Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33134861›Full record

ReviewHemaSphere2020

Chronic Myeloid Leukemia in 2020.

Rüdiger Hehlmann

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in HemaSphere, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 44 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
44citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

44 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Role of Specific miRNA Expression and Nuclear Kappa B Gene Polymorphism as Potential Diagnostic Markers for Chronic Myeloid Leukemia.Medical principles and practice : international journal of the Kuwait University, Health Science Centre · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. LncRNAiScience · 2024
    Article
  17. Contribution of genetic polymorphism inJournal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2024
    Article
  18. Review
  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

1 author.

Rüdiger HehlmannELN Foundation, Weinheim; Medizinische Fakultät Mannheim, Universität Heidelberg, Mannheim, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

New insights have emerged from maturing long-term academic and commercial clinical trials regarding optimum management of chronic myeloid leukemia (CML). Velocity of response has unexpectedly proved less important than hitherto thought, does not predict survival, and is of unclear relevance for treatment-free remission (TFR). Serious and cumulative toxicity has been observed with tyrosine kinase inhibitors that had been expected to replace imatinib. Generic imatinib has become cost-effective first-line treatment in chronic phase despite chronic low-grade side-effects in many patients. Earlier recognition of end-phase by genetic assessment might improve prospects for blast crisis (BC). TFR has become an important new treatment goal of CML. To reflect this new situation ELN has recently revised and updated its recommendations for treating CML. After a brief review of 175 years of CML history this review will focus on recent developments and on current evidence for treating CML in 2020.

Identifiers

PMID33134861
PMCPMC7544304

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.