ReviewCurrent hematologic malignancy reports2015
Outlook and Management of Patients with Myelodysplastic Syndromes Failed by Hypomethylating Agents.
Review in Current hematologic malignancy reports, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Meta-analysis of the benefit of hypomethylating agents before allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation in myelodysplastic syndromes.Clinical and experimental medicine · 2021Pooled it
- Decision Analysis of Transplantation for Patients with Myelodysplasia: "Who Should We Transplant Today?"Current hematologic malignancy reports · 2020Review
- Hypomethylating agents (HMA) treatment for myelodysplastic syndromes: alternatives in the frontline and relapse settings.Expert opinion on pharmacotherapy · 2017Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The DNA hypomethylating agents (HMAs) azacitidine and decitabine are currently the most frequently administered disease-modifying therapies for patients with higher-risk myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS). However, azacitidine and decitabine are not curative, the median response duration is 11-15 months, and only 10-20 % of patients experience complete hematologic and cytogenetic response. Moreover, once an HMA fails the patient, the prognosis is poor, with a median survival of less than 6 months unless the patient undergoes hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT). Recent insights into the genetic basis of MDS have enhanced biological understanding and prognostication accuracy, but these developments have not yet led to regulatory approval of new therapies. While there are multiple potential approaches to patients with MDS for whom HMAs have failed, including supportive care alone, cytotoxic therapy, lenalidomide, histone deacetylase inhibitors, and HSCT, favorable responses to these approaches are limited and new therapies are greatly needed. Here, we review clinical and biological data about the population of patients failed by HMAs, evaluate currently available approaches to patients in this clinical situation, and discuss prospects for development of novel active agents.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26126600What 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.