Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33818756›Full record

ArticleCancer2021

De novo acute myeloid leukemia: A population-based study of outcome in the United States based on the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database, 1980 to 2017.

Koji Sasaki, Farhad Ravandi, Tapan M Kadia, Courtney D DiNardo, Nicholas J Short, Gautam Borthakur, Elias Jabbour, Hagop M Kantarjian

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 163 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
163citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
25.4field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

163 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 260 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Ziftomenib in Relapsed or RefractoryJournal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2025
    Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. A Rare Case of De Novo Acute Myeloid Leukemia, Featuring aDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Article

103 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Koji SasakiDepartment of Leukemia, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.ORCID 0000-0002-9140-0610
Farhad RavandiDepartment of Leukemia, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Tapan M KadiaDepartment of Leukemia, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.ORCID 0000-0002-9892-9832
Courtney D DiNardoDepartment of Leukemia, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.ORCID 0000-0001-9003-0390
Nicholas J ShortDepartment of Leukemia, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.ORCID 0000-0002-2983-2738
Gautam BorthakurDepartment of Leukemia, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Elias JabbourDepartment of Leukemia, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.ORCID 0000-0003-4465-6119
Hagop M KantarjianDepartment of Leukemia, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.ORCID 0000-0002-1908-3307
The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center · US

Funding

Tumor Evolution and Metastasis ProgramP30CA016672 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF TX MD ANDERSON CAN CTR · PI Fabien Delerue · 1985 to 2026
$290.8M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA016672
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSeveral important treatment and supportive care strategies have been implemented over the past 4 decades in the management of acute myeloid leukemia (AML).

methodsThe authors identified 29,107 patients who were diagnosed with de novo AML between 1980 and 2017 in the National Cancer Institute's Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database. Patients were categorized into 5 age groups (ages birth to 14, 15-39, 40-59, 60-69, and ≥70 years) and 4 calendar periods (1980-1989, 1990-1999, 2000-2009, and 2010-2017). The outcomes of patients who had AML within these categories were analyzed.

resultsThe overall 5-year survival rates in patients with AML were 9%, 15%, 22%, and 28% in the decades 1980 to 1989, 1990 to 1999, 2000 to 2009, and 2010 to 2017, respectively. Among patients aged 15 to 39 years, the 5-year survival rates were 24%, 41%, 52%, and 63%, respectively; among those aged ≥70 years, the 5-year survival rates were 1%, 2%, 3%, and 5%, respectively. Four-week mortality was surprising high among adults and older patients (range, 20%-45%), even in modern times. Overall, survival continued to improve over the calendar periods and was best in the period from 2010 to 2017. Survival improvement was noticeable across all age groups except patients aged ≥70 years, in whom the estimated 5-year survival rate remained 5% even during the period from 2010 to 2017.

conclusionsThe outcomes of patients with AML showed incremental improvement over time in a population-based study of the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results data. The introduction since 2017 of targeted therapies among older patients and optimizations in supportive care hopefully will continue to improve outcomes in AML, particularly among older patients.

Indexed as

Leukemia, Myeloid, AcuteAdolescentAdultAgedHumansSEER ProgramSurvival RateUnited StatesYoung Adultacute myeloid leukemiadecadesearly mortalityEpidemiology and End ResultsoutcomeSurveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results

Identifiers

PMID33818756
PMCPMC11826308
OpenAlexW3144004041

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.