Comparative Analysis of Treatment Standards for Acute Lymphoblastic Leukaemia

Rakhmonova G.A; Umarova  Sh.Z; Pulatova  N.S

doi:10.18502/jppm.v10i4.20268

Rakhmonova G.A Basic doctoral student of the Tashkent Pharmaceutical Institute, Tashkent, Republic of Uzbekistan.
Umarova Sh.Z 1st Vice-Rector of the Pharmaceutical Institute of Education and Research, Tashkent, Uzbekistan.
Pulatova N.S Hematologist of the highest category of the Republican Specialized Hematological Scientific and Practical Medical Center, Tashkent, Uzbekistan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.18502/jppm.v10i4.20268

Keywords: Acute Lymphoblastic Leukaemia, Treatment Standards, Diagnostics, Treatment Methods, Antitumor Drugs, Targeted Therapy

Abstract

Background: Acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) is a critical hematologic malignancy, particularly affecting children. Treatment outcomes depend significantly on adherence to standardized, evidence-based protocols. While international guidelines exist, understanding regional variations in clinical standards within the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) is essential for optimizing care. This study specifically examines the current national treatment standards for ALL in Uzbekistan, Russia, and Kazakhstan.

Methods: A cross-national comparative analysis was conducted. Official national clinical guidelines, protocols, and formularies for ALL diagnosis and treatment from Uzbekistan, Russia, and Kazakhstan were systematically reviewed and compared. Key areas of comparison included diagnostic criteria and required tests, recommended treatment phases, specific therapeutic regimens, and the list of approved and accessible pharmaceuticals, including cytotoxic agents, targeted therapies, and supportive care drugs.

Results: Significant variations were identified across the three countries in all examined domains. Differences existed in the specificity of diagnostic requirements, the intensity and structure of treatment protocols, and crucially, in the formularies of accessible drugs. Disparities in the availability of newer targeted therapies and certain supportive care medications were particularly noted compared to international standards.

Conclusion: This comparative analysis highlights substantial heterogeneity in the national standards for ALL management across Uzbekistan, Russia, and Kazakhstan, especially concerning accessible therapeutics. These findings provide a crucial foundation for subsequent in-depth pharmacoeconomic evaluations and targeted market access strategies. The ultimate goal is to utilize this evidence to advocate for improved alignment with international best practices and to enhance the availability of effective, innovative treatments for ALL patients within the CIS region.