ReviewLeukemia2019
Rethinking clinical trial endpoints in myelodysplastic syndromes.
Review in Leukemia, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effect of thrombopoietin receptor agonist on health-related quality of life and platelet transfusion burden for patients with myelodysplastic syndromes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Annals of hematology · 2022Pooled it
- Monitoring clonal burden as an alternative to blast count for myelodysplastic neoplasm treatment response.Leukemia · 2025Article
- Review
- Evaluating complete remission with partial hematologic recovery (CRh) as a response criterion in myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS).Blood cancer journal · 2022Article
- Content validity of patient-reported outcomes for use in lower-risk myelodysplastic syndromes.Journal of patient-reported outcomes · 2020Article
- Review
- Patient-Reported Outcomes in Myelodysplastic Syndromes: the Move from Life Span to Health Span.Current hematologic malignancy reports · 2020Review
- Emerging Therapies for the Myelodysplastic Syndromes.Clinical hematology international · 2020Review
- Lowering the boom on lower-risk myelodysplastic syndromes.Hematology. American Society of Hematology. Education Program · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) are a heterogeneous collection of clonal, hematopoietic disorders primarily affecting an older population, making successful drug development a complicated process. A sole focus on response rate in clinical trials is likely not clinically meaningful if not accompanied by substantive response duration, improvement in quality of life, and ideally prolongation of survival. The process of receiving a new therapy should not be more burdensome than the MDS sequela it is intended to ameliorate. We review challenges in drug development in MDS with respect to aligning trial endpoints for lower and higher risk patients with treatment goals meaningful to patients.
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.