ArticleLeukemia2003
Timed-sequential chemotherapy with concomitant granulocyte colony-stimulating factor for newly diagnosed de novo acute myelogenous leukemia.
Article in Leukemia, 2003. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- The role of timed sequential chemotherapy in adult acute myelogenous leukemia.Current hematologic malignancy reports · 2008Review
- Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
EMA, consisting of etoposide, mitoxantrone, and cytarabine, is a timed-sequential chemotherapy (TSC) regimen and an efficacious option for induction treatment of acute myelogenous leukemia (AML). Hematopoietic growth factors (HGFs) have been shown to recruit leukemic blasts into cell cycle. We postulated the addition of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) to EMA (EMA-G) might enhance treatment efficacy. EMA-G consisted of mitoxantrone on days 1-3, cytarabine on days 1-3 and 8-10, etoposide on days 8-10, and G-CSF from day 4 until absolute neutrophil count (ANC) >500/microl. In total, 28 patients were enrolled. All patients had newly diagnosed de novo AML. The median age was 42 years. Of the 27 patients with cytogenetic analysis, six had favorable karyotype, 18 intermediate karyotype, and three unfavorable karyotype. The median follow-up was 37.5 months. The median time for both ANC recovery and last platelet transfusion was 26 days. The toxicities associated with this regimen were no more than those expected with the standard chemotherapy. In all, 24 (86%) patients achieved complete remission (CR), three (11%) patients had no response, and one patient died within 24 h of induction therapy before response could be evaluated. Of the 24 patients who achieved CR, 22 received high-dose cytosine arabinoside and two received allogeneic bone marrow transplant as initial postremission therapy. For the whole cohort, the estimated 3-year survival rate was 67%. The median relapse-free survival was 30.5 months. We conclude that EMA-G regimen is a safe regimen and administration of G-CSF during and after induction treatment is not associated with prolongation of marrow aplasia or acceleration of leukemia relapse. It is efficacious for induction therapy for newly diagnosed de novo AML. A high CR rate can be achieved with only one course of this chemotherapy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.