastic phases (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12) . In patients with chronic-phase CML post-IFN failure, imatinib induced complete cytogenetic response in 48% and major cytogenetic response (Ph <35%) in 65% of patients. The estimated 2-year transformation rate was 13%, and the estimated 2-year survival rate was 92% (5) . In an international randomized study of IFN plus 1-ß-D-arabinofuranosylcytosine (ara-C) versus STI571 (IRIS trial), in patients with previously untreated CML in early chronic-phase, imatinib was associated with significantly better 18-month rates of complete cytogenetic response (76% versus 14%; P < 0.001), progression-free survival (91% versus 73%; P < 0.001), and transformation (3% versus 9%; P < 0.001). Because of the response and toxicity profiles, 89% of patients on IFN plus ara-C have already either crossed over to imatinib by design (58%) or were taken off study to be treated with commercially available imatinib (31%) after a median duration of 8 months of therapy (11) . The 18-month estimated survival rates with imatinib versus IFN plus ara-C were 98% versus 95% (P = 0.16). Thus, perhaps partly because of the high early crossover rate, a survival benefit with imatinib versus IFN plus ara-C may not be observed in the IRIS study. Other randomized studies of imatinib versus IFN-based therapy are unlikely to be conducted.

An alternative method to demonstrate a survival benefit with imatinib is a rigorous comparison of the maturing survival data with imatinib to historical control patients treated in the past with the standard of care. Recent studies suggested that well-defined observational studies yield similar results to comparative randomized trials, provided they satisfy certain criteria (e.g., appropriate selection of controls, inability of the investigator or patient to choose therapy, and ethical and moral considerations disallowing such randomized designs; Refs. 13 , 14 ).

In this analysis, we have compared the outcome of patients in chronic-phase CML post-IFN failure treated with imatinib to two other historical control groups (15, 16, 17) . The first group is historical patients with CML post-IFN failure receiving nonimatinib therapies (when imatinib was not available). The second group is historical patients in late chronic-phase CML (diagnosis >12 months) treated with IFN therapy (imatinib also not available then). The latter group would provide a comparison of imatinib versus IFN (an accepted standard of care) in late chronic-phase CML. These patients had received IFN alone or in combinations on one of several protocols available throughout the time period at our institution.

	MATERIALS AND METHODS

Top ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION MATERIALS AND METHODS RESULTS DISCUSSION REFERENCES

 
Study Group.
Two hundred sixty-one patients with Ph-positive CML in chronic-phase post-IFN failure treated with imatinib on the Food and Drug Administration pivotal trial (Novartis 110) and the Expanded Access Trial (Novartis 113) were analyzed (5 , 6) . Within this group of 261 patients, 147 patients had 100% Ph-positive disease and were compared with the second historical control group discussed below. Eligibility criteria, treatment design, dose modifications, management of side effects and monitoring, and follow-up have been detailed previously (5 , 6) .

Historical Control Groups.
Two historical control groups were selected for analysis. The first historical study group included 204 patients with early chronic-phase CML treated with IFN-based regimens on our institutional protocols from 1982 until 1992 and, whose disease ultimately failed on IFN therapy (15, 16, 17) . Details of these IFN programs and patient outcomes have been reported previously. The purpose of the historical group selection was to allow comparison of results with imatinib to results with nonimatinib therapies received by these patients who had CML post-IFN failure.

The second historical study group included 95 patients in late chronic-phase CML (diagnosis 12 months) who received IFN regimens on institutional protocols from 1982 until 1997. These patients had received non-IFN therapies (e.g., hydroxyurea, busulfan, or chemotherapy combinations) before IFN. The purpose of the second historical group selection was to compare results with imatinib to results with IFN, an accepted standard of care, in late chronic-phase CML.

Response Criteria and Statistical Considerations.
Response criteria have been described previously (5 , 6 , 15, 16, 17) . A complete hematological response was defined as a WBC count of <10 x 10⁹/liter; a platelet count of <450 x 10⁹/liter; no immature cells (blasts, promyelocytes, or myelocytes) in the peripheral blood; marrow blasts 5%; and disappearance of all signs and symptoms related to leukemia (including palpable splenomegaly); the response lasting for at least 4 weeks. Response was additionally categorized by the best cytogenetic response: complete if no Ph-positive cells were present, partial if the proportion of Ph-positive cells was between 1% and 34%, and minor if the proportion of Ph-positive cells declined to between 35% and 90%. Major cytogenetic response was defined as the sum of complete plus partial cytogenetic responses (i.e., all of the patients in whom Ph-positive cell proportions were <35%). The evaluation of cytogenetic response was judged by standard cytogenetic analysis of metaphase spreads. Time to disease progression was calculated from the time the treatment began until the first reported appearance of accelerated- or blastic-phase disease, discontinuation of therapy because of unsatisfactory response, or death. Survival was calculated from the time the treatment began until death from any cause or last follow-up.

Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to identify potential prognostic factors and their association with survival (18) . Significant prognostic factors by univariate analysis (P < 0.05) were then included as terms in a multivariate regression model for survival. Factors retaining significance in the multivariate model were interpreted as being independently predictive of survival.

	RESULTS

Top ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION MATERIALS AND METHODS RESULTS DISCUSSION REFERENCES

 
Study Groups and Outcome in Chronic-Phase CML Post-IFN Failure.
The pretreatment characteristics of the 261 patients treated with imatinib for chronic-phase CML post-IFN failure are shown in Table 1 and compared with the historical control group of patients receiving nonimatinib therapies post-IFN failure. Patients treated with imatinib were significantly older (P < 0.01), had longer duration of chronic-phase disease (P = 0.01), and included more patients with some extent of Ph suppression (P = 0.01) and with cytogenetic resistance (P < 0.0001). The historical group of patients treated with nonimatinib regimens had significantly higher incidences of splenomegaly (P < 0.01), anemia (P < 0.01), and leukocytosis (P < 0.0001). Risk group distributions by the Hasford model (19) were similar (data not shown), but more patients in the historical group had high-risk disease by the Sokal model (20) . Twenty-eight (14%) patients in the historical control group eventually received imatinib therapy after a median time of 129 months (range, 96–190 months). This added sequential therapy should, thus, have no effect on the comparison of early parts of the survival curves (3–4 year survivals). The median follow-up times were 34 months with imatinib and 109 months with other therapies.

Initial therapy in the 204 patients in the historical control after IFN failure included: allogeneic (SCT), 37; homoharringtonine-based therapy, 27; hydroxyurea and/or busulfan, 86; ara-C-based regimens, 24; and others (idarubicin, deoxycoformycin, thiotepa, and so forth), 30. The incidence of complete cytogenetic response with each approach was: allogeneic SCT, 28of 37 (76%); homoharringtonine, 5 of 27 (19%); hydroxyurea and/or busulfan, 1 of 86 (1%); and ara-C regimens and others, 5 of 54 (9%). Survival by therapy is shown in Fig. 1 . Among the 37 patients who underwent allogeneic SCT, 16 were alive and disease-free with a median follow-up of 127 months; the estimated 10-year survival rate was 42%. Sixty additional patients (of the 204; 29%) underwent allogeneic SCT after one or several of these treatments: 30 in chronic phase, 8 in accelerated phase, 12 in second chronic phase, and 10 in blastic phase. Ten (17%) of them are still alive without disease with a median follow-up time from SCT of 109+ months (range, 64–199 + months).

View larger version (20K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Fig. 1. Survival of the 261 patients treated with imatinib and the 204 patients in the historical control group post-IFN failure by treatment.

View larger version (14K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Fig. 2. Survival of patients in chronic-phase chronic myelogenous leukemia post-IFN failure treated with imatinib or other regimens.

Study Groups and Outcome in Late Chronic-Phase CML.
We next investigated the outcome of patients with only late chronic-phase CML treated with imatinib post-IFN failure, and compared them with a group of historical controls treated with IFN regimens for late chronic-phase CML. These patients were IFN-naïve, and, therefore, different from the imatinib study group in this one aspect. However, our previous experience indicated that the outcome in late chronic-phase CML was not different by prior IFN exposure (21 , 22) . Thus, this second analysis allowed a comparison of imatinib results with a second set of historical controls receiving IFN in late chronic-phase CML. To harmonize the pretreatment characteristics of the two study groups, we analyzed only the subset of 147 patients on imatinib who had only late chronic-phase CML and who had 100% Ph-positive disease at the start of therapy. The median follow-up times were 33 months for the imatinib study group and 93 months for the IFN-treated historical control group. Twenty of the 95 patients (21%) in the historical group underwent allogeneic SCT: 11 in chronic phase, 6 in accelerated phase/second chronic phase, and 3 in blastic phase. Five of the 20 patients are still alive without disease for a median follow-up time from SCT of 61+ months (range, 59+ to 87+ months).

Patients on imatinib were significantly older (P < 0.01), but those receiving IFN therapy had significantly more frequent splenomegaly (P = 0.04), leukocytosis (P < 0.01), and peripheral blasts (P = 0.04).

The characteristics of the two study groups are compared in Table 4 . Complete cytogenetic response was significantly higher with imatinib versus IFN (41% versus 7%; P < 0.001; Table 5 ). Survival of the two study groups is compared in Fig. 3 . A univariate analysis of the total group of patients identified several characteristics as significant adverse prognostic factors (Table 6) . A multivariate analysis of pretreatment factors (excluding therapy, imatinib versus IFN) selected anemia (P = 0.005) and peripheral blasts (P = 0.003) to be independent adverse prognostic factors. Adding therapy (imatinib versus IFN) after accounting for the independent significant pretreatment prognostic factors identified imatinib therapy to be associated with a significant survival advantage (hazard ratio, 0.2; P < 0.001).

View larger version (14K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Fig. 3. Survival of patients in late chronic-phase chronic myelogenous leukemia and 100% Philadelphia-positive disease treated with imatinib or IFN therapy.

View larger version (21K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Fig. 4. Comparison of the outcome of patients in chronic-phase chronic myelogenous leukemia post-IFN failure treated with imatinib by their 3-month (A) and 6-month (B) cytogenetic response (A = major; B = minor; C = other) to historical control patients receiving nonimatinib therapies (D).

	DISCUSSION

Top ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION MATERIALS AND METHODS RESULTS DISCUSSION REFERENCES

This analysis provides evidence for a survival advantage with imatinib versus other treatments, by comparing the maturing results from the single-arm trials with imatinib in chronic-phase CML post-IFN failure to historical control populations. The first analysis compared the imatinib-treated study group to a historical control group of patients with chronic-phase CML post-IFN failure who received different treatment approaches (these would be considered acceptable "standards of care" because no standard of care existed). The analysis demonstrated a survival advantage with imatinib versus nonimatinib regimens (hazard ratio, 0.17; P < 0.0001) by multivariate analysis, after accounting for important pretreatment prognostic factors. The second analysis compared only patients with 100% Ph-positive disease treated with imatinib for late chronic-phase CML to patients treated with IFN for late chronic-phase CML. Whereas this analysis compared two study groups with one major different factor (IFN failures versus IFN-naïve patients) it may be justified for three reasons. First, it compared imatinib therapy to an accepted standard of care, IFN. Second, patients in late chronic-phase CML have a similar prognosis whether they had or did not have exposure to IFN therapy (21 , 22) . Third, even if the latter argument was disputed, the IFN-failure patients would be expected logically to have a worse outcome than the IFN-naïve patient. Thus, the multivariate analysis, demonstrating the survival advantage with imatinib over IFN in late chronic-phase CML (hazard ratio, 0.20; P < 0.001), after accounting for pretreatment important prognostic factors, provided a second line of evidence for the superiority of imatinib over other therapies in relation to survival in CML. As expected, in both analyses, imatinib was associated with significantly higher complete and major cytogenetic response rates, these being early surrogate endpoints for survival benefit with IFN therapy in several studies (27, 28, 29, 30) .

In a recent study by Marin et al. (31) , 143 patients treated with imatinib for chronic-phase CML post-IFN failure were compared with 246 historical controls who received conventional treatment They reported that patients on imatinib showed an overall survival advantage (relative risk, 0.54). However, whereas patients who achieved some cytogenetic response after 6 months had better survival than controls (relative risk, 0.13), those who did not have a cytogenetic response had a significantly worse survival (relative risk, 1.69). Our results contrast with their findings: survival with imatinib was significantly superior to historical controls whether patients did or did not achieve a cytogenetic response at 3 or 6 months (Fig. 4 ; Table 7 ). Moreover, within each cytogenetic response category, survival with imatinib was superior to other therapies, indicating a better quality/durability of cytogenetic response and better disease control with imatinib (Table 7) .

In summary, this analysis of imatinib therapy in chronic-phase CML provided support for its beneficial effect on survival compared with nonimatinib therapies post-IFN failure, and compared with IFN therapy in late chronic-phase CML. The survival benefit with imatinib over historical controls is noted even in patients who do not achieve a cytogenetic response. Within each cytogenetic response category achieved with imatinib or other therapies, survival was superior with imatinib compared with other therapies.

	FOOTNOTES

 
The costs of publication of this article were defrayed in part by the payment of page charges. This article must therefore be hereby marked advertisement in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1734 solely to indicate this fact.

Requests for reprints: Hagop Kantarjian, M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, 1515 Holcombe, Houston, TX 77030. Phone: (713) 792-7305; Fax: (713) 794-4297; E-mail: hkantarj{at}mdanderson.org

Received 7/14/03; revised 9/11/03; accepted 9/12/03.

	REFERENCES

Top ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION MATERIALS AND METHODS RESULTS DISCUSSION REFERENCES

 

1. Druker B. J., Tamura S., Buchdunger E., Ohno S., Segal G. M., Fanning S., Zimmermann J., Lydon N. B. Effects of a selective inhibitor of the Abl tyrosine kinase on the growth of Bcr-Abl positive cells. Nat. Med., 2: 561-566, 1996.[CrossRef][Medline]
2. Beran M., Cao X., Estroz Z., Jeha S., Jin G., O’Brien S., Talpaz M., Arlinghaus R. B., Lydon N. B., Kantarjian H. Selective inhibition of cell proliferation and BCR-ABL phosphorylation in acute lymphoblastic leukemia cells expressing Mr 190, 000 BCR-ABL protein by a tyrosine kinase inhibitor (CGP-57148). Clin. Cancer Res., 4: 1661-1672, 1998.[Abstract]
3. Druker B. J., Talpaz M., Resta D. J., Peny B., Buchdung E., Ford J., et al Efficacy and safety of a specific inhibitor of the BCR-ABL tyrosine kinase in chronic myeloid leukemia. N. Engl. J. Med., 344: 1031-1037, 2001.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
4. Druker B. J., Sawyers C. L., Kantarjian H., Resta D. J., Reese S. F., Ford J. M., Capdeville R., Talpaz M. Activity of a specific inhibitor of the BCR-ABL tyrosine kinase in the blast crisis of chronic myeloid leukemia and acute lymphoblastic leukemia with the Philadelphia chromosome. N. Eng. J. Med., 344: 1038-1042, 2001.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
5. Kantarjian H., Sawyers C., Hochhaus A., Guilhot F., Schiffer C., Gambacorti-Passerini C., Niederwieser D., Resta D., Capdeville R., Zoellner U., Talpaz M., Druker B. Hematologic and cytogenetic responses to imatinib mesylate in chronic myelogenous leukemia. N. Engl. J. Med., 346: 645-652, 2002.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
6. Kantarjian H., Talpaz M., O’Brien S., Smith T. L., Giles F. J., Faderl S., Thomas D. A., Garcia-Manero G., Issa J. P., Andreeff M., Kornblau S. M., Koller C., Beran M., Kearing M., Rios M. B., Shan J., Resta D., Capdeville R., Hayes K., Albitar M., Freireich E. J., Cortes J. E. Imatinib mesylate for Philadelphia chromosome-positive chronic-phase myeloid leukemia after failure of interferon-: follow-up results. Clin. Cancer Res., 8: 2177-2187, 2002.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
7. Talpaz M., Silver R. T., Druker B. J., Goldman J. M., Gambacorti-Passerini C., Guilhot F., Schiffer C. A., Fischer T., Deininger M. W., Lennard A. L., Hochhaus A., Ottmann O. G., Gratwohl A., Baccarani M., Stone R., Tura S., Mahon F. X., Fernandes-Reese S., Gathmann I., Capdeville R., Kantarjian H. M., Sawyers C. L. Imatinib induces durable hematologic and cytogenetic responses in patients with accelerated phase chronic myeloid leukemia: results of a phase 2 study. Blood, 99: 1928-1937, 2002.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
8. Kantarjian H., O’Brien S., Cortes J., Smith T. L., Rios M. B., Shan J., Yang Y., Giles F. J., Thomas D. A., Faderl S., Garcia-Manero G., Jeha S., Wierda W., Issa J. P., Kornblau S. M., Keating M., Resta D., Capdeville R., Talpaz M. Treatment of Philadelphia chromosome-positive, accelerated-phase chronic myelogenous leukemia with imatinib mesylate. Clin. Cancer Res., 8: 2167-2176, 2002.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
9. Sawyers C. L., Hochhaus A., Feldman E., Goldman J. M., Miller C. B., Ottman O. G., Schiffer C. A., Talpaz M., Guilhot F., Deininger M. W., Fischer T., O’Brien S. G., Stone R. M., Gambacorti-Passerini C. B., Russell N. H., Reiffers J. J., Shea T. C., Chapuis B., Courtre S., Tura S., Morra E., Larson R. A., Saven A., Peschel C., Gratwohl A., Mandelli F., Ben Am M., Gathmann I., Capdeville R., Paquette R. L., Druker B. J. Imatinib induces hematologic and cytogentic responses in patients with chronic myelogenous leukemia in myeloid blast crisis: results of a phase II study. Blood, 99: 3530-3539, 2002.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
10. Kantarjian H. M., Cortes J., O’Brien S., Giles F. J., Albitar M., Rios M. B., Shan J., Faderl S., Garcia-Manero G., Thomas D. A., Resta D., Talpaz M. Imatinib mesylate (STI571) therapy for Philadelphia chromosome-positive chronic myelogenous leukemia in blast phase. Blood, 99: 3547-3553, 2002.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
11. O’Brien S. G., Guilhot F., Larson R. A., Gathmann I., Baccarani M., Cervantes F., Cornelissen J. J., Fischer T., Hochhaus A., Hughes T., Lechner K., Nielsen J. L., Rousselot P., Reiffers J., Saglio G., Shepherd J., Simonsson B., Gratwohl A., Goldman J. M., Kantarjian H., Taylor K., Verhoef G., Bolton A. E., Capdeville R., Druker B. J., for the IRIS Investigators. Imatinib compared with interferon and low-dose cytarabine for newly diagnosed chronic-phase chronic myeloid leukemia. N. Engl. J. Med., 348: 994-1004, 2003.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
12. Kantarjian H., Cortes J., O’Brien S., Giles F., Garcia-Manero G., Faderl S., Thomas D., Jeha S., Rios M. B., Letvak L., Bochinski K., Arlinghaus R., Talpaz M. Imatinib mesylate therapy in newly diagnosed patients with Philadelphia chromosome-positive chronic myelogenous leukemia: high incidence of early complete and major cytogenetic responses. Blood, 101: 97-100, 2003.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
13. Benson B. A., Hartz A. A comparison of observation studies and randomized, controlled trials. N. Engl. J. Med., 342: 1878-1886, 2000.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
14. Concato J., Shah N., Horwitz R. I. Randomized controlled trials, observational studies, and the hierarchy of research designs. N. Engl. J. Med., 342: 1887-1892, 2000.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
15. Kantarjian H. M., O’Brien S., Smith T. L., Rios M. B., Cortes J., Beran M., Koller C., Giles F. J., Andreeff M., Kornblau S., Giralt S., Keating M. J., Talpaz M. Treatment of Philadelphia chromosome-positive early chronic phase chronic myelogenous leukemia with daily doses of interferon and low-dose cytarabine. J. Clin. Oncol., 17: 284-292, 1999.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
16. Talpaz M., Kantarjian H., Kurzrock R., Trujillo J. M., Gutterman J. U. Interferon produces sustained cytogenetic responses in chronic myelogenous leukemia. Philadelphia chromosome-positive patients. Ann. Intern. Med., 114: 532-538, 1991.[Medline]
17. Kantarjian H., Smith T. L., O’Brien S., Beran M., Pierce S., Talpaz M. Prolonged survival in chronic myelogenous leukemia after cytogenetic response to interferon- therapy. The Leukemia Service. Ann. Intern. Med., 122: 254-261, 1995.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
18. Cox D. R. Regression models and life tables (with discussion). J. R. Statist. Soc., 34: 187-220, 1972.
19. Hasford J., Pfirrmann M., Hehlmann R., Allan N. C., Baccarani M., Kluin-Nelemans J. C., Alimena G., Steegmann J. L., Ansari H. A new prognostic score for survival of patients with chronic myeloid leukemia treated with interferon alfa. J. Natl. Cancer Inst., 90: 850-858, 1998.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
20. Sokal J., Cox E., Baccarani M., Tura S., Gomez G. A., Robertson J., Tso C. Y., Braun T. J., Clarkson B. D., Cervantes F., and the Italian Cooperative CML Study Group. Prognostic discrimination in "good-risk" chronic granulocytic leukemia. Blood, 63: 789-799, 1984.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
21. Rodriguez J., Cortes J., Smith T., O’Brien S., Rios M. B., Talpaz M., Kantarjian H. Determinants of prognosis in late chronic phase myelogenous leukemia. J. Clin. Oncol.;, 16: 3782-3787, 1998.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
22. Sacchi S., Kantarjian H., O’Brien S., Beran M., Koller C., Pierce S., Kornblau S., Estey E., Keating M. J., Talpaz M. Long-term follow-up results of -interferon-based regimens in patients with late chronic phase chronic myelogenous leukemia. Leukemia (Baltimore), 11: 1610-1616, 1997.
23. Chalmers T. C., Celano P., Sacks H. S., Smith H., Jr. Bias treatment assignment in controlled clinical trials. N. Engl. J. Med., 309: 1358-1361, 1983.[Abstract]
24. Sacks H., Chalmers T. C., Smith H., Jr. Randomized versus historical controls for clinical trials. Am. J. Med., 72: 233-240, 1982.[CrossRef][Medline]
25. Colditz G. A., Miller J. N., Mosteller F. How study design affects outcomes in comparisons of therapy. I. Med. Stat. Med., 8: 441-454, 1989.
26. Miller J. N., Colditz G. A., Mosteller F. How study design affects outcomes in comparisons of therapy II. Surg. Stat. Med., 8: 455-466, 1989.
27. Mahon F. X., Delbrel X., Cony-Makhoul P., Faberes C., Boiron J. M., Barthe C., Bilhou-Nabera C., Pigneux A., Marit G., Reiffers J. Follow-up of complete cytogenetic remission in patients with chronic myeloid leukemia after cessation of interferon-. J. Clin. Oncol., 20: 214-220, 2002.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
28. Bonifazi F., de Vivo A., Rosti G., Guilhot F., Guilhot J., Trabacchi E., Hehlmann R., Hochhaus A., Shepherd P. C., Steegmann J. L., Kluin-Nelemans H. C., Thaler J., Simonsson B., Louwagie A., Reiffers J., Mahon F. X., Montefusco E., Alimena G., Hasford J., Richards S., Saglio G., Testoni N., Martinelli G., Tura S., Baccarani M. Chronic myeloid leukemia and interferon-: a study of complete cytogenetic responders. Blood, 98: 3074-3081, 2001.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
29. Giles F. J., Kantarjian H., O’Brien S., Rios M. B., Cortes J., Beran M., Koller C., Keating M., Talpaz M. Results of therapy with interferon and cyclic combination chemotherapy in patients with Philadelphia chromosome positive chronic myelogenous leukemia in early chronic phase. Leuk. Lymphoma, 41: 309-319, 2001.[Medline]
30. Kantarjian H., O’Brien S., Cortes J., Shan J., Giles F. J., Rios M. B., Faderl S. H., Wierda W. G., Ferrajoli A., Verstovsek S., Keating M. J., Freireich E. J., Talpaz M. Complete cytogenetic and molecular responses to interferon-alfa-based therapy for chronic myelogenous leukemia are associated with excellent long-term prognosis. Cancer (Phila.), 97: 1033-1041, 2003.
31. Marin D., Marktel S., Szydlo R., Klein J. P., Bua M., Foot N., Olavarria E., Shepherd P., Kanfer E., Goldman J. M., Apperley J. Survival of patients with chronic-phase chronic myeloid leukaemia on imatinib after failure on interferon alfa. Lancet, 362: 617-619, 2003.[CrossRef][Medline]

This article has been cited by other articles:

				I. Samudio, S. Kurinna, P. Ruvolo, B. Korchin, H. Kantarjian, M. Beran, K. Dunner Jr., S. Kondo, M. Andreeff, and M. Konopleva Inhibition of mitochondrial metabolism by methyl-2-cyano-3,12-dioxooleana-1,9-diene-28-oate induces apoptotic or autophagic cell death in chronic myeloid leukemia cells Mol. Cancer Ther., May 1, 2008; 7(5): 1130 - 1139. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				P. Ramirez and J. F. DiPersio Therapy Options in Imatinib Failures Oncologist, April 1, 2008; 13(4): 424 - 434. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				F. Palandri, I. Iacobucci, G. Martinelli, M. Amabile, A. Poerio, N. Testoni, S. Soverini, F. Castagnetti, A. De Vivo, M. Breccia, et al. Long-Term Outcome of Complete Cytogenetic Responders After Imatinib 400 mg in Late Chronic Phase, Philadelphia-Positive Chronic Myeloid Leukemia: The GIMEMA Working Party on CML J. Clin. Oncol., January 1, 2008; 26(1): 106 - 111. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				H. M. Kantarjian, F. Giles, A. Quintas-Cardama, and J. Cortes Important Therapeutic Targets in Chronic Myelogenous Leukemia Clin. Cancer Res., February 15, 2007; 13(4): 1089 - 1097. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				H. M. Kantarjian, M. Talpaz, S. O'Brien, D. Jones, F. Giles, G. Garcia-Manero, S. Faderl, F. Ravandi, M. B. Rios, J. Shan, et al. Survival benefit with imatinib mesylate versus interferon-{alpha}-based regimens in newly diagnosed chronic-phase chronic myelogenous leukemia Blood, September 15, 2006; 108(6): 1835 - 1840. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. Baccarani, G. Saglio, J. Goldman, A. Hochhaus, B. Simonsson, F. Appelbaum, J. Apperley, F. Cervantes, J. Cortes, M. Deininger, et al. Evolving concepts in the management of chronic myeloid leukemia: recommendations from an expert panel on behalf of the European LeukemiaNet Blood, September 15, 2006; 108(6): 1809 - 1820. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				L. Roy, J. Guilhot, T. Krahnke, A. Guerci-Bresler, B. J. Druker, R. A. Larson, S. O'Brien, C. So, G. Massimini, and F. Guilhot Survival advantage from imatinib compared with the combination interferon-{alpha} plus cytarabine in chronic-phase chronic myelogenous leukemia: historical comparison between two phase 3 trials Blood, September 1, 2006; 108(5): 1478 - 1484. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				I. Iacobucci, G. Saglio, G. Rosti, N. Testoni, F. Pane, M. Amabile, A. Poerio, S. Soverini, S. Bassi, D. Cilloni, et al. Achieving a Major Molecular Response at the Time of a Complete Cytogenetic Response (CCgR) Predicts a Better Duration of CCgR in Imatinib-Treated Chronic Myeloid Leukemia Patients. Clin. Cancer Res., May 15, 2006; 12(10): 3037 - 3042. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				P. Ault, H. Kantarjian, S. O'Brien, S. Faderl, M. Beran, M. B. Rios, C. Koller, F. Giles, M. Keating, M. Talpaz, et al. Pregnancy Among Patients With Chronic Myeloid Leukemia Treated With Imatinib J. Clin. Oncol., March 1, 2006; 24(7): 1204 - 1208. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. Van Glabbeke, J. Verweij, P. G. Casali, A. Le Cesne, P. Hohenberger, I. Ray-Coquard, M. Schlemmer, A. T. van Oosterom, D. Goldstein, R. Sciot, et al. Initial and Late Resistance to Imatinib in Advanced Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors Are Predicted by Different Prognostic Factors: A European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer-Italian Sarcoma Group-Australasian Gastrointestinal Trials Group Study J. Clin. Oncol., August 20, 2005; 23(24): 5795 - 5804. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. Golemovic, S. Verstovsek, F. Giles, J. Cortes, T. Manshouri, P. W. Manley, J. Mestan, M. Dugan, L. Alland, J. D. Griffin, et al. AMN107, a Novel Aminopyrimidine Inhibitor of Bcr-Abl, Has In vitro Activity against Imatinib-Resistant Chronic Myeloid Leukemia Clin. Cancer Res., July 1, 2005; 11(13): 4941 - 4947. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. Cortes, M. Talpaz, S. O'Brien, D. Jones, R. Luthra, J. Shan, F. Giles, S. Faderl, S. Verstovsek, G. Garcia-Manero, et al. Molecular Responses in Patients with Chronic Myelogenous Leukemia in Chronic Phase Treated with Imatinib Mesylate Clin. Cancer Res., May 1, 2005; 11(9): 3425 - 3432. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. Deininger, E. Buchdunger, and B. J. Druker The development of imatinib as a therapeutic agent for chronic myeloid leukemia Blood, April 1, 2005; 105(7): 2640 - 2653. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				H. M. Kantarjian, J. E. Cortes, S. O'Brien, R. Luthra, F. Giles, S. Verstovsek, S. Faderl, D. Thomas, G. Garcia-Manero, M. B. Rios, et al. Long-term survival benefit and improved complete cytogenetic and molecular response rates with imatinib mesylate in Philadelphia chromosome-positive chronic-phase chronic myeloid leukemia after failure of interferon-{alpha} Blood, October 1, 2004; 104(7): 1979 - 1988. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. J. DeAngelo and J. Ritz Imatinib Therapy for Patients with Chronic Myelogenous Leukemia: Are Patients Living Longer? Clin. Cancer Res., January 1, 2004; 10(1): 1 - 3. [Full Text] [PDF]

This Article Abstract Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Kantarjian, H. Articles by Talpaz, M. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Kantarjian, H. Articles by Talpaz, M.