ArticleLeukemia2000
Survival time in a population-based consecutive series of adult acute myeloid leukemia--the prognostic impact of karyotype during the time period 1976-1993.
Article in Leukemia, 2000. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Survival prognostic factors in patients with acute myeloid leukemia using machine learning techniques.PloS one · 2021Article
- Myelodysplastic syndrome with chromosome 5 abnormalities: a nationwide survey in Japan.Leukemia · 2008Article
- Is there a role for postremission therapy in older adults with acute myelogenous leukemia (AML)?Leukemia · 2005Article
- Article
- Article
- Preferential expression of the transcription coactivator HTIF1alpha gene in acute myeloid leukemia and MDS-related AML.Leukemia · 2002Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A consecutive population-based series of 372 adult acute myeloid leukemias, successfully cytogenetically investigated at a single center between 1976 and 1993, is reported. All medical records were reviewed in order to ascertain the prognostic impact of karyotype, divided into three groups; favorable (t(8;21), t(15;17), and inv(16) irrespective of karyotypic complexity; n = 40), poor (der(1;7), inv(3), -5, del(5q), -7, t(9;22), and complex karyotypes including whole or partial losses of chromosomes 5 and/or 7; n = 56), and intermediate (other abnormalities or normal karyotype; n = 276). The possible modification by age, gender, time period, morphologic subtype, and bone marrow transplantation (BMT) on this prognostic impact was also determined. The chemotherapy regimens used were heterogeneous over time but principally the same at any given point in time. The majority of the patients were treated with combinations including an anthracycline and cytarabine with curative intent. Gender, morphology, and BMT did not significantly modify the effect of cytogenetic patterns on survival time, whereas age and time period did. The hazard ratios for the subgroups favorable, intermediate, and poor were 1.0, 1.2 and 1.9 at age 20-49; 1.0, 2.5 and 4.5 at age 50-64; 1.0, 4.1 and 11.4 at age 65-74; 1.0, 1.4 and 2.2 for the time period 1976-1987 and 1.0, 2.0 and 6.7 for 1988-1993. The salient feature of the Kaplan-Meier curves was the improved survival during the later time period for patients with favorable and intermediate cytogenetic abnormalities. The present findings thus suggest that it is mainly these patient groups that have benefited from advances in therapy, including supportive care.
Indexed as
Identifiers
10865970What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.