ArticleLeukemia research reports2021
Treatment outcome of doxorubicin versus idarubicin in adult acute myeloid leukemia.
Article in Leukemia research reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- TargetPrior: a miRNA-signature embedded evolutionary learning framework for prioritizing drug targets in acute myeloid leukemia.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2026Article
- Article
- Dysregulated HELLS expression alters cellular processes and serves as a potential prognostic marker in acute myeloid leukemia.The Journal of biological chemistry · 2026Article
- Review
- Gastrointestinal side effects in hepatocellular carcinoma patients receiving transarterial chemoembolization: a meta-analysis of 81 studies and 9495 patients.Therapeutic advances in medical oncology · 2025Article
- Unveiling the Complexities: Exploring Mechanisms of Anthracyclineinduced Cardiotoxicity.Current cardiology reviews · 2025Review
- Impact of different chemotherapy regimens on intestinal mucosal injury assessed with bedside ultrasound: a study in 213 AML patients.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe present study aimed to compare treatment outcome of idarubicin versus doxorubicin in combination with Ara-C as induction therapy for untreated AML patients. PATIENTS AND
methodsThis retrospective study included 143 patients with de novo AML. All patients received full dose of standard induction therapy (3 + 7) using anthracyclines (doxorubicin or idarubicin) and cytarabine.
resultsThe studied groups had comparable CR. No significant differences were noted between the studied groups regarding DFS and OS. The DXR group had significantly lower cost in comparison to IDA group.
conclusionsIdarubicin doesn't have a clear advantage over doxorubicin in treatment of AML.
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.