Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25376374›Full record

ArticleLeukemia2015

A comparative assessment of the curative potential of reduced intensity allografts in acute myeloid leukaemia.

N H Russell, L Kjeldsen, C Craddock, A Pagliuca, J A Yin, R E Clark, A Howman, R K Hills, A K Burnett, UK NCRI Adult AML Working Party

Open access · greenAbstract readComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Leukemia, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
3.1field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 31 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. State-of-the-art acute and chronic GVHD treatment.International journal of hematology · 2015
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 8 institutions in 2 countries.

N H RussellDepartment of Haematology, Centre for Clinical Haematology, Nottingham University Hospital, Nottingham, UK.
L KjeldsenDepartment of Haematology, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark.
C CraddockDepartment of Haematology, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Birmingham, UK.
A PagliucaDepartment of Haematology, Kings College Hospital, London, UK.
J A YinDepartment of Haematology, Manchester Royal Infirmary, Manchester, UK.
R E ClarkDepartment of Haematology, Royal Liverpool Hospital, Liverpool, UK.
A HowmanSchool of Cancer Studies, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.
R K HillsDepartment of Haematology, Cardiff University School of Medicine, Cardiff, UK.
A K BurnettDepartment of Haematology, Cardiff University School of Medicine, Cardiff, UK.
UK NCRI Adult AML Working Party
Cardiff University · GBKing's College Hospital · GBManchester Royal Infirmary · GBQueen Elizabeth Hospital Birmingham · GBRigshospitalet · DKUniversity of Birmingham · GBUniversity of Liverpool · GBUniversity of Nottingham · GB

Funding

Medical Research Council
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Allogeneic stem cell transplantation (SCT) provides the best mechanism of preventing relapse in acute myeloid leukaemia (AML). However non-relapse mortality (NRM) negates this benefit in older patients. Reduced intensity conditioning (RIC) permits SCT with reduced NRM, but its contribution to cure is uncertain. In the MRC AML15 Trial, patients in remission without favourable risk disease could receive SCT from a matched sibling or unrelated donor (MUD). If aged >45 years, a RIC was recommended and in patients aged 35-44 years, either RIC or myeloablative conditioning was permitted. The aim was to determine which approach improved survival and within which prespecified cytogenetic groups. RIC transplants significantly reduced relapse (adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 0.66 (0.50-0.85), P=0.002) compared to chemotherapy The 5-year overall survival from a sibling RIC (61%) was superior to a MUD RIC (37%; adjusted HR 1.50 (1.01-2.21), P=0.04) due to lower NRM (34 vs 14%, P=0.002) In adjusted analyses, there was a survival benefit for sibling RIC over chemotherapy (59 vs 49%, HR 0.75 (0.57-0.97), P=0.03), with consistent results in intermediate and adverse-risk patients. In patients aged 35-44 years, best outcomes were seen with a sibling RIC transplant, although a comparison with chemotherapy and myeloablative transplant was not significant in adjusted analyses (P=0.3).

Indexed as

Hematopoietic Stem Cell TransplantationTransplantation ConditioningAdultAllograftsAntineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsCombined Modality TherapyFemaleFollow-Up StudiesGraft vs Host DiseaseHumansLeukemia, Myeloid, AcuteMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm StagingPrognosisSiblings

Identifiers

PMID25376374
OpenAlexW2045695338

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.