ArticleOncology letters2019
Observation of clinical efficacy and toxic and side effects of pirarubicin combined with cytarabine on acute myeloid leukemia.
Article in Oncology letters, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Network Pharmacology and Validation Experiments Reveal Cryptotanshinone Inhibits Acute Myeloid Leukemia Progression by Activating Endoplasmic Reticulum Stress.Current medicinal chemistry · 2026Article
- Parallel Toxicities: A Comparative Analysis of Chemotherapy-Induced Neutropenia and Alopecia.Cancers · 2025Review
- Antileukemic potential of Nile blue-mediated photodynamic therapy on HL60 human myeloid leukemia cells.Turkish journal of biology = Turk biyoloji dergisi · 2023Article
- Marine Power on Cancer: Drugs, Lead Compounds, and Mechanisms.Marine drugs · 2021Review
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Efficacy and toxic and side effects of pirarubicin combined with cytarabine and mitoxantrone combined with cytarabine on the treatment of initially treated acute myeloid leukemia (AML) were compared. A retrospective analysis was performed on the medical records of 76 AML patients who were initially treated in Weifang People's Hospital. Among them, 36 patients (observation group) were treated with pirarubicin combined with cytarabine, and 40 patients (control group) were treated with mitoxantrone combined with cytarabine. The efficacy and toxic and side effects on patients in the two groups were observed. There was no statistically significant difference in the complete response (CR) rate, partial response (PR) rate and overall response (OR) rate of patients between the two groups (P>0.05). Patients in the observation group had significantly lower incidence of cardiotoxicity and alopecia than those in the control group (P<0.05). Patients in the observation group had lower incidence of bone marrow depression (BMD) at grade IV than those in the control group (P<0.05). The median progression-free survival time of patients was 14.5 months in the observation group and 18 months in the control group. The progression-free survival rate of patients was 36.11% in the observation group and 40.00% in the control group, with no difference between the two groups (P>0.05). The median survival time of patients was 22.5 months in the observation group and 24.5 months in the control group. The overall survival (OS) rate of patients was 44.44% in the observation group and 47.50% in the control group, with no difference between the two groups (P>0.05). Both pirarubicin combined with cytarabine and mitoxantrone combined with cytarabine have satisfactory efficacy on initially treated AML. Compared to the latter, the former has lower toxic and side effects.
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.