All content on this site is intended for healthcare professionals only. By acknowledging this message and accessing the information on this website you are confirming that you are a Healthcare Professional. If you are a patient or carer, please visit Know AML.
The AML Hub uses cookies on this website. They help us give you the best online experience. By continuing to use our website without changing your cookie settings, you agree to our use of cookies in accordance with our updated Cookie Policy
Introducing
Now you can personalise
your AML Hub experience!
Bookmark content to read later
Select your specific areas of interest
View content recommended for you
Find out moreThe AML Hub website uses a third-party service provided by Google that dynamically translates web content. Translations are machine generated, so may not be an exact or complete translation, and the AML Hub cannot guarantee the accuracy of translated content. The AML Hub and its employees will not be liable for any direct, indirect, or consequential damages (even if foreseeable) resulting from use of the Google Translate feature. For further support with Google Translate, visit Google Translate Help.
In what patients would you replace 7+3 with venetoclax-based therapies?
Bookmark this article
During the Acute Leukemia Forum 2021, the AML Hub spoke to James Foran, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, US. We asked, In what patients would you replace 7+3 with venetoclax-based therapies?
In what patients would you replace 7+3 with venetoclax-based therapies?
Historically, older patients with AML have been undertreated due to the barriers involved in treatment with intensive chemotherapy. In this video, Foran discusses the usage of venetoclax-based therapies with a focus on this patient subset. He believes that longer follow-up and prospective data are needed in order to offer the azacitidine/venetoclax combination to more patients.
More about...
Newsletter
Subscribe to get the best content related to AML delivered to your inbox