Hi! Could I hear about people's experiences using Aza-Ven as a bridge to SCT. We have had our consultation to discuss treatment regimes for my mum's AML. The consultant said the mutations aren't good or bad, which classes it as intermediate AML. Both routes end in a SCT but the consultant said she could either do Aza-Ven > SCT or intesive chemo > SCT.
I am really on the fence about it all. We asked the consultant which one she would recommend but she wouldn't really answer. All the papers I can find comparing the two methods say they both have the same success rates as a bridge to SCT, in some Aza-Ven even performs a bit better. If this is the case then why wouldn't this start to become the standard treatment for all ages, or perhaps it is just because Aza-Ven doesn't have decades worth of research behind it.
For background my mum is 68, she is fit, eats healthy, no previous health problems. Only presenting with bruises, still feeling fine and blood counts aren't changing much at the moment (it is only really her platelete which have taken a hit). Consultant has given her a week to think about it as said delaying the treatment doesn't matter much for stable patients.
Hi again LilacJen ….. I had a quick search of the site and did not find any posts with Axa - Ven in them but that not to say that there is not someone who has had this SCT bridging treatment.
I know the Allogenic (donor) SCT journey rather well as I have had 2 Allo SCTs……. the first in June 2014 with the second in Oct 2015.
As you may member I have/had 2 rare types of T-Cell NHL…… so my bridging/prep treatment was 750+ hrs of aggressive chemo.
Yes going through treatment you do indeed get into shortened abbreviations……. if you put Azacitidine and/or Venetoclax into the search 
tool near the top you will see all the old posts about these drugs.
