ArticleOncoTargets and therapy2016
Dose-enhanced combined priming regimens for refractory acute myeloid leukemia and middle-and-high-risk myelodysplastic syndrome: a single-center, retrospective cohort study.
Article in OncoTargets and therapy, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Minimally myelosuppressive regimen for remission induction in pediatric AML: long-term results of an observational study.Blood advances · 2021Observational
- Immunological effects of a low-dose cytarabine, aclarubicin and granulocyte-colony stimulating factor priming regimen on a mouse leukemia model.Oncology letters · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo assess chemotherapeutic regimens for refractory acute myeloid leukemia (AML) and middle-and-high-risk myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS).
methodsBetween 2004 and 2014, 44 patients with refractory AML and 36 patients with MDS were treated with new priming regimens (CHAG, CHTG, CHMG, or CTMG), and 77 patients with refractory AML and 52 patients with MDS were treated with conventional priming regimens (CHG or CAG). This was a single-center retrospective analysis of remission, adverse event, mortality, and survival. The capacity of clinical features (including the expression of co-stimulatory molecule B7.1 on tumor cells) to influence survival was assessed by multivariate Cox regression.
resultsComplete and partial remission rates (RRs) were significantly higher in AML patients treated with new regimens compared to conventional ones (68.2% vs 13.6%, P<0.05). Complete and partial remission were also significantly higher in patients with MDS treated with new regimens (55.6% vs 19.4%, P<0.05). However, although survival advantages were observed in the first year, the new regimens did not significantly improve 3-year overall survival (P>0.05). Patients administered the new regimens experienced more severe and sustained myelosuppression (P<0.05), but no severe adverse events or treatment-related deaths were observed. The rate of non-hematological side effects did not differ significantly between treatment regimens (P>0.05). Both RR and B7.1 expression were significantly higher in patients with AML-M2 and M5 (P<0.05).
conclusionThe new priming regimens improved the RR, lowered the recurrence rate, and improved survival in AML and middle-and-high-risk MDS, without significantly increasing adverse events.
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.