ArticleSao Paulo medical journal = Revista paulista de medicina
Patients' perceptions about diagnosis and treatment of chronic myeloid leukemia: a cross-sectional study among Brazilian patients.
Article in Sao Paulo medical journal = Revista paulista de medicina. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Social and Financial Barriers to Optimum TKI Treatment in Patients with Chronic Myeloid Leukemia-A Knowledge-Attitudes-Practices Study from India.Mediterranean journal of hematology and infectious diseases · 2021Article
- MicroRNA-130a regulates cell malignancy by targeting RECK in chronic myeloid leukemia.American journal of translational research · 2016Article
- Functional studies of miR-130a on the inhibitory pathways of apoptosis in patients with chronic myeloid leukemia.Cancer gene therapy · 2015Article
- Analysis of imatinib adherence in chronic myeloid leukemia: a retrospective study in a referral hospital in the Brazilian Amazon.Hematology, transfusion and cell therapyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
CONTEXT AND
objectivesChronic myeloid leukemia (CML) requires strict daily compliance with oral medication and regular blood and bone marrow control tests. The objective was to evaluate CML patients' perceptions about the disease, their access to information regarding the diagnosis, monitoring and treatment, adverse effects and associations of these variables with patients' demographics, region and healthcare access. DESIGN AND
settingProspective cross-sectional study among CML patients registered with the Brazilian Lymphoma and Leukemia Association (ABRALE).
methodsCML patients receiving treatment through the public healthcare system were interviewed by telephone.
resultsAmong 1,102 patients interviewed, the symptoms most frequently leading them to seek medical care were weakness or fatigue. One third were diagnosed by means of routine tests. The time that elapsed between first symptoms and seeking medical care was 42.28 ± 154.21 days. Most patients had been tested at least once for Philadelphia chromosome, but 43.2% did not know the results. 64.8% had had polymerase chain reaction testing for the BCR/ABL gene every three months. 47% believed that CML could be controlled, but 33.1% believed that there was no treatment. About 24% reported occasionally stopping their medication. Imatinib was associated with nausea, cramps and muscle pain. Self-reported treatment adherence was significantly associated with normalized blood count, and positively associated with imatinib.
conclusionsThere is a lack of information or understanding about disease monitoring tools among Brazilian CML patients; they are diagnosed quickly and have good access to treatment. Correct comprehension of CML control tools is impaired in Brazilian patients.
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.