ArticleJournal of comparative effectiveness research2024
Real-world use of inotuzumab ozogamicin is associated with lower health care costs than blinatumomab in patients with acute lymphoblastic leukemia in the first relapsed/refractory setting.
Article in Journal of comparative effectiveness research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Prolonged molecular control during intermittent reduced-intensity blinatumomab maintenance in a transplant-ineligible patient with Philadelphia chromosome-positive acute lymphoblastic leukaemia andClinical & translational immunology · 2026Article
- Monoclonal Antibodies as a Breakthrough in Personalised Leukaemia Therapy: What Pharmacists and Doctors Should Know.Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Real-World Data on Inotuzumab Ozogamicin for Adult Patients With Relapsed/Refractory Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia: A GRELAL-Chile Study.Cancer medicine · 2025Article
- Budget impact analysis of revumenib for the treatment of relapsed or refractory acute leukemias with aJournal of managed care & specialty pharmacy · 2025Article
- Article
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 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.
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.