ArticleChinese journal of integrative medicine2023
Comparing Arsenic-Containing Qinghuang Powder and Low-Intensity Chemotherapy in Elderly Patients with Acute Myeloid Leukemia.
Article in Chinese journal of integrative medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Integrating Nature Into Oncology: Enhancing Hematological Malignancies Therapies With Natural Medicine.Cancer medicine · 2025Review
- Characterization and comparation of toxicity between natural realgar and artificially optimized realgar.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo compare the clinical effect of arsenic-containing Qinghuang Powder (QHP) and low-intensity chemotherapy (LIC) in treatment of elderly acute myeloid leukemia (eAML) patients.
methodsClinical data of 80 eAML patients treated at Xiyuan Hospital of China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences from January 2015 to December 2020 were retrospectively analyzed. The treatment scheme was designed by real world study according to patients' preference, and patients were divided into a QHP group (35 cases) and a LIC group (45 cases). The median overall survival (mOS), 1-, 2-, and 3-year OS rates, and incidence of adverse events were compared between the two groups.
resultsThe mOS of 80 patients was 11 months, and the 1-, 2-, and 3-year OS rates were 45.51%, 17.96%, and 11.05%, respectively. The QHP and LIC groups demonstrated no significant difference in mOS (12 months vs. 10 months), 1- (48.57% vs. 39.65%), 2- (11.43% vs. 20.04%), and 3-year OS rates (5.71% vs. 13.27%, all P>0.05). Moreover, the related factors of mOS demonstrated no significant difference in patients with age>75 years (11 months vs. 8 months), secondary AML (11 months vs. 8 months), poor genetic prognosis (9 months vs. 7 months), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score ⩾ 3 (10 months vs. 7 months) and hematopoietic stem cell transplant comorbidity index ⩾ 4 (11 months vs. 7 months) between the QHP and LIC groups (all P>0.05). However, the incidence of myelosuppression was significantly lower in the QHP group than that in the LIC group (28.57% vs. 73.33%, P<0.01).
conclusionsQHP and LIC had similar survival rates in eAML patients, but QHP had a lower myelosuppression incidence. Hence, QHP can be an alternative for eAML patients who do not tolerate LIC.
Indexed as
Identifiers
37222831What 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.