4.4 Article

Epidemiological study and comparison of MD Anderson Cancer Center and GIMENA. Adult Hematological Illness in patients with B-chronic lymphocytic leukemia

Journal

MEDICINA CLINICA
Volume 133, Issue 5, Pages 161-166

Publisher

EDICIONES DOYMA S A
DOI: 10.1016/j.medcli.2008.09.046

Keywords

Epidemiology; Prognosis; B-Chronic limphocytic leukemia

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background and objective: The clinical course of B-chronic lymphocytic leukemia (B-CLL) patients is highly heterogeneous and the prognosis of these patients is difficult to predict. In this study, we analysed two new prognostic indexes proposed by the MDACC and GIMEMA group in a random population of B-CCL patients. Patients and methods: A follow up study of a cohort of patients was carried out. 265 B-CLL patients diagnosed in the Area Sanitaria de Gijon during 10 years (1997-2007) were analysed in this study. The overall Survival of the patients was analysed by the Rai and Binet staging systems and the prognostic indexes proposed by the MDACC and GIMEMA group. Results: The crude rate was 8.99 per 100.000 populations for year and the adjusted-age rate was 3.47 per 100.000 populations for year. The distribution of patients based on the MDACC index was: 31.4% had low risk, 62% had intermediate risk and 6.6% had high risk. The percentage of 5- and 10-years survival probabilities were 87% and 73% for low risk, 75% and 49% for intermediate risk and 29% and 16% of high risk. The GIMEMA index was unable to predict the overall survival in our patients. Conclusions: The rates of B-CLL are higher in our population than previously described, which is probably caused by an earlier diagnosis. Our results indicate that the MDACC prognostic index predicted the overall survival and the prognosis of a random population of patients better than the classical staging systems. The simplicity and utility of this prognostic index may help clinicians in clinical decision and therapeutical management. (C) 2008 Elsevier Espana, S.L. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available