AIEOP-BFM ALL 2017
International Collaborative Treatment Protocol for Children and Adolescents With Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia - AIEOP-BFM ALL 2017
Phase 3N = 709NCT03643276
- Population
- Children with newly diagnosed high-risk B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia
- Design
- Phase 3 randomised comparison within a larger protocol: after consolidation, children with high-risk B-cell ALL were assigned 1:1 to two cycles of blinatumomab or two cycles of chemotherapy. Primary objective: to test whether 4-year EFS would be 10 percentage points higher with blinatumomab. Results shown are a planned interim analysis, with 709 of 768 eligible patients randomised.
- Primary endpoint
- EFS
- Arms
- Chemotherapy cycles (control, n = 351): Two cycles of conventional chemotherapy after consolidation
- Blinatumomab cycles (experimental, n = 358): Two cycles of blinatumomab in place of the two chemotherapy cycles, after consolidation
- People
- Schrappe M, AIEOP-BFM ALL 2017 Consortium
EFSHR 0.51 (95% CI 0.35–0.73)Δ 48-month EFS+12.7 points
Show the numbers
| Endpoint | Analysis | Blinatumomab cycles | Chemotherapy cycles | Effect |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| EFSITT (709 randomised)Time from randomization to the first of resistance to protocol treatment, relapse, second cancer or death from any cause | interimmedian follow-up 2.9 yearsSchrappe 2026 | 83% at 4 y (77.4–87.4%) | 70.3% at 4 y (63.8–75.9%) | HR 0.51 (95% CI 0.35–0.73)P=0.0002Planned interim analysis. Hazard ratio is blinatumomab versus control, from a Cox model; the P value is from the intention-to-treat analysis. |
| Endpoint | Analysis | Blinatumomab cycles | Chemotherapy cycles | Effect |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| EFSITT (709 randomised)Time from randomization to the first of resistance to protocol treatment, relapse, second cancer or death from any cause | interimmedian follow-up 2.9 yearsSchrappe 2026 | 83% at 4 y (77.4–87.4%) | 70.3% at 4 y (63.8–75.9%) | HR 0.51 (95% CI 0.35–0.73)P=0.0002Planned interim analysis. Hazard ratio is blinatumomab versus control, from a Cox model; the P value is from the intention-to-treat analysis. |
Data table
| Endpoint | HR | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| EFS | 0.51 | 0.35–0.73 |