ReviewBlood cancer journal2026
Newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia in Fit patients: 2026 treatment algorithms.
Review in Blood cancer journal, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The introduction of venetoclax (a BCL2 inhibitor) and targeted therapies, including inhibitors of CD33, FLT3, IDH1, IDH2, and menin, has expanded treatment options for newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia (AML). In younger, fit patients, the primary goal remains long-term survival, which in most cases is secured through allogeneic stem cell transplant. Transplant in first complete remission is recommended for FLT-ITD, TP53 mutated, KMT2A rearranged, AML with other adverse genetic abnormalities, and is considered in most intermediate-risk patients. It is also recommended in relapsed/refractory disease or persistent measurable residual disease (MRD). The role of intensive chemotherapy, such as cytarabine (7) plus anthracycline (3), is limited to patients with core-binding factor AML, NPM1 mutation, CEBPA bZIP mutation and those with intermediate-risk disease. Intensive regimens such as FLAG-IDA and CLIA plus venetoclax have shown impressive long-term outcomes, but their use is not widespread. In FLT3 mutated AML, 7 + 3 plus an FLT3 inhibitor (midostaurin or quizartinib) remains a standard, with venetoclax-hypomethylating agent-FLT3 inhibitor triplets emerging as an alternative. Similarly, in IDH1/2 mutated AML, venetoclax-hypomethylating agent with or without IDH1/2 inhibitor combinations challenge intensive chemotherapy approaches. Patients with TP53 mutations or other adverse-risk features, where intensive chemotherapy is known to be less effective, should be referred for clinical trials. There remains ongoing debate regarding optimal management of fit patients with newly diagnosed AML without targetable mutations, as emerging data suggest that venetoclax- hypomethylating agents may be comparable to intensive chemotherapy in selected patients proceeding to transplant. Accordingly, treatment decisions should be individualized to maximize remission while minimizing toxicity.
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.