Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 211

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Postremission therapy in older patients with de novo acute myeloid leukemia: a randomized trial comparing mitoxantrone and intermediate-dose cytarabine with standard-dose cytarabine

Stone, Richard M., Berg, Deborah T., George, Stephen L., Dodge, Richard K., Paciucci, Paolo A., Schulman, Philip P., Lee, Edward J., Moore, Joseph O., Powell, Bayard L., Baer, Maria R., Bloomfield, Clara D., Schiffer, Charles A.·2001·Blood

Abstract

The treatment of older patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) remains unsatisfactory, with complete remission (CR) achieved in only approximately 50% and long-term disease-free survival in 10% to 20%. Three hundred eighty-eight patients (60 years of age and older) with newly diagnosed de novo AML were randomly assigned to receive placebo (P) or granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF) or GM in a double-blind manner, beginning 1 day after the completion of 3 days of daunorubicin and 7 days of cytarabine therapy. No differences were found in the rates of leukemic regrowth, CR, or infectious complications in either arm. Of 205 patients who achieved CR, 169 were medically well and were randomized to receive cytarabine alone or a combination of cytarabine and mitoxantrone. With a median follow-up of 7.7 years, the median disease-free survival times were 11 months and 10 months for those randomized to cytarabine or cytarabine/mitoxantrone, respectively. Rates of relapse, excluding deaths in CR, were 77% for cytarabine and 82% for cytarabine/mitoxantrone. Induction randomization had no effect on leukemic relapse rate or remission duration in either postremission arm. Because cytarabine/mitoxantrone was more toxic and no more effective than cytarabine, it was concluded that this higher-dose therapy had no benefit in the postremission management of older patients with de novo AML. These results suggest the need to develop novel therapeutic strategies for these patients.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1182/blood.v98.3.548

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 211

Metadata

Authors
Stone, R. M., Berg, D. T., George, S. L., Dodge, R. K., Paciucci, P. A., Schulman, P. P., Lee, E. J., Moore, J. O., Powell, B. L., Baer, M. R., Bloomfield, C. D., & Schiffer, C. A.
Venue
Blood
Published
2001-08-01
Volume
98
Issue
3
Pages
548-553
ISSN
  • 0006-4971 (ISSN-L)
  • 1528-0020
OpenAlex
W2169994420
Cited by
211
References
2
FWCI
4.82
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Postremission therapy in older patients with de novo acute myeloid leukemia: a randomized trial comparing mitoxantrone and intermediate-dose cytarabine with standard-dose cytarabine. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1182/blood.v98.3.548
The paper
Stone, R. M., Berg, D. T., George, S. L., Dodge, R. K., Paciucci, P. A., Schulman, P. P., Lee, E. J., Moore, J. O., Powell, B. L., Baer, M. R., Bloomfield, C. D., & Schiffer, C. A. (2001). Postremission therapy in older patients with de novo acute myeloid leukemia: a randomized trial comparing mitoxantrone and intermediate-dose cytarabine with standard-dose cytarabine. Blood. https://doi.org/10.1182/blood.v98.3.548

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.