ArticleBone marrow transplantation2010
Double allogeneic hematopoietic SCT as a rescue therapy for poor-risk hematological malignancies.
Article in Bone marrow transplantation, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- High-dose melphalan with or without stem cell support before myeloablative allo-SCT for remission induction in patients with advanced relapsed or refractory AML.Bone marrow transplantation · 2011Article
- Order of application and liver toxicity in patients given BU and CY containing conditioning regimens for allogeneic hematopoietic SCT.Bone marrow transplantation · 2011Article
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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The prognosis of patients with poor-risk or relapsed hematological malignancies is dismal. The dose intensification necessary to achieve subsequent CR is limited by the toxicity of chemotherapy. Treatment intensification with double allogeneic HSCT (dHSCT) may enhance the antileukemic effect and reduces treatment-related toxicity associated with prolonged aplasia during reinduction. We evaluated this approach in 23 patients, nine with primary refractory disease or relapse after conventional chemotherapy (group I) and 14 with relapses after allogeneic HSCT (group II). Double HSCT was feasible in all patients. At the end of the observation period, 6 of 23 (26%) patients were still alive and in remission with a median observation time of 60 months (1-153). The overall survival probability at 1 year was 41% (95% confidence interval (CI), 21-62%), transplant-related mortality (TRM) 28% (9-47%) and the incidence of relapse 42% (18-66%). The TRM in groups I and II were 22 and 36% and the relapse rate 33 and 50%, respectively. In conclusion, we have shown the feasibility of dHSCT with an acceptable TRM, irrespective of a previous allogeneic HSCT. Whether this approach offers a survival benefit for patients with poor-risk leukemias has to be tested in larger prospective trials.
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.