The blind men and the AML elephant:can we feel the progress?

The pharmacological therapy of non-promyelocytic acute myeloid leukemia (AML) has remained unchanged for over 40 years with an anthracycline–cytarabine combination forming the backbone of induction treatments. Nevertheless, the survival of younger patients has increased due to improved management of the toxicity of therapies including stem cell transplantation. Older patients and those with infirmity that precludes treatment-intensification have, however, not benefited from improvements in supportive care and continue to experience poor outcomes. An increased understanding of the genomic heterogeneity of AML raises the possibility of treatment-stratification to improve prognosis. Thus, efforts to identify agents with non-conventional anti-leukemic effects have paralleled those aiming to optimize leukemia cell-kill with conventional chemotherapy, resulting in a number of randomized controlled trials (RCT). In the last 18 months, RCTs investigating the effects of vosaroxin, azacitidine and gemtuzumab ozogamycin and daunorubicin dose have been reported with some studies indicating a statistically significant survival benefit with the investigational agent compared with standard therapy and potentially, a new era in AML therapeutics. Given the increasing costs of cancer care, a review of these studies, with particular attention to the magnitude of clinical benefit with the newer agents would be useful, especially for physicians treating patients in single-payer health systems

An exploration of parents’ preferences for foot care in juvenile idiopathic arthritis: a possible role for the discrete choice experiment

Background: An increased awareness of patients’ and parents’ care preferences regarding foot care is desirable from a clinical perspective as such information may be utilised to optimise care delivery. The aim of this study was to examine parents’ preferences for, and valuations of foot care and foot-related outcomes in juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA).<p></p> Methods: A discrete choice experiment (DCE) incorporating willingness-to-pay (WTP) questions was conducted by surveying 42 parents of children with JIA who were enrolled in a randomised-controlled trial of multidisciplinary foot care at a single UK paediatric rheumatology outpatients department. Attributes explored were: levels of pain; mobility; ability to perform activities of daily living (ADL); waiting time; referral route; and footwear. The DCE was administered at trial baseline. DCE data were analysed using a multinomial-logit-regression model to estimate preferences and relative importance of attributes of foot care. A stated-preference WTP question was presented to estimate parents’ monetary valuation of health and service improvements.<p></p> Results: Every attribute in the DCE was statistically significant (p < 0.01) except that of cost (p = 0.118), suggesting that all attributes, except cost, have an impact on parents’ preferences for foot care for their child. The magnitudes of the coefficients indicate that the strength of preference for each attribute was (in descending order): improved ability to perform ADL, reductions in foot pain, improved mobility, improved ability to wear desired footwear, multidisciplinary foot care route, and reduced waiting time. Parents’ estimated mean annual WTP for a multidisciplinary foot care service was £1,119.05.<p></p> Conclusions: In terms of foot care service provision for children with JIA, parents appear to prefer improvements in health outcomes over non-health outcomes and service process attributes. Cost was relatively less important than other attributes suggesting that it does not appear to impact on parents’ preferences.<p></p&gt

Laboratory Capacity Building in Asia for Infectious Disease Research: Experiences from the South East Asia Infectious Disease Clinical Research Network (SEAICRN)

Heiman Wertheim and colleagues discuss a network that aims to improve infectious disease management through integrated, collaborative clinical research in South East Asia

Intensive consolidation therapy compared with standard consolidation and maintenance therapy for adults with acute myeloid leukaemia aged between 46 and 60 years: final results of the randomized phase III study (AML 8B) of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) and the Gruppo Italiano Malattie Ematologiche Maligne dell’Adulto (GIMEMA) Leukemia Cooperative Groups

The most effective post-remission treatment to maintain complete remission (CR) in adults aged between 46 and 60 years with acute myeloid leukaemia (AML) is uncertain. Previously untreated patients with AML in CR after induction chemotherapy with daunorubicin and cytarabine were randomized between two intensive courses of consolidation therapy containing high-dose cytarabine, combined with amsacrine or daunorubicin and a standard consolidation and maintenance therapy containing standard dose cytarabine and daunorubicin. One hundred fifty-eight CR patients were assigned to the intensive group and 157 patients to the standard group. After a median follow-up of 7.5 years, the 4-year survival rate was 32 % in the intensive group versus 34 % in the standard group (P = 0.29). In the intensive group, the 4-year relapse incidence was lower than in the standard group: 55 and 75 %, respectively (P = 0.0003), whereas treatment-related mortality incidence was higher: 22 versus 3 % (P < 0.0001). Two intensive consolidation courses containing high-dose cytarabine as post-remission treatment in patients with AML aged between 46 and 60 years old did not translate in better long-term outcome despite a 20 % lower relapse incidence. Better supportive care and prevention of treatment-related complications may improve the overall survival after intensified post-remission therapy in this age group