ReviewWiener klinische Wochenschrift2008
[Individualized management and therapy of myelodysplastic syndromes].
Review in Wiener klinische Wochenschrift, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- 10th anniversary of the Austrian MDS Platform: aims and ongoing projects.Wiener klinische Wochenschrift · 2015Article
- The challenge of individualised risk assessment and therapy planning in elderly high-risk myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) patients.Annals of hematology · 2012Review
- [Comorbidity oriented oncology - an overview].Wiener klinische Wochenschrift · 2010Review
- [Rationale for bone marrow examination in patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases].Wiener klinische Wochenschrift · 2009Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) are characterized by ineffective hematopoiesis and a tendency to transition to acute myeloid leukemia. Due to the increasing number of older patients in Austria and the high frequency of therapy-associated MDS following successful chemo- and/or radiotherapy of a primary tumor, the frequency and relevance of MDS are continuously increasing. While therapeutic options were until recently limited to best supportive care, AML-like induction chemotherapy and hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) in younger patients, in recent years new therapeutic options have become available. Supportive care was improved through the introduction of effective iron chelation and the availability of hematopoietic growth factors like erythropoiesis-stimulating factors (ESF) and granulocyte colony-stimulating factors (G-CSF). In addition, immune-modulating drugs (IMiDs) like lenalidomide or epigenetically effective agents like the cytosine analogues or histone deacetylase (HDAC) inhibitors have become available and are highly effective in distinct subgroups of MDS patients. The development of state-of-the art recommendations is one of the major aims of the MDS Platform of the Austrian Society of Hematology and Oncology. This manuscript reviews recent developments in clinical scoring and targeted and individualized MDS therapy and discusses their relevance in and potential applicability to daily practice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
18988005What 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.