Trial reportCancer chemotherapy and pharmacology2022
A prospective, open-label, randomised, parallel design study of 4 generic formulations of intramuscular L-asparaginase in childhood precursor B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukaemia (ALL).
Trial report in Cancer chemotherapy and pharmacology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Global Challenges in Paediatric Acute Lymphoblastic Leukaemia.Acta haematologica · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsL-asparaginase is an essential medicine for childhood ALL. The quality of generic L-asparaginase available in India is a matter of concern. We compared four commonly used generic formulations of L-asparaginase in India. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe conducted a prospective, open-label, randomised trial of four generic formulations of asparaginase for the treatment of patients with newly diagnosed intermediate-risk B-ALL. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1:1:1 ratio to receive generic asparaginase at a dose of at 10,000 IU/m 2 on days 9, 12, 15, and 18 of a 35-day cycle (Induction treatment). The primary end points were to determine the difference in the asparaginase activity and asparagine depletion. Historical patients who received L-asparaginase Medac (innovator) served as controls.
resultsA total of 48 patients underwent randomization; 12 patients each in the four arms. Failure to achieve predefined activity threshold of 100 IU/L was observed in 9/40 samples of Generic A (22·5%), 23/40 of Generic B (57·5%), and 43/44 (98%) each of Generic C and D. All 27 samples from seven historical patients who were administered Medac had activity > 100 IU/L. The average activity was significantly higher for Genericm A, 154 (70·3, 285·4) IU/L followed by Generic B 84·5(44·2, 289·1) IU/L, Generic C 45(14·4, 58·4) IU/L, and Generic D 20·4(13, 35) IU/L. Only 6 patients had asparaginase activity > 100 IU/L on each of the four occasions (Generic A = 5; Generic B = 1), and none of them developed Anti-Asparaginase Antibodies (AAA). On the other hand, AAA was observed in 12/36 patients who had at least one level < 100 IU/L (P < 0·05): Generic A 3/5, Generic B = 3/9, Generic D (4/11), and Generic C (5/11).
conclusionGeneric A and B had better trough asparaginase activity compared to Generic D and C. Overall, generic formulations had lower asparaginase activity which raises serious clinical concerns regarding their quality. Until strict regulatory enforcement improves the quality of these generics, dose adaptive approaches coupled with therapeutic drug monitoring need to be considered.
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.