ArticleCureus2024
Improved Treatment Outcomes With Modified Induction Therapy in Acute Myeloid Leukemia (AML): A Retrospective Observational Study From a Regional Cancer Center.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- LncRNA NEAT1 restrains the malignant biological characteristics of acute myeloid leukemia via regulating CTCF/CXCR2 axis.Clinical and experimental medicine · 2025Article
- Priority setting for improved leukemia management and research in South Africa: a modified Delphi study.Cancer causes & control : CCC · 2025Article
- Review
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
backgroundThe aggressive, genetically diverse group of malignant illnesses known as acute myeloid leukemia (AML) is characterized by clonally related myeloblast invasion of the bone marrow, blood, and other organs. The treatment regimen plays a crucial role in the management of AML, and it is associated with poor overall survival and enhanced risk of relapse. Induction therapy with a 7+3 DA regimen (daunorubicin + ara-C) has been the treatment of choice for young and fit patients.
objectiveTo evaluate the effect of dose modification in young and fit patients for a modified treatment regimen.
methodsThis was a retrospective, observational study of AML patients to analyze the outcomes of modified induction therapy in AML patients enrolled at Dr. B. Borooah Cancer Institute, Guwahati, Assam, India, from October 2021 to March 2022. The outcomes of modified induction therapy with intensive chemotherapy (modified 7+3 DA) and low-intensity chemotherapy decitabine (10 days) and venetoclax + azacytidine (seven days) were considered after the first two cycles or 60 days, whichever was earlier.
resultsData from 31 patients with de-novo AML was analyzed; the median age of the patients was 41 years (range: 2-71 years), and the male-to-female ratio was 1.8. There were seven patients in the pediatric age group (2-13 years), and 19%, 65%, and 13% of patients belonged to favorable, intermediate, and high-risk groups, respectively. With regards to modified induction therapy (n=31), 20 (65%) patients received modified "7+3 DA", nine (29%) received hypomethylating agents (HMA, decitabine only), and two patients received HMA (azacitidnie) + venetoclax. Additionally, 23/31 patients completed at least two cycles of induction therapy. Overall, 60 day-induction mortality was 13%, and the complete remission (CR) and partial remission (PR) rates were 48% and 26%, respectively. In patients who received modified "7+3 DA", the CR rate was 55%.
conclusionsThe notable reduction in deaths due to infections observed in our study suggests that centers with limited resources for preventing neutropenic complications during induction therapies in AML patients could consider adopting this modified regimen.
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.