ArticleAdvances in therapy2023
Ponatinib vs. Imatinib as Frontline Treatment for Philadelphia Chromosome-Positive Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia: A Matching Adjusted Indirect Comparison.
Article in Advances in therapy, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT00038610 (Phase II Study of Hyper-CVAD Plus Imatinib Mesylate), which is not on this map. Cited by 12 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.
Phase II Study of Hyper-CVAD Plus Imatinib Mesylate (Gleevec, STI571) for Philadelphia-Positive Acute Lymphocytic Leukemia
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Challenges in Conducting Quantitative Patient-Centered Benefit-Risk Assessments: A Case Study in Ph + ALL with Immature Efficacy Data.Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science · 2026Article
- Toward a chemotherapy and allo-HSCT free future: the evolution of treatment for Philadelphia chromosome-positive acute lymphoblastic leukemia.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Review
- A tour of leukemia progress in 2025, viewed through the MD Anderson leukemia research lens.Cancer · 2025Review
- Oncologists' preferences for frontline TKI treatment of Ph+ acute lymphoblastic leukemia: a discrete choice experiment.Future oncology (London, England) · 2025Article
- Management of Adult Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia: A Review.JAMA oncology · 2025Review
- The Role of Transplant for Philadelphia-positive B-cell Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia in 2025.Current oncology reports · 2025Review
- Review
- Acute Lymphoid Leukemia: Is Transplant Indicated for Philadelphia Chromosome Positive ALL?Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2025Review
- Ph+ ALL: new approaches for upfront therapy.Hematology. American Society of Hematology. Education Program · 2024Review
- Article
- Ponalfil trial for adults with Philadelphia chromosome-positive acute lymphoblastic leukemia: Long-term results.HemaSphere · 2024Article
- Prognostic Factors and Outcome of Patients with Adult Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia Treated with the Hyper-CVAD Regimen: A Retrospective Study.Advances in hematology · 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
8 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionEfficacy of ponatinib-based treatment for patients with Philadelphia chromosome-positive acute lymphoblastic leukemia (Ph + ALL) has not been compared to imatinib-based treatments in head-to-head clinical trials. We evaluated its efficacy versus imatinib-based regimens using a matching adjusted indirect comparison.
methodsTwo ponatinib studies were used: the phase 2 MDACC study of ponatinib + hyper-CVAD (cyclophosphamide, vincristine, doxorubicin, and dexamethasone) in adult patients and the phase 2 GIMEMA LAL1811 study of ponatinib + steroids in patients > 60 years/unfit for intensive chemotherapy and stem cell transplant. Studies on imatinib as first-line treatment in adults with Ph + ALL were identified using a systematic literature search. Population adjustment was based on the prognostic factors and effect modifiers identified by clinical experts. Hazard ratios (HRs) were calculated for overall survival (OS) and odds ratios (ORs) for complete molecular response (CMR).
resultsThe systematic literature search identified two studies (GRAAPH-2005 and NCT00038610) reporting the efficacy of first-line imatinib + hyper-CVAD and one study reporting the efficacy of first-line imatinib monotherapy induction + imatinib-based consolidation (CSI57ADE10). Ponatinib + hyper-CVAD prolonged OS and gave a higher CMR rate than imatinib + hyper-CVAD. The adjusted HR [95% confidence interval (CI)] for OS was 0.35 (0.17-0.74) for MDACC vs. GRAAPH-2005 and 0.35 (0.18-0.70) for MDACC vs. NCT00038610; the adjusted OR (95% CI) for CMR was 12.11 (3.77-38.87) for MDACC vs. GRAAPH-2005 and 5.65 (2.02-15.76) for MDACC vs. NCT00038610. Ponatinib + steroids prolonged OS and gave a higher CMR rate than imatinib monotherapy induction + imatinib-containing consolidation. The adjusted HR (95% CI) for OS was 0.24 (0.09-0.64) and the adjusted OR (95% CI) for CMR was 6.20 (1.60-24.00) for GIMEMA LAL1811 vs. CSI57ADE10.
conclusionIn adults with newly diagnosed Ph + ALL, first-line treatment with ponatinib was associated with better outcomes than first-line treatment with imatinib.
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.