ReviewEuropean journal of haematology2025
Therapeutic Strategies for Relapsed or Refractory B-Cell Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia in Adult Patients: Optimizing the Use of Monoclonal Antibodies.
Review in European journal of haematology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Trial
- Targeting drug efflux and DNA repair enhances inotuzumab ozogamicin activity in IO-resistant B-ALL cell lines.International journal of hematology · 2026Article
- Chronic portal hypertension following inotuzumab ozogamicin in a low-risk patient: a case of overriding baseline risk and long-term management.Annals of hematology · 2026Article
- From Molecular Precision to Clinical Practice: A Comprehensive Review of Bispecific and Trispecific Antibodies in Hematologic Malignancies.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The treatment landscape for relapsed or refractory acute lymphoblastic leukemia (RR ALL) has evolved significantly with the introduction of monoclonal antibodies such as blinatumomab and inotuzumab ozogamicin. These agents have demonstrated remarkable efficacy, achieving high response rates and minimal residual disease (MRD) negativity. However, the optimal selection, sequencing, and integration of monoclonal antibodies and other modalities like standard chemotherapy or chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy remain areas of active investigation. The absence of direct comparative studies has led to reliance on indirect analyses, which provide conflicting results regarding the relative benefits of inotuzumab and blinatumomab. While inotuzumab is preferred in high-disease-burden settings due to its cytoreductive capabilities, blinatumomab shows superior performance in low-disease-burden settings by leveraging preserved T-cell function. Sequential and combination approaches, such as induction with inotuzumab followed by blinatumomab consolidation, may optimize outcomes, particularly for patients undergoing subsequent allogeneic stem cell transplantation (alloSCT). The interval between inotuzumab and alloSCT is critical to mitigate the risk of veno-occlusive disease (VOD). Despite these advances, the prognosis for patients with high-risk genetic lesions, such as TP53 mutations, remains poor, underscoring the need for innovative therapeutic strategies. As monoclonal antibodies increasingly move into frontline therapy, their role in relapse settings must be redefined. Future research should focus on unraveling the molecular underpinnings of resistance and refining treatment paradigms to improve survival and quality of life for patients with RR ALL.
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.