ArticleLeukemia2017
Comparison of clinical outcomes and prognostic utility of risk stratification tools in patients with therapy-related vs de novo myelodysplastic syndromes: a report on behalf of the MDS Clinical Research Consortium.
Article in Leukemia, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 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
34 citing papers in PubMed.
- Circulating S100A8 and S100A9 protein levels in plasma of patients with acquired aplastic anemia and myelodysplastic syndromes.Cytokine · 2019Trial
- A 2026 update on myelodysplastic neoplasms: current state, challenges and future directions.Nature reviews. Clinical oncology · 2026Review
- Standardizing the Clinical Approach to Cancer Therapy-Related Cardiac Dysfunction: Applying Cardio-Oncology Guidelines as a Practical Tool for Hematology and Oncology Providers.Cancer medicine · 2026Review
- Venetoclax combined with azacitidine in the treatment of secondary myelodysplastic syndrome following multiple myeloma: a case report and literature review.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Clinical and Biological Insights into Myelodysplastic Neoplasms Associated with Deletions of Chromosome 5q Region.Hematology reports · 2025Review
- Impact of primary cancer history and molecular landscape in therapy-related myeloid neoplasms.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
- Incidence and impact of other malignancies after immunochemotherapy by fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab as frontline treatment for chronic lymphocytic leukemia: A single-center retrospective study.Clinical hematology international · 2025Article
- Myeloid neoplasms post cytotoxic therapy: epidemiology, pathogenesis outcomes, prognostic factors, and treatment options.Annals of medicine · 2024Review
- Therapy-related myeloid neoplasms: a real-world pharmacovigilance analysis (1970-2023).Annals of hematology · 2024Article
- Review
- Myelodysplastic syndromes: 2023 update on diagnosis, risk-stratification, and management.American journal of hematology · 2023Review
- Therapy-related MDS dissected based on primary disease and treatment-a nationwide perspective.Leukemia · 2023Article
- De Novo and Therapy-Related Myelodysplastic Syndromes: Analogies and Differences.Mediterranean journal of hematology and infectious diseases · 2022Review
- Secondary myeloid neoplasms after CD19 CAR T therapy in patients with refractory/relapsed B-cell lymphoma: Case series and review of literature.Frontiers in immunology · 2022Review
- Lower risk but high risk.Hematology. American Society of Hematology. Education Program · 2021Review
- Article
- BMT for Myelodysplastic Syndrome: When and Where and How.Frontiers in oncology · 2021Review
- Clinical Management of Anemia in Patients with Myelodysplastic Syndromes: An Update on Emerging Therapeutic Options.Cancer management and research · 2021Review
- Which lower risk myelodysplastic syndromes should be treated with allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation?Leukemia · 2020Review
- Clinical outcomes and characteristics of patients withLeukemia & lymphoma · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
While therapy-related (t)-myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) have worse outcomes than de novo MDS (d-MDS), some t-MDS patients have an indolent course. Most MDS prognostic models excluded t-MDS patients during development. The performances of the International Prognostic Scoring System (IPSS), revised IPSS (IPSS-R), MD Anderson Global Prognostic System (MPSS), WHO Prognostic Scoring System (WPSS) and t-MDS Prognostic System (TPSS) were compared among patients with t-MDS. Akaike information criteria (AIC) assessed the relative goodness of fit of the models. We identified 370 t-MDS patients (19%) among 1950 MDS patients. Prior therapy included chemotherapy alone (48%), chemoradiation (31%), and radiation alone in 21%. Median survival for t-MDS patients was significantly shorter than for d-MDS (19 vs 46 months, P<0.005). All models discriminated survival in t-MDS (P<0.005 for each model). Patients with t-MDS had a significantly higher hazard of death relative to d-MDS in every risk model, and had inferior survival compared to patients with d-MDS within all risk group categories. AIC Scores (lower is better) were 2316 (MPSS), 2343 (TPSS), 2343 (IPSS-R), 2361 (WPSS) and 2364 (IPSS). In conclusion, subsets of t-MDS patients with varying clinical outcomes can be identified using conventional risk stratification models. The MPSS, TPSS and IPSS-R provide the best predictive power.
Indexed as
Identifiers
28111463What 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.