Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27602508›Full record

ArticleCancer2017

Differential impact of minimal residual disease negativity according to the salvage status in patients with relapsed/refractory B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia.

Elias Jabbour, Nicholas J Short, Jeffrey L Jorgensen, Musa Yilmaz, Farhad Ravandi, Sa A Wang, Deborah A Thomas, Joseph Khoury, Richard E Champlin, Issa Khouri and 11 more

Open access · greenAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 40 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
40citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
11.5field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

40 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 75 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Minimal Residual Disease in the Management of B-Cell Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia: A Systematic Review of Studies from Indian Settings.Indian journal of hematology & blood transfusion : an official journal of Indian Society of Hematology and Blood Transfusion · 2024
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Therapeutic Advances in Immunotherapies for Hematological Malignancies.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Clinical Value of Measurable Residual Disease in Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia.Blood and lymphatic cancer : targets and therapy · 2022
    Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

21 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Elias JabbourDepartment of Leukemia, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Nicholas J ShortDivision of Cancer Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Jeffrey L JorgensenDepartment of Hematopathology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Musa YilmazDepartment of Leukemia, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Farhad RavandiDepartment of Leukemia, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Sa A WangDepartment of Hematopathology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Deborah A ThomasDepartment of Leukemia, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Joseph KhouryDepartment of Hematopathology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Richard E ChamplinDepartment of Stem Cell Transplantation, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Issa KhouriDepartment of Stem Cell Transplantation, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Partow KebriaeiDepartment of Stem Cell Transplantation, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Susan M O'BrienChao Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of California Irvine, Orange, California.
Guillermo Garcia-ManeroDepartment of Leukemia, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Jorge E CortesDepartment of Leukemia, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Koji SasakiDepartment of Leukemia, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Courtney D DinardoDepartment of Leukemia, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Tapan M KadiaDepartment of Leukemia, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Nitin JainDepartment of Leukemia, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Marina KonoplevaDepartment of Leukemia, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Rebecca GarrisDepartment of Leukemia, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Hagop M KantarjianDepartment of Leukemia, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center · USUniversity of California, Irvine · US

Funding

Tumor Evolution and Metastasis ProgramP30CA016672 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF TX MD ANDERSON CAN CTR · PI Fabien Delerue · 1985 to 2026
$290.8M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA016672
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMinimal residual disease (MRD) assessment predicts survival for patients with newly diagnosed acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL). Its significance in relapsed/refractory ALL is less clear.

methodsThis study identified 78 patients with relapsed/refractory B-cell ALL who achieved a morphologic response with inotuzumab ozogamicin (n = 41), blinatumomab (n = 11), or mini-hyperfractionated cyclophosphamide, vincristine, and doxorubicin plus inotuzumab (n = 26) during either salvage 1 (S1; n = 46) or salvage 2 (S2; n = 32) and had undergone an MRD assessment by multiparameter flow cytometry at the time of remission.

resultsMRD negativity was achieved in 41 patients overall (53%). The MRD negativity rate was 57% in S1 and 47% in S2. Among patients in S1, achieving MRD negativity was associated with longer event-free survival (EFS; median, 18 vs 7 months; 2-year EFS rate, 46% vs 17%; P = .06) and overall survival (OS; median, 27 vs 9 months; 2-year OS, 52% vs 36%; P = .15). EFS and OS were similar in S2, regardless of the MRD response. Among MRD-negative patients who underwent allogeneic stem cell transplantation (SCT), EFS and OS were superior for those who underwent SCT in S1 rather than S2 (P = .003 and P = .04, respectively). Patients in S1 who achieved MRD negativity and subsequently underwent SCT had the best outcomes with a 2-year OS rate of 65%.

conclusionsPatients with relapsed/refractory ALL who achieve MRD negativity in S1 can have long-term survival. Patients in S2 generally have poor outcomes, regardless of their MRD status. Cancer 2017;123:294-302. © 2016 American Cancer Society.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAntineoplastic AgentsB-LymphocytesDisease-Free SurvivalHematopoietic Stem Cell TransplantationHumansMiddle AgedNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalNeoplasm, ResidualPrecursor B-Cell Lymphoblastic Leukemia-LymphomaPrecursor Cell Lymphoblastic Leukemia-LymphomaSalvage TherapyStem Cell TransplantationAntineoplastic Agentsacute lymphoblastic leukemiablinatumomabinotuzumabminimal residual diseaserefractoryrelapsed

Identifiers

PMID27602508
PMCPMC5321541
OpenAlexW2518831426

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.