Trial reportThe Lancet. Oncology2015
Vosaroxin plus cytarabine versus placebo plus cytarabine in patients with first relapsed or refractory acute myeloid leukaemia (VALOR): a randomised, controlled, double-blind, multinational, phase 3 study.
Trial report in The Lancet. Oncology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01191801 (A Phase 3, Randomized, Controlled, Double-Blind, Multinational Clinical Study of the Efficacy and Safety of Vosaroxin and Cytarabine Versus Placebo and Cytarabine in Patients With First Relapsed or Refractory Acute Myeloid Leukemia), which is not on this map. Cited by 80 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.
A Phase 3, Randomized, Controlled, Double-Blind, Multinational Clinical Study of the Efficacy and Safety of Vosaroxin and Cytarabine Versus Placebo and Cytarabine in Patients With First Relapsed or Refractory Acute Myeloid Leukemia (VALOR)
Who cites it
80 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Efficacy and safety of venetoclax combination therapy for relapsed/refractory acute myeloid leukemia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC cancer · 2024Pooled it
- Trial
- Trial
- Guadecitabine vs TC in relapsed/refractory AML after intensive chemotherapy: a randomized phase 3 ASTRAL-2 trial.Blood advances · 2024Trial
- Trial
- Idasanutlin plus cytarabine in relapsed or refractory acute myeloid leukemia: results of the MIRROS trial.Blood advances · 2022Trial
- Trial
- Phase II Trial of Pembrolizumab after High-Dose Cytarabine in Relapsed/Refractory Acute Myeloid Leukemia.Blood cancer discovery · 2021Trial
- Clofarabine, cytarabine, and mitoxantrone in refractory/relapsed acute myeloid leukemia: High response rates and effective bridge to allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation.Cancer medicine · 2020Trial
- Phase 3 results for vosaroxin/cytarabine in the subset of patients ≥60 years old with refractory/early relapsed acute myeloid leukemia.Haematologica · 2018Trial
- A phase I/II randomized trial of clofarabine or fludarabine added to idarubicin and cytarabine for adults with relapsed or refractory acute myeloid leukemia.Leukemia & lymphoma · 2018Trial
- Trial
- Trial
- Post-marketing surveillance of quizartinib for relapsed or refractory FLT3-ITD-positive acute myeloid leukemia in Japan.International journal of hematology · 2026Observational
- Saddlepoint inference for rank-based k-sample tests in clustered survival trials.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Concordance between European medicine agency good clinical practice inspections and medical literature: a meta-research survey.BMC medicine · 2025Article
- Early allogeneic stem cell transplantation after melphalan-induced aplasia leads to long-term survival in patients with primary refractory AML.Annals of hematology · 2025Article
- (R)-WAC-224, a new anticancer quinolone, combined with venetoclax and azacitidine overcomes venetoclax-resistant AML through MCL-1 downregulation.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Diagnosis of TP53-mutated myeloid disease by the ICC and WHO fifth edition classifications.Blood advances · 2025Article
- Testing One Primary and Two Secondary Endpoints in a Two-Stage Group Sequential Trial With Extensions.Statistics in medicine · 2025Article
20 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
36 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundSafe and effective treatments are urgently needed for patients with relapsed or refractory acute myeloid leukaemia. We investigated the efficacy and safety of vosaroxin, a first-in-class anticancer quinolone derivative, plus cytarabine in patients with relapsed or refractory acute myeloid leukaemia.
methodsThis phase 3, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial was undertaken at 101 international sites. Eligible patients with acute myeloid leukaemia were aged 18 years of age or older and had refractory disease or were in first relapse after one or two cycles of previous induction chemotherapy, including at least one cycle of anthracycline (or anthracenedione) plus cytarabine. Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to vosaroxin (90 mg/m(2) intravenously on days 1 and 4 in a first cycle; 70 mg/m(2) in subsequent cycles) plus cytarabine (1 g/m(2) intravenously on days 1-5) or placebo plus cytarabine through a central interactive voice system with a permuted block procedure stratified by disease status, age, and geographical location. All participants were masked to treatment assignment. The primary efficacy endpoint was overall survival and the primary safety endpoint was 30-day and 60-day all-cause mortality. Efficacy analyses were done by intention to treat; safety analyses included all treated patients. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01191801.
findingsBetween Dec 17, 2010, and Sept 25, 2013, 711 patients were randomly assigned to vosaroxin plus cytarabine (n=356) or placebo plus cytarabine (n=355). At the final analysis, median overall survival was 7·5 months (95% CI 6·4-8·5) in the vosaroxin plus cytarabine group and 6·1 months (5·2-7·1) in the placebo plus cytarabine group (hazard ratio 0·87, 95% CI 0·73-1·02; unstratified log-rank p=0·061; stratified p=0·024). A higher proportion of patients achieved complete remission in the vosaroxin plus cytarabine group than in the placebo plus cytarabine group (107 [30%] of 356 patients vs 58 [16%] of 355 patients, p<0·0001). Early mortality was similar between treatment groups (30-day: 28 [8%] of 355 patients in the vosaroxin plus cytarabine group vs 23 [7%] of 350 in the placebo plus cytarabine group; 60-day: 70 [20%] vs 68 [19%]). Treatment-related deaths occurred at any time in 20 (6%) of 355 patients given vosaroxin plus cytarabine and in eight (2%) of 350 patients given placebo plus cytarabine. Treatment-related serious adverse events occurred in 116 (33%) and 58 (17%) patients in each group, respectively. Grade 3 or worse adverse events that were more frequent in the vosaroxin plus cytarabine group than in the placebo plus cytarabine group included febrile neutropenia (167 [47%] vs 117 [33%]), neutropenia (66 [19%] vs 49 [14%]), stomatitis (54 [15%] vs 10 [3%]), hypokalaemia (52 [15%] vs 21 [6%]), bacteraemia (43 [12%] vs 16 [5%]), sepsis (42 [12%] vs 18 [5%]), and pneumonia (39 [11%] vs 26 [7%]).
interpretationAlthough there was no significant difference in the primary endpoint between groups, the prespecified secondary analysis stratified by randomisation factors suggests that the addition of vosaroxin to cytarabine might be of clinical benefit to some patients with relapsed or refractory acute myeloid leukaemia.
fundingSunesis Pharmaceuticals.
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.