Here's a link to recently published research about PCR numbers. (Found this at the LLS site) I haven't read the whole thing, but it sounds like confirmation that PCR tests should be routine for all newly diagnosed CMLers in order to inform timely decisions about early therapy.
Early BCR-ABL1 decline in imatinib-treated patients with chronic myeloid leukemia: results from a multicenter study of the Chinese CML alliance
Thanks for posting the link. Impressive study. I have only read it quickly. If I understood what I read:
This is a pretty scary article for anyone who has not achieved <10% at 3 months, or who is a slow responder. However, it only deals with Imatinib and the study population is Chinese only. If I read it correctly. Slow responders were not changed to another drug. Since I read fast, I cannot be positive. It is a comforting study for those who respond quickly, within the time guidelines of 3, 6 etc. months.
For those of us who are turtles, slower than turtles or unicorns the results are anxiety inducing. However, being resistant to Imatinib and then changed to another TKI, which seems to be the current practice, may change the story of outcomes. Any other studies out there?
nervously. Gitel
comments and corrections welcomed.
Gitel - Your observations are on point. Also, although I too read it quickly, I couldn't seem to find the TRUE bottom line, which is: what was termed "success"? PCR undetectable? DMR 4.5? Even so, they didn't address the elephant in the room: other than racking up speedier numbers in prep for a TFR attempt, does it make any difference for survivorship? I believe this study has not shown that our so-called "gold standard" measurement of safety and survivorship (CCyR and/or MMR which is 0.1%IS) has changed.
