Trial reportHaematologica2014
Safety and efficacy of switching to nilotinib 400 mg twice daily for patients with chronic myeloid leukemia in chronic phase with suboptimal response or failure on front-line imatinib or nilotinib 300 mg twice daily.
Trial report in Haematologica, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- Trial
- Nilotinib vs. imatinib in Japanese patients with newly diagnosed chronic myeloid leukemia in chronic phase: 10-year follow‑up of the Japanese subgroup of the randomized ENESTnd trial.International journal of hematology · 2022Trial
- Nilotinib dose-optimization in newly diagnosed chronic myeloid leukaemia in chronic phase: final results from ENESTxtnd.British journal of haematology · 2017Trial
- Evaluating the Impact of a Switch to Nilotinib on Imatinib-Related Chronic Low-Grade Adverse Events in Patients With CML-CP: The ENRICH Study.Clinical lymphoma, myeloma & leukemia · 2016Trial
- Trial
- Analysis of 2013 European LeukaemiaNet (ELN) responses in chronic phase CML across four frontline TKI modalities and impact on clinical outcomes.British journal of haematology · 2016Trial
- Lipid Storage and Therapy Resistance in Chronic Myeloid Leukaemia: A Novel Perspective on Targeting Metabolic Vulnerabilities.Cancers · 2025Review
- A practical guide to managing cardiopulmonary toxicities of tyrosine kinase inhibitors in chronic myeloid leukemia.Frontiers in medicine · 2023Review
- Management of Adverse Events Associated With Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitor Use in Adult Patients With Chronic Myeloid Leukemia in Chronic Phase: An Advanced Practice Perspective.Journal of the advanced practitioner in oncology · 2021Article
- Chronic myeloid leukemia patients and treatment-free remission attitudes: a multicenter survey.Patient preference and adherence · 2018Article
- Exploratory study on the impact of switching to nilotinib in 18 patients with chronic myeloid leukemia in chronic phase with suboptimal response to imatinib.Therapeutic advances in hematology · 2017Article
- Chronic myeloid leukemia: sequencing of TKI therapies.Hematology. American Society of Hematology. Education Program · 2016Review
- How we will treat chronic myeloid leukemia in 2016.Blood reviews · 2015Review
- Extending the reach of nilotinib in chronic myeloid leukemia.Haematologica · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In a randomized, phase III trial of nilotinib versus imatinib in patients with newly diagnosed Philadelphia chromosome positive chronic myeloid leukemia in chronic phase, more patients had suboptimal response or treatment failure on front-line imatinib than on nilotinib. Patients with suboptimal response/treatment failure on imatinib 400 mg once or twice daily or nilotinib 300 mg twice daily could enter an extension study to receive nilotinib 400 mg twice daily. After a 19-month median follow up, the safety profile of nilotinib 400 mg twice daily in patients switching from imatinib (n=35) was consistent with previous reports, and few new adverse events occurred in patients escalating from nilotinib 300 mg twice daily (n=19). Of patients previously treated with imatinib or nilotinib 300 mg twice daily, respectively, 15 of 26 (58%) and 2 of 6 (33%) without complete cytogenetic response at extension study entry, and 11 of 34 (32%) and 7 of 18 (39%) without major molecular response at extension study entry, achieved these responses at any time on nilotinib 400 mg twice daily. Estimated 18-month rates of freedom from progression and overall survival after entering the extension study were lower for patients switched from imatinib (85% and 87%, respectively) versus nilotinib 300 mg twice daily (95% and 94%, respectively). Nilotinib dose escalation was generally well tolerated and improved responses in about one-third of patients with suboptimal response/treatment failure. Switch to nilotinib improved responses in some patients with suboptimal response/treatment failure on imatinib, but many did not achieve complete cytogenetic response (clinicaltrials.gov identifiers: 00718263, 00471497 - extension).
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.