Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28708931›Full record

Trial reportCancer2017

A randomized phase 2 study of idarubicin and cytarabine with clofarabine or fludarabine in patients with newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia.

Elias Jabbour, Nicholas J Short, Farhad Ravandi, Xuelin Huang, Lianchun Xiao, Guillermo Garcia-Manero, William Plunkett, Varsha Gandhi, Koji Sasaki, Naveen Pemmaraju and 12 more

Abstract readClinical Trial, Phase IIRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Cancer, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed
4.3field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

26 citing papers in PubMed, 48 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Venetoclax Combined With FLAG-IDA Induction and Consolidation in Newly Diagnosed and Relapsed or Refractory Acute Myeloid Leukemia.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2021
    Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Therapeutic Advances in Immunotherapies for Hematological Malignancies.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

22 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Elias JabbourDepartment of Leukemia, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Nicholas J ShortDepartment of Leukemia, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2983-2738
Farhad RavandiDepartment of Leukemia, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Xuelin HuangDepartment of Biostatistics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Lianchun XiaoDepartment of Biostatistics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Guillermo Garcia-ManeroDepartment of Leukemia, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
William PlunkettDepartment of Experimental Therapeutics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Varsha GandhiDepartment of Experimental Therapeutics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Koji SasakiDivision of Cancer Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9140-0610
Naveen PemmarajuDepartment of Leukemia, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Naval G DaverDepartment of Leukemia, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7103-373X
Gautam BorthakurDepartment 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.
Zeev EstrovDepartment 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.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9892-9832
William G WierdaDepartment 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.
Mark BrandtDepartment of Leukemia, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Susan M O'BrienChao Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of California at Irvine, Orange, California.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3386-6540
Jorge E CortesDepartment of Leukemia, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Hagop 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

backgroundFludarabine and clofarabine are purine nucleoside analogues with established clinical activity in patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML).

methodsHerein, the authors evaluated the efficacy and safety of idarubicin and cytarabine with either clofarabine (CIA) or fludarabine (FIA) in adults with newly diagnosed AML. Adults with newly diagnosed AML who were deemed suitable for intensive chemotherapy were randomized using a Bayesian adaptive design to receive CIA (106 patients) or FIA (76 patients). Patients received induction with idarubicin and cytarabine, plus either clofarabine or fludarabine. Responding patients could receive up to 6 cycles of consolidation therapy. Outcomes were compared with a historical cohort of patients who received idarubicin and cytarabine.

resultsThe complete remission/complete remission without platelet recovery rate was similar among patients in the CIA and FIA arms (80% and 82%, respectively). The median event-free survival was 13 months and 12 months, respectively (P = .91), and the median overall survival was 24 months and not reached, respectively (P = .23), in the 2 treatment arms. CIA was associated with more adverse events, particularly transaminase elevation, hyperbilirubinemia, and rash. Early mortality was similar in the 2 arms (60-day mortality rate of 4% for CIA vs 1% for FIA; P = .32). In an exploratory analysis of patients aged <50 years, FIA was found to be associated with improved survival compared with idarubicin and cytarabine (2-year event-free survival rate: 58% vs 30% [P = .05] and 2-year overall survival rate: 72% vs 36% [P = .009]).

conclusionsCIA and FIA have similar efficacy in younger patients with newly diagnosed AML, although FIA is associated with a better toxicity profile. Cancer 2017;123:4430-9. © 2017 American Cancer Society.

Indexed as

Adenine NucleotidesAdolescentAdultAgedAntineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsArabinonucleosidesClofarabineCytarabineHumansIdarubicinLeukemia, Myeloid, AcuteMiddle AgedNeoadjuvant TherapyTreatment OutcomeVidarabineYoung AdultAdenine NucleotidesArabinonucleosidesClofarabineCytarabinefludarabineIdarubicinVidarabineacute myeloid leukemiaclofarabinefludarabineinductionnucleoside analog

Identifiers

PMID28708931
PMCPMC5739034
OpenAlexW2735569737

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.