ArticleThe Pan African medical journal2017
[Treatment of systemic AL amyloidosis: about 25 cases].
Article in The Pan African medical journal, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Primarye systemic AL amyloidosis is a rare hematologic disorder. The majority of the therapeutic guidelines are based on phase II studies or on retrospective comparisons and case series. Our study aimed to describe all the cases of primary AL amyloidosis reported in 2 military hospitals and to make a comparison between standard melphalan-dexamethasone protocol and new agents in first-line treatment of patients with this disease. We conducted a retrospective, descriptive and multicentric study of all patients with AL amyloidosis whose data were collected during the period July 2009-June 2016. Twenty five patients were enrolled in the study (12 patients treated with melphalan-dexamethasone and 13 with bortezomib-based protocol or lenalidomide-based protocol). There was no significant difference in the epidemiological, clinical and prognostic features between the 2 groups. After a median follow up of 40 months, median overall survival was 54 months in the melphalan-dexamethasone-treated group and 60 months in the new therapies-treated group (P = 0.98). Progression-free survival was 18 months in the standard treatment group vs 11 months in the 2nd group (p = 0.08). In our small case series we haven't found a superiority of the new therapies compared to the standard protocol. This result should be confirmed by a true prospective study, mainly because of the cost of these new molecules that are not always accessible, especially in developing countries.
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.