ArticleCancer medicine2025
Impact of Decitabine Conditioning on Allo-HSCT Outcomes in AML and Intermediate-to-High-Risk MDS Patients in Remission.
Article in Cancer medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAllogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HSCT) remains the sole curative option for myeloid malignancies, though high toxicity from conditioning regimens and complications like graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) limit its success. The potential benefit of incorporating decitabine (DAC) into conditioning regimens for acute myeloid leukemia (AML) and intermediate-to-high-risk myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) patients in remission remains unclear.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective, single-center study analyzing data from January 2016 to December 2020 at the First Affiliated Hospital of Ningbo University with a median follow-up of 45.05 months (range, 1-96 months). Outcomes were compared between patients receiving DAC+HSCT versus HSCT alone, with primary endpoints of 5-year overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and relapse rate. Secondary analyses examined outcomes by remission status (CR1 vs. others) and age subgroups (< 31.5 years). Immune cell subsets (CD3-CD56+ NK cells) were evaluated for GVHD correlation.
resultsThe DAC+HSCT group exhibited 5-year OS of 51.9% and PFS of 46.1%, compared to 67% OS and 56.5% PFS in the HSCT-only group. The 5-year relapse rate was 16.9% for DAC+HSCT versus 23.2% for HSCT alone. DAC did not significantly improve outcomes in complete remission (CR1) patients but improved OS and PFS in patients under 31.5 years of age. Elevated CD3-CD56+ NK cells in the DAC+HSCT group were associated with higher incidence of severe acute GVHD (aGVHD).
conclusionWhile DAC conditioning did not provide overall survival benefit for AML/MDS patients undergoing allo-HSCT, it improved outcomes in younger individuals (< 31.5 years). Higher NK cell proportions may serve as a potential biomarker for early aGVHD intervention, warranting further investigation into risk-stratified conditioning approaches.
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.