Trial reportCancer2011
Randomized trial of 2 dosages of prophylactic granulocyte-colony-stimulating factor after induction chemotherapy in pediatric acute myeloid leukemia.
Trial report in Cancer, 2011. 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, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effects of a Change from an Indoor-Based Total Mixed Ration to a Rotational Pasture System Combined with a Moderate Concentrate Feed Supply on Immunological Cell and Blood Parameters of Dairy Cows.Veterinary sciences · 2019Article
- Controlled release of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor enhances osteoconductive and biodegradable properties of Beta-tricalcium phosphate in a rat calvarial defect model.International journal of biomaterials · 2014Article
- BOSS: context-enhanced search for biomedical objects.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2012Article
- Dexamethasone enhances 1alpha,25-dihydroxyvitamin D3 effects by increasing vitamin D receptor transcription.The Journal of biological chemistry · 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
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundGranulocyte-colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) is effective in accelerating neutrophil recovery after intensive chemotherapy for acute myeloid leukemia (AML). However, the optimal G-CSF dosage for patients with AML has not been determined. To the authors' knowledge, G-CSF dosages have not been compared in a randomized AML study.
methodsPatients who were enrolled on the St. Jude AML97 protocol and remained on study after window therapy were eligible to participate. The effect of the dosage of G-CSF given after induction chemotherapy Courses 1 and 2 was analyzed in 46 patients who were assigned randomly in a double-blinded manner to receive either 5 μg/kg daily or 10 μg/kg daily of G-CSF. The number of days of G-CSF treatment, neutropenia (an absolute neutrophil count <0.5 × 10(9) /L), and hospitalization; the number of episodes of febrile neutropenia, grade 2 through 4 infection, and antimicrobial therapy; transfusion requirements; the cost of supportive care; and survival were compared between the 2 study arms.
resultsNo statistically significant differences were observed between the 2 arms in any of the endpoints measured.
conclusionsThe higher G-CSF dosage (10 μg/kg daily) offered no greater benefit than the lower dosage (5 μg/kg daily) in patients who were receiving intensive chemotherapy for AML.
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.