ReviewExpert review of anticancer therapy2011
Choosing first-line therapy for chronic lymphocytic leukemia.
Review in Expert review of anticancer therapy, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Impact of Venetoclax Exposure on Clinical Efficacy and Safety in Patients with Relapsed or Refractory Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia.Clinical pharmacokinetics · 2017Trial
- Clinical Predictors of Venetoclax Pharmacokinetics in Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia and Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma Patients: a Pooled Population Pharmacokinetic Analysis.The AAPS journal · 2016Trial
- Interindividual variability in CYP3A-mediated venetoclax metabolism in vitro and in vivo in patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia.Clinical and translational science · 2024Article
- Article
- Investigating and targeting chronic lymphocytic leukemia metabolism with the human immunodeficiency virus protease inhibitor ritonavir and metformin.Leukemia & lymphoma · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) exhibits a highly variable natural history, but the addition of genomic risk stratification to traditional clinical staging systems has begun to explain the heterogeneous clinical course. Overall response to treatment has significantly improved over the past three decades and for the first time, a survival benefit has been demonstrated with the use of monoclonal antibodies in combination with cytotoxic chemotherapy. Newer therapeutic strategies have abrogated the adverse prognosis associated with some higher risk features, but other genetic subgroups remain at high risk for rapid disease progression and early mortality. Patients at advanced age or with significant comorbidity constitute a large proportion of the CLL population and present unique clinical challenges. This article will discuss the evolution of contemporary therapeutic approaches to the initial treatment of CLL, and highlight the ways in which risk-adapted therapeutic strategies are improving clinical outcomes.
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.