ArticleCancer management and research2018
First-line treatment strategies for newly diagnosed chronic myeloid leukemia: a network meta-analysis.
Article in Cancer management and research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Comparison of Hepatotoxicity Associated With New BCR-ABL Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors vs Imatinib Among Patients With Chronic Myeloid Leukemia: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.JAMA network open · 2021Pooled it
- First-line imatinib vs second- and third-generation TKIs for chronic-phase CML: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Blood advances · 2020Pooled it
- Discontinuation of Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors in Chronic Myeloid Leukemia With Losing Major Molecular Response as a Definition for Molecular Relapse: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2019Pooled it
- Asciminib add-on to imatinib demonstrates sustained high rates of ongoing therapy and deep molecular responses with prolonged follow-up in the ASC4MORE study.Journal of hematology & oncology · 2024Trial
- MicroRNAs as Sensitizers of Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitor Resistance in Cancer: Small Molecule Partnerships.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Pharmacology of tyrosine kinase inhibitors in chronic myeloid leukemia; a clinician's perspective.Daru : journal of Faculty of Pharmacy, Tehran University of Medical Sciences · 2020Review
- Long-Term Survival, Vascular Occlusive Events and Efficacy Biomarkers of First-Line Treatment of CML: A Meta-Analysis.Cancers · 2020Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesWith bosutinib proven to be available for frontline treatment, there are currently four frontline treatments as well as an additional strategy with high-dose imatinib for newly diagnosed chronic myeloid leukemia (CML). Due to the lack of direct comparison of high-dose imatinib, dasatinib, nilotinib, and bosutinib, we summarized the evidence to indirectly compare the efficacy among these treatment options.
methodsIn total, 14 randomized clinical trials including 5,630 patients were analyzed by direct and mixed-treatment comparisons. Outcomes assessed were the following: complete cytogenetic response at 12 months; major molecular response at 12, 24, and 36 months; deep molecular response at 12, 24, 36, and 60 months; early molecular response at 3 months; progression-free survival (PFS); overall survival (OS); and Grade 3 or 4 adverse events (AEs).
resultsThe Bayesian network meta-analysis demonstrated that high-dose imatinib was less effective than all new-generation tyrosine kinase inhibitors and had a higher probability of Grade 3 or 4 AEs. For molecular response, 300 mg of nilotinib was likely to be the preferred frontline treatment, as demonstrated by higher response rates and faster, deeper, and longer molecular response. For PFS and OS, there were high likelihoods (79% and 74%, respectively) that 400 mg of nilotinib was the preferred option. For AEs, standard-dose imatinib has the highest probability (65%) of being the most favorable toxicity profile.
conclusionConsidering the efficacy and toxicity profile, it is not recommended to use high-dose imatinib for treatment. This analysis also showed that nilotinib has the highest probability to become the preferred frontline agents for treating CML.
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.