Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23625468›Full record

ReviewIndian journal of pediatrics2013

How to treat relapsed acute lymphoblastic leukemia: transplant vs. conventional chemotherapy.

Sandeep Jain, Gauri Kapoor

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Indian journal of pediatrics, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

2 authors.

Sandeep JainDepartment of Pediatric Hematology and Oncology, Rajiv Gandhi Cancer Institute & Research Centre, Rohini Sector-5, Delhi, 110085, India.
Gauri Kapoor

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Management of relapsed acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) is challenging and far from satisfactory. The treatment approaches are often varied and controversial. The duration of first remission, site of relapse, immunophenotypic and molecular characteristics of relapsed disease and response to therapy influence treatment outcome. There are three main therapeutic options i.e., chemotherapy alone, induction chemotherapy followed by HLA matched allogeneic transplant and palliation. These may be chosen based on the above mentioned factors. The response to therapy may be evaluated morphologically or by minimal residual disease (MRD). Persistence of MRD, as assessed by molecular techniques or through flowcytometry, clearly influences prognosis in children with relapsed ALL. It not only helps in identifying the subset of patients likely to benefit from allogeneic bone marrow transplant (ABMT) but also in determining the timing of transplant. Patients with non-T phenotype, with late relapsing disease and good response to re-induction therapy have been shown to do equally well with chemotherapy alone. On the other hand patients with early relapse and poor initial response are selected for ABMT. With the improvement in supportive care, better selection of HLA match donors and better immunosuppressive therapies, transplant related mortality has decreased considerably. Despite all of these overall salvage rates are still poor and novel agents are being tested in various trials to establish their role in relapsed ALL therapy.

Indexed as

Bone Marrow TransplantationAntineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsChildFemaleHumansMaleNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalPrecursor Cell Lymphoblastic Leukemia-Lymphoma

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.