↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Dose-enhanced combined priming regimens for refractory acute myeloid leukemia and middle-and-high-risk myelodysplastic syndrome: a single-center, retrospective cohort study

Overview of attention for article published in OncoTargets and therapy, June 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
8 Mendeley
Title
Dose-enhanced combined priming regimens for refractory acute myeloid leukemia and middle-and-high-risk myelodysplastic syndrome: a single-center, retrospective cohort study
Published in
OncoTargets and therapy, June 2016
DOI 10.2147/ott.s96427
Pubmed ID
Authors

Xiaorong Ma, Jin Wang, Yan Xu, Wanggang Zhang, Jie Liu, Xingmei Cao, Aili He, Fangxia Wang, Liufang Gu, Bo Lei, Jianli Wang

Abstract

To assess chemotherapeutic regimens for refractory acute myeloid leukemia (AML) and middle-and-high-risk myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS). Between 2004 and 2014, 44 patients with refractory AML and 36 patients with MDS were treated with new priming regimens (CHAG, CHTG, CHMG, or CTMG), and 77 patients with refractory AML and 52 patients with MDS were treated with conventional priming regimens (CHG or CAG). This was a single-center retrospective analysis of remission, adverse event, mortality, and survival. The capacity of clinical features (including the expression of co-stimulatory molecule B7.1 on tumor cells) to influence survival was assessed by multivariate Cox regression. Complete and partial remission rates (RRs) were significantly higher in AML patients treated with new regimens compared to conventional ones (68.2% vs 13.6%, P<0.05). Complete and partial remission were also significantly higher in patients with MDS treated with new regimens (55.6% vs 19.4%, P<0.05). However, although survival advantages were observed in the first year, the new regimens did not significantly improve 3-year overall survival (P>0.05). Patients administered the new regimens experienced more severe and sustained myelosuppression (P<0.05), but no severe adverse events or treatment-related deaths were observed. The rate of non-hematological side effects did not differ significantly between treatment regimens (P>0.05). Both RR and B7.1 expression were significantly higher in patients with AML-M2 and M5 (P<0.05). The new priming regimens improved the RR, lowered the recurrence rate, and improved survival in AML and middle-and-high-risk MDS, without significantly increasing adverse events.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 8 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 8 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Professor 2 25%
Unspecified 1 13%
Other 1 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 13%
Other 2 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 2 25%
Unspecified 1 13%
Arts and Humanities 1 13%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 13%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 13%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 2 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 07 July 2016.
All research outputs
#22,756,649
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from OncoTargets and therapy
#2,078
of 3,016 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#309,346
of 353,651 outputs
Outputs of similar age from OncoTargets and therapy
#77
of 124 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,016 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.9. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 353,651 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 124 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.