ArticleCancer reports (Hoboken, N.J.)2026
Impact of Frontline Treatment Strategies on Outcomes in Patients With Acute Myeloid Leukemia, Myelodysplasia-Related.
Article in Cancer reports (Hoboken, N.J.), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe 5th edition of the World Health Organization (WHO) classification updated the term for acute myeloid leukemia with myelodysplasia-related changes (AML-MRC) to acute myeloid leukemia, myelodysplasia-related (AML-MR), along with new diagnostic criteria. However, the clinical prognostic outcomes of patients diagnosed with AML-MR based on the new WHO definition remain poorly defined, and the optimal frontline treatment strategy for this patient population has not been fully clarified.
aimsThis study aimed to compare the clinical efficacy and survival outcomes of three mainstream frontline treatment regimens for newly diagnosed AML-MR patients and identify independent prognostic factors affecting patient survival. METHODS AND
resultsWe collected data from 142 patients with newly diagnosed AML-MR and divided them into three cohorts depending on different frontline therapies: low-intensity chemotherapy (LIC), intensive chemotherapy (IC), and venetoclax plus hypomethylating agent (VEN/HMA). The overall response rate in the VEN/HMA cohort was higher than in the LIC or IC cohort (VEN/HMA vs. LIC, 72.7% vs. 42.1%, p = 0.010; VEN/HMA vs. IC, 72.7% vs. 54.3%, p = 0.049). Event-free survival (EFS) in the LIC cohort was inferior to that in the IC cohort (median 2.5 vs. 4.8 months, p = 0.037) or VEN/HMA cohort (median 2.5 vs. 6.4 months, p = 0.006). The overall survival (OS) in the LIC cohort was inferior to that in the IC cohort (median 11.9 vs. 19.4 months, p = 0.009). No statistically significant differences in EFS or OS were observed between the IC and VEN/HMA cohorts. Multivariate analyses showed that prior HMA exposure and frontline LIC therapy were associated with inferior EFS, and allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation was associated with better EFS and OS.
conclusionOur study suggests that in patients with AML-MR, frontline therapy with VEN/HMA or IC improves outcomes compared with LIC. Allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation is encouraged for all eligible patients with AML-MR.
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.