ArticleBlood neoplasia2026
A comparison of overall survival and quality of life in patients with MDS treated with azacytidine vs decitabine.
Article in Blood neoplasia, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02537990 (MDS-CAN), which is not on this 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.
MDS-CAN: A Prospective National MDS Clinical Database and Local Tissue Bank
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
28 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Patients with high-risk myelodysplastic neoplasms or syndromes (MDS) are considered for therapy with hypomethylating agents (HMA) to help restore hematopoiesis, delay progression to acute myeloid leukemia, and improve overall survival (OS). Azacytidine (AZA) and decitabine (DEC) have commonly been used without direct clinical trial comparison between the 2 agents. Prior studies have demonstrated no difference in OS; however, these analyses are limited by the lack of patient-level and disease-risk factors that may influence efficacy and tolerability. This study retrospectively evaluated differences in clinical outcomes for patients treated with AZA or DEC, adjusting for disease-risk category and patient-specific factors, using data from the Canadian MDS registry (NCT02537990). The primary outcome for the study was OS, which was compared using the log-rank test, evaluated for the whole cohort, and then stratified by the Revised International Prognostic Scoring System (IPSS-R) disease-risk. Secondary outcomes included leukemia-free survival (LFS), change in transfusion dependence or independence status, and differences in quality-of-life (QoL) measurements. In total, 424 patients were treated with AZA (median of 10 cycles) and 85 patients were treated with DEC (median of 5 cycles). In unadjusted analysis, median OS was longer in the patients treated with DEC (37.0 vs 21.4 months;
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.