Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23220013›Full record

Trial reportBiology of blood and marrow transplantation : journal of the American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation2013

Dose intensification of busulfan in the preparative regimen is associated with improved survival: a phase I/II controlled, randomized study.

Simrit Parmar, Gabriela Rondon, Marcos de Lima, Peter Thall, Ronald Bassett, Paolo Anderlini, Partow Kebriaei, Issa Khouri, Prasanth Ganesan, Richard Champlin and 1 more

Open access · hybridAbstract readClinical Trial, Phase IClinical Trial, Phase IIRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Biology of blood and marrow transplantation : journal of the American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 23% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Economic and clinical aspects of intravenous versus oral busulfan in adult patients for conditioning prior to HSCT.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2015
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Simrit ParmarDepartment of Stem Cell Transplantation and Cellular Therapy, The University of Texas at MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA. sparmar@mdanderson.org
Gabriela Rondon
Marcos de Lima
Peter Thall
Ronald Bassett
Paolo Anderlini
Partow Kebriaei
Issa Khouri
Prasanth Ganesan
Richard Champlin
Sergio Giralt
The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center · USMemorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center · US

Funding

Tumor Evolution and Metastasis ProgramP30CA016672 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF TX MD ANDERSON CAN CTR · PI Scott Kopetz · 1985 to 2026
$290.8M
TOLERANCE INDUCTION BY MEGADOSE STEM CELL TRANSPLANTS IN CML--GVHD AND GVLP01CA049639 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF TX MD ANDERSON CAN CTR · PI THALL, PETER F · 1990 to 2014
$41.8M
NCI NIH HHS P01 CA049639NCI NIH HHS P30 CA016672
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Dose intensity is important for disease control in patients undergoing allogeneic stem cell transplantation. We conducted a phase I/II controlled, adoptive, randomized study to determine the optimal dosing schedule of i.v. busulfan. Patients aged ≤75 years with advanced hematologic malignancies with human leukocyte antigen-compatible donor were eligible. All patients received fludarabine at 30 mg/m(2)/d for 4 days, and busulfan was administered in different doses in oral or i.v. formulations. As determined by the phase I trial, i.v. busulfan at a dose of 11.2 mg/kg/d was used for the phase II expansion cohort. Altogether, 80 patients with a median age of 56 years were enrolled. Forty percent had active disease at the time of transplantation. Engraftment occurred in 91%, and a complete response was achieved in 79% of patients posttransplantation. At a median follow-up of 91 months in the surviving patients, the outcomes for i.v. busulfan dose of 11.2 mg/kg/d versus other doses were as follows: nonrelapse mortality, 34% versus 23% (P = .4); cumulative incidence of relapse, 43% versus 68% (P = .02); relapse-free survival, 25% versus 9% (P = .017); and overall survival, 27% versus 9% (P = .02). We conclude that optimizing i.v. busulfan dose intensity in the preparative regimen may overcome disease-associated poor prognostic factors.

Indexed as

Hematopoietic Stem Cell TransplantationTransplantation ConditioningAdministration, OralAgedBusulfanDrug Administration ScheduleFemaleGraft vs Host DiseaseHematologic NeoplasmsHistocompatibility TestingHumansImmunosuppressive AgentsInjections, IntravenousMaleMiddle AgedMyeloablative AgonistsBusulfanfludarabineImmunosuppressive AgentsMyeloablative AgonistsVidarabine

Identifiers

PMID23220013
PMCPMC4052712
OpenAlexW1999985485

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.