Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26617639›Full record

ArticleAdvances in hematology2015

Decitabine Compared with Low-Dose Cytarabine for the Treatment of Older Patients with Newly Diagnosed Acute Myeloid Leukemia: A Pilot Study of Safety, Efficacy, and Cost-Effectiveness.

Linu A Jacob, S Aparna, K C Lakshmaiah, D Lokanatha, Govind Babu, Suresh Babu, Sandhya Appachu

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Advances in hematology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 25% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Linu A JacobDepartment of Medical Oncology, Kidwai Memorial Institute of Oncology, Dr. M. H. Mari Gowda Road, Hombegowda Nagar, Bangalore, Karnataka 560030, India.
S AparnaDepartment of Medical Oncology, Kidwai Memorial Institute of Oncology, Dr. M. H. Mari Gowda Road, Hombegowda Nagar, Bangalore, Karnataka 560030, India.
K C LakshmaiahDepartment of Medical Oncology, Kidwai Memorial Institute of Oncology, Dr. M. H. Mari Gowda Road, Hombegowda Nagar, Bangalore, Karnataka 560030, India.
D LokanathaDepartment of Medical Oncology, Kidwai Memorial Institute of Oncology, Dr. M. H. Mari Gowda Road, Hombegowda Nagar, Bangalore, Karnataka 560030, India.
Govind BabuDepartment of Medical Oncology, Kidwai Memorial Institute of Oncology, Dr. M. H. Mari Gowda Road, Hombegowda Nagar, Bangalore, Karnataka 560030, India.
Suresh BabuDepartment of Medical Oncology, Kidwai Memorial Institute of Oncology, Dr. M. H. Mari Gowda Road, Hombegowda Nagar, Bangalore, Karnataka 560030, India.
Sandhya AppachuDepartment of Medical Oncology, Kidwai Memorial Institute of Oncology, Dr. M. H. Mari Gowda Road, Hombegowda Nagar, Bangalore, Karnataka 560030, India.
Kidwai Memorial Institute of Oncology · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction. The incidence of Acute Myeloid Leukemia (AML) increases progressively with age and its treatment is challenging. This prospective case control study was undertaken to compare the safety, efficacy, and cost-effectiveness of decitabine with those of cytarabine in older patients with newly diagnosed AML who are not fit for intensive chemotherapy. Materials and Methods. 30 eligible patients above 60 years old with newly diagnosed AML were assigned to receive decitabine or cytarabine. The primary end point was overall survival (OS). The secondary objective was to compare adverse events and cost-effectiveness of therapy in the two study groups. Results. In this study, 15 patients received decitabine and 15 patients received cytarabine. The median OS was 5.5 months for each of the treatment groups. The hazard ratio between the treatment groups was 0.811 with 95% CI of 0.390 to 1.687. Toxicity profile was similar in both groups. Cost per cycle of chemotherapy in INR was 24,200 for decitabine and 1,600 for low-dose cytarabine group. Median of simplified cost-effectiveness ratio was 0.00022 for decitabine group and 0.0034 for low-dose cytarabine group. Conclusions. For elderly patients with AML, decitabine and low-dose cytarabine should be chosen based on the patient's choice and affordability. Our study has shown that both of these agents have similar OS and toxicity. Low-dose cytarabine scores over decitabine in developing countries as it is more cost-effective.

Identifiers

PMID26617639
PMCPMC4649104
OpenAlexW2128168358

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.