Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37422670›Full record

ReviewJournal of hematology & oncology2023

Unresolved questions in selection of therapies for treatment-naïve chronic lymphocytic leukemia.

Rory Bennett, Mary Ann Anderson, John F Seymour

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of hematology & oncology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
6.3field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Rory BennettDepartment of Clinical Haematology, Royal Melbourne Hospital and Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, 305 Grattan St, Parkville, Melbourne, VIC, 3000, Australia.
Mary Ann AndersonDepartment of Clinical Haematology, Royal Melbourne Hospital and Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, 305 Grattan St, Parkville, Melbourne, VIC, 3000, Australia.
John F SeymourDepartment of Clinical Haematology, Royal Melbourne Hospital and Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, 305 Grattan St, Parkville, Melbourne, VIC, 3000, Australia. John.seymour@petermac.org.
The Royal Melbourne Hospital · AUPeter MacCallum Cancer Centre · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe treatment landscape for chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) continues to undergo considerable evolution. Optimal selection of initial therapy from multiple effective options provides a major challenge for clinicians, who need to consider both disease and patient factors in conjunction with a view to sequencing available therapies in event of disease relapse. REVIEW: We explore the most topical clinically relevant unresolved questions through discussion of important available pertinent literature and propose expert opinion based on these data. (1) Shrinking role of chemoimmunotherapy (CIT); while novel therapies are generally superior, we highlight the utility of FCR for IGHV-mutated CLL. (2) Choosing between inhibitors of Bruton's tyrosine kinase (BTKi); while efficacy between agents is likely similar there are important differences in toxicity profiles, including the incidence of cardiac arrhythmia and hypertension. (3) BTKi with or without anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies (mAb); while obinutuzumab-acalabrutinib (AO) may confer superior progression-free survival to acalabrutinib (Acala), this is not true of rituximab (Ritux) to ibrutinib (Ib)-we highlight that potential for increased side effects should be carefully considered. (4) Continuous BTKi versus time-limited venetoclax-obinutuzumab (VenO); we propose that venetoclax (Ven)-based therapy is generally preferable to BTKi with exception of TP53 aberrant disease. (5) BTKi-Ven versus VenO as preferred time-limited therapy; we discuss comparable efficacies and the concerns about simultaneous 1L exposure to both BTKi and Ven drug classes. (6) Utility of triplet therapy (BTKi-Ven-antiCD20 mAb) versus VenO; similar rates of complete response are observed yet with greater potential for adverse events. (7) Optimal therapy for TP53 aberrant CLL; while limited data are available, there are likely effective novel therapy combinations for TP53 aberrant disease including BTKi, BTKi-Ven ± antiCD20 mAb.

conclusionFrontline therapy for CLL should be selected based on efficacy considering the patient specific biologic profile of their disease and potential toxicities, considering patient comorbidities and preferences. With the present paradigm of sequencing effective agents, 1L combinations of novel therapies should be used with caution in view of potential adverse events and theoretical resistance mechanism concerns in the absence of compelling randomized data to support augmented efficacy.

Indexed as

Leukemia, Lymphocytic, Chronic, B-CellAgammaglobulinaemia Tyrosine KinaseAntineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsBenzamidesBridged Bicyclo Compounds, HeterocyclicHumansPyrazinesSulfonamidesacalabrutinibAgammaglobulinaemia Tyrosine KinaseBenzamidesBridged Bicyclo Compounds, HeterocyclicPyrazinesSulfonamidesvenetoclaxBCL2 inhibitorBTK inhibitorChemoimmunotherapyCLLFrontline therapySequencing

Identifiers

PMID37422670
PMCPMC10329329
OpenAlexW4383620419

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.