ArticleEuropean journal of haematology2026
Adapting UK Clinical Practise in Chronic Myeloid Leukaemia in Chronic Phase to Contemporary Management Recommendations: The ADAPT 2.0 Survey.
Article in European journal of haematology, 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveChronic myeloid leukaemia in chronic phase (CML-CP) treatment recommendations have changed substantially in recent years. The ADAPT 2.0 survey aimed to provide an updated understanding of CML-CP management in the UK.
methodsThis healthcare professional (HCP) survey, conducted between December 2023 and June 2024, assessed treatment goals, choice of tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs), unmet needs and approaches to treatment-free remission (TFR).
resultsUK CML-CP practise is generally aligned with the contemporary guidelines for CML management. Key treatment goals were major molecular response (54%-77% across treatment lines) and deep molecular response (5%-46%). The main factors influencing first-line (1 L) TKI selection were treatment guidelines (97%), comorbidities (90%) and TFR as a treatment goal (82%). Therapy switch after one warning European LeukemiaNet (ELN) 2020 response was rare (10% vs. 56% in patients with > 1 warning response and 100% in failure response). BCR::ABL1 mutation analysis was less common after one warning response versus > 1 warning response (54% vs. 82%). TKI toxicity, resistance, intolerance and T315I mutation management were key unmet needs in later treatment lines; achieving and maintaining TFR were key unmet needs in 1 L.
conclusionThe ADAPT 2.0 survey highlights potential areas of improvement in current CML-CP management in the UK.
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.