ArticleCancer2025
Outpatient cytarabine consolidation in acute myeloid leukemia safely reduces hospitalization time and treatment costs.
Article in Cancer, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers 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
17 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAdministration of intensive induction chemotherapy followed by consolidation with postremission high- or intermediate-dose cytarabine (H/IDAC) remains a standard therapeutic approach in fit patients with nonadverse risk acute myeloid leukemia (AML). Historically, H/IDAC has been administered in the inpatient (IP) rather than outpatient (OP) setting given infection risk, transfusion and supportive care needs, and logistical challenges of OP treatment. However, the financial toxicity associated with IP chemotherapy hospitalization as well as risk of nosocomial infections and improvements in antimicrobial prophylaxis have highlighted the potential role for OP H/IDAC administration.
methodsAccordingly, an OP H/IDAC treatment program was developed at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in 2014 using an ambulatory pump system. To investigate the benefits and risks of this approach compared with standard IP H/IDAC administration, a retrospective single-center cohort study was conducted of 198 adult patients with AML who received either IP (59) or OP (139) H/IDAC consolidation.
resultsIn the OP-treated group, this approach safely reduced hospitalization days per cycle (median, 0.8 vs 7.5, p < .001) without leading to increased incidence of hospitalization for febrile neutropenia (incidence rate ratio, 1.07, p = .8) or higher rate of major treatment complications. Total cost per cycle was significantly lower for the OP-treated group (median, $14,244 compared to $36,688, p < .001).
conclusionsIn the largest cohort study of adult AML patients receiving OP H/IDAC, OP treatment administration was feasible, led to decreased hospital days and cost savings, and did not impact relapse free or overall survival compared to IP administration.
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.