ArticleCancer science2022
Comparison of molecular responses and outcomes between BCR::ABL1 e14a2 and e13a2 transcripts in chronic myeloid leukemia.
Article in Cancer science, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- One Target, Different Results: The Clinical Impact of Diagnostic Kit Choice inDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Article
- Chronic myeloid leukemia with the e13a3 atypical fusion gene: A case report.Oncology letters · 2025Article
- CD302 predicts achievement of deep molecular response in patients with chronic myeloid leukemia treated with imatinib.Blood neoplasia · 2024Article
- e14a2 Transcript Favors Treatment-Free Remission in Chronic Myeloid Leukemia When Associated with Longer Treatment with Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors and Sustained Deep Molecular Response.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Exploration of treatment-free remission in CML, based on molecular monitoring.Cancer medicine · 2024Review
- Prognosis in Chronic Myeloid Leukemia: Baseline Factors, Dynamic Risk Assessment and Novel Insights.Cells · 2023Review
- Comparison of molecular responses and outcomes between BCR::ABL1 e14a2 and e13a2 transcripts in chronic myeloid leukemia.Cancer science · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 7 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Several studies have compared the molecular responses between e14a2 and e13a2 BCR::ABL1 transcripts in chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) patients treated with front-line imatinib, but there were very limited studies on nilotinib or dasatinib-treated patients. We retrospectively analyzed the molecular responses in 1124 CML patients with the e14a2 or e13a2 transcript receiving front-line imatinib, nilotinib or dasatinib treatment. Patients with the e14a2 transcript had higher optimal response rates than those with the e13a2 transcript at 12 months in the imatinib-treated group, and 6 and 12 months in the nilotinib-treated group. The optimal response rates were not significantly different between the two transcripts in the dasatinib-treated group at landmark molecular responses. With a median follow-up time of 48.4 months, higher cumulative incidences of BCR::ABL1 International Scale ≤1% and major molecular response were observed in patients with the e14a2 rather than the e13a2 transcript receiving front-line imatinib or nilotinib treatment, but not in dasatinib-treated patients. The progression-free survival and overall survival did not differ between the two transcripts in all three treatment groups. In view of the speed and depth of molecular responses, BCR::ABL1 transcript subtypes might provide helpful information in selecting a front-line tyrosine kinase inhibitor for individual young patients with future potential treatment-free remission.
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.