Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30762219›Full record

Observational studyInternational journal of hematology2019

Efficacy and safety of tyrosine kinase inhibitors for newly diagnosed chronic-phase chronic myeloid leukemia over a 5-year period: results from the Japanese registry obtained by the New TARGET system.

Masahiro Kizaki, Naoto Takahashi, Noriyoshi Iriyama, Shinichiro Okamoto, Takaaki Ono, Noriko Usui, Koiti Inokuchi, Chiaki Nakaseko, Mineo Kurokawa, Masahiko Sumi and 8 more

Abstract readMulticenter StudyObservational Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Observational study in International journal of hematology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

28 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

18 authors.

Masahiro KizakiDepartment of Hematology, Saitama Medical Center, Saitama Medical University, Saitama, Japan.
Naoto TakahashiDepartment of Hematology, Nephrology and Rheumatology, Akita University Graduate School of Medicine, 1-1-1 Hondo, Akita, Akita, 010-8543, Japan. naotot@doc.med.akita-u.ac.jp.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6758-3787
Noriyoshi IriyamaDivision of Hematology and Rheumatology, Department of Medicine, Nihon University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.
Shinichiro OkamotoDivision of Hematology, Department of Medicine, Keio University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.
Takaaki OnoDivision of Hematology, Department of Internal Medicine III, Hamamatsu University School of Medicine, Hamamatsu, Japan.
Noriko UsuiDivision of Clinical Oncology and Hematology, Department of Internal Medicine, The Jikei University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.
Koiti InokuchiDepartment of Hematology, Nippon Medical School, Tokyo, Japan.
Chiaki NakasekoDepartment of Hematology, Chiba University Hospital, Chiba, Japan.
Mineo KurokawaDepartment of Hematology and Oncology, Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.
Masahiko SumiDepartment of Hematology, Nagano Red Cross Hospital, Nagano, Japan.
Fumihiko NakamuraDepartment of Hematology, National Center for Global Health and Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.
Tatsuya KawaguchiDepartment of Medical Technology, Kumamoto Health Science University, Kumamoto, Japan.
Ritsuro SuzukiDepartment of Oncology and Hematology, Shimane University Hospital, Izumo, Japan.
Kazuhito YamamotoDepartment of Hematology and Cell Therapy, Aichi Cancer Center, Nagoya, Japan.
Kazunori OhnishiJapanese Red Cross Aichi Blood Center, Seto, Japan.
Itaru MatsumuraKindai University Faculty of Medicine, Osaka-Sayama, Japan.
Tomoki NaoeNational Hospital Organization Nagoya Medical Center, Nagoya, Japan.
New TARGET investigators

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We report the results of a multicenter observational study using the New TARGET system, in which the effectiveness and safety of tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) were evaluated in newly diagnosed chronic-phase chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) patients. A total of 506 patients were enrolled between April 2010 and March 2013. Median age was 56 (range 18-92) years; 35% of patients were females. As the first-line therapy, 139 (27.9%), 169 (33.9%) and 144 (28.9%) patients were treated with imatinib, nilotinib, and dasatinib, respectively. Five-year progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 93.8% and 94.5%, respectively. The OS curve was significantly superior for patients treated with second-generation TKIs than imatinib (P = 0.0068), and an early molecular response (EMR) at 3 months (BCR-ABL1 < 10%) was detected in 328 of 377 patients evaluated for molecular response. The PFS curve was significantly superior for patients with EMR than without (P < 0.0001). Although 12 patients experienced vascular adverse events, no new safety issues were observed in patients with adverse events. The results of this observational study demonstrated that treating newly diagnosed CML-CP patients with TKI results in satisfactory and reliable outcomes.

Indexed as

Imatinib MesylateLeukemia, Myelogenous, Chronic, BCR-ABL PositiveProtein Kinase InhibitorsRegistriesAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overDisease-Free SurvivalFemaleHumansJapanMaleMiddle AgedRetrospective StudiesSurvival RateImatinib MesylateProtein Kinase InhibitorsBCR-ABL1Chronic myeloid leukemia (CML)Early molecular response (EMR)Overall survival (OS)Tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI)

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.