Skip to search boxSkip to navigationSkip to main content

Systematic review and meta-analysis of standard-dose imatinib vs. high-dose imatinib and second generation tyrosine kinase inhibitors for chronic myeloid leukemia

  • Verena S. Hoffmann(corresponding author)
    ,
  • Joerg Hasford
    ,
  • Michael Deininger
    ,
  • ,
  • Michele Baccarani
    ,
  • Rüdiger Hehlmann
*Corresponding author for this work
  • Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich
    ,
  • University of Utah
    ,
  • University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center
    ,
  • University of Bologna
    ,
  • Heidelberg University 
Scholary Output:
Contribution to journal
Article
Peer-review

Sustainable Development Goals

  • SDG 3 - Good Health and Well-being
    SDG 3 Good Health and Well

Abstract

Purpose: Most randomized clinical trials evaluating second generation tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) for the first-line treatment of Chronic Myeloid Leukemia used as comparator the ‘standard’ dose of 400 mg imatinib daily. Several studies showed higher rates of major molecular remission (MMR) at 12 months with 800 mg compared to 400 mg, suggesting that high-dose imatinib may be the appropriate comparator rather than 400 mg. Methods: We systematically reviewed randomized trials comparing the two dosages, calculated a common estimator and compared the result to a common estimator of trials evaluating a second generation TKI in comparison with 400 mg imatinib daily. Results: We identified three trials comparing 400–800 mg imatinib resulting in a common relative risk of 1.30 (1.13–1.49) and indicating a significantly higher rate of MMR in patients treated with 800 mg imatinib (p = 0.0003). We identified five trials comparing 400 mg imatinib daily to a second generation TKI. The common relative risk for MMR at 12 months was 1.69 (1.50–1.90, p < 0.0001). Differences in the prognostic profiles precluded a direct comparison of the common efficacy estimates. Conclusions: We conclude that imatinib was probably not licensed at the optimal dose initially. We suggest that in the future, new TKIs are compared with a higher dose of imatinib. In addition, high-dose imatinib should be considered more often for routine clinical decisions based on the characteristics of the individual patient.

Publication Information

Output type

Scholary Output:
Contribution to journal
Article
Peer-review

Original language

English (US)

Pages from-to (Number of pages)

Pages 1311-1318 (8 pages)

Journal (Volume, Issue Number)

Journal of Cancer Research and Clinical Oncology (Volume 143, Issue 7)

Publication milestones

  • Published - 07/01/2017

Publication status

Published - 07/01/2017

ISSN

0171-5216

Publication IDs

  • Scopus: 85014695667
  • PubMed: 28275866
  • ORCID: /0000-0002-8636-1071/work/68811197

Publication metrics

Metrics

Fractional count
1
Fractional count
0.17
Fractional count
5
Fractional count
0.83
Fractional count
1
Fractional count
1
Scopus
citations
SciVal
FWCI
0.68
SciVal
Author count
6
SciVal
citations
11
SciVal
Paper percentile
77

PlumX, opens in new tab

Captures
40
Citation count
20

Funding Details

VH received research funding form Novartis Oncology Europe and received honoraria from BMS. JH received research funding form Novartis Oncology Europe; MD researched research funding from BMS, Novartis, Celgene, Genzyme, and Gilead, and is on the advisory board and consultant for BMS, ARIAD, Novartis, Incyte, and Pfizer. JC has received research support from and has acted as a consultant for Ariad, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Novartis, and Pfizer; has received research support from Teva; and has been paid for travel expenses by Bristol-Myers Squibb, Novartis, and Pfizer. MB served on the speakers’ bureau of and received honoraria from ARIAD, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Novartis and Pfizer and acted as a consultant for ARIAD and Novartis. RH received research support from Novartis, consultation fees from BMS.