ArticleBone marrow transplantation2026
Treosulfan or busulfan plus clofarabine as reduced intensity conditioning regimen before allotransplant for adults with myeloid malignancies.
Article in Bone marrow transplantation, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This single-center retrospective study included 142 adults with myeloid malignancies undergoing allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation with peripheral blood stem cells from matched related or unrelated donors between 2010 and 2023. The aim was to compare outcomes between patients receiving a clofarabine-based reduced-intensity conditioning regimen combined either with busulfan (CloB2, n = 108) or treosulfan (CloT3, n = 34). CloB2 consisted of busulfan 3.2 mg/kg/day 2 days (d) with 1 or 2 d of anti-thymocyte globulin (ATG). CloT3 consisted of treosulfan 10 g/m²/d 3 d and 2 d of ATG. The CloT3 group included more patients with adverse-risk acute myeloid leukemia (AML). Neutrophil recovery was significantly faster after CloT3, resulting in a shorter hospital stay. No significant differences were observed between groups regarding overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS) and graft-versus-host disease (GVHD)-free/relapse-free survival, non-relapse mortality (NRM), relapse incidence (RI), or acute and chronic GVHD. Among AML patients, univariable analysis showed similar outcomes, except for slower neutrophil recovery and higher RI with CloB2. In multivariable analysis, adverse ELN-2017 risk score, was associated with lower OS and DFS. CloT3 was independently associated with improved OS (p = 0.038), DFS (p = 0.026) and lower RI (p = 0.024). These exploratory results support further prospective studies, particularly in AML patients.
Identifiers
42618729What 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.