Cited by 93Acute Myeloid Leukemia ResearchRetinoids in leukemia and cellular processesHematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation

Clinical outcomes of older patients with AML receiving hypomethylating agents: a large population-based study in the United States

Open access
Zeidan, Amer M., Wang, Rong, Wang, Xiaoyi, Shallis, Rory M., Podoltsev, Nikolai A., Bewersdorf, Jan P., Huntington, Scott F., Neparidze, Natalia +4 more·2020·Blood Advances

Abstract

The hypomethylating agents (HMAs) azacitidine and decitabine have been the de facto standard of care for patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) who are unfit for intensive therapy. Using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare linked database, we identified 2263 older adults (age ≥66 years) diagnosed with AML during 2005-2015 who received a first-line HMA; 1154 (51%) received azacitidine, and 1109 (49%) received decitabine. Median survival from diagnosis was 7.1 and 8.2 months (P < .01) for azacitidine- and decitabine-treated patients, respectively. Mortality risk was higher with azacitidine vs decitabine (hazard ratio [HR], 1.11; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.01-1.21; P = .02). The findings were similar when evaluating only patients completing ≥4 cycles (42% of patients treated with either azacitidine or decitabine). These findings lost significance when evaluating those completing a standard 7-day schedule of azacitidine (34%) vs 5-day schedule for decitabine (66%) (HR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.83-1.08; P = .43). Red blood cell (RBC) transfusion independence (TI) was achieved in one-third of patients with no difference between the 2 HMAs. In conclusion, the majority of older AML patients did not receive the minimum of 4 cycles of HMA often needed to elicit clinical benefit. We observed no clinically meaningful differences between azacitidine- and decitabine-treated patients in their achievement of RBC TI or survival.

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/bloodadvances.2020001779

Cites

39 of 39 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Increased HMA duration, such as 10-day decitabine, initially suggested improved outcomes in a limited number of patients with TP53-mutant myeloid malignancies, but there was no improvement in CR or OS in a prospective randomized study comparing 10-day versus 5-day decitabine in AML.

    “Increased HMA duration, such as 10-day decitabine, initially suggested improved outcomes in a limited number of patients with TP53-mutant myeloid malignancies (patients with MDS; n = 9),18 but there was no improvement in CR or OS in a prospective randomized study comparing 10-day versus 5-day decitabine in AML, and this treatment schedule has not been widely adopted.19,20”

    From Eprenetapopt (APR-246) and Azacitidine in <i>TP53</i> -Mutant Myelodysplastic Syndromes (2021) · cites this paper as [20]

    Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 1 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 1 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Zeidan, A. M., Wang, R., Wang, X., Shallis, R. M., Podoltsev, N. A., Bewersdorf, J. P., Huntington, S. F., Neparidze, N., Giri, S., Gore, S. D., Davidoff, A. J., & Ma, X.
Affiliations
  • Department of Internal Medicine,
  • Cancer Outcomes, Public Policy, and Effectiveness Research Center,
  • Yale University (US)
Venue
Blood Advances
Published
2020-05-20
Volume
4
Issue
10
Pages
2192-2201
ISSN
  • 2473-9529 (ISSN-L)
  • 2473-9537
OpenAlex
W3028372384
Cited by
93
References
39
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 21 · 2021: 23 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 1
FWCI
10.73
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by-nc-nd
Locations
  • Blood Advances (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Celgene
  • National Institutes of Health (n01pc35139-25-0-11, n01pc35136-24-0-2, UL1TR001863)
  • National Cancer Institute (N01 PC035139, N01 PC035136, N02 PC015105, P30CA016359)
  • National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Hematology › Acute Myeloid Leukemia Research
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Retinoids in leukemia and cellular processes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Hematology › Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation
Keywords
acute myeloid leukemia, hypomethylating agents, azacitidine, decitabine, older adults, first-line therapy, survival, mortality, treatment duration, red blood cell transfusion independence
MeSH terms
Decitabine, Aged, Medicare, Humans, Retrospective Studies, United States, Leukemia, Myeloid, Acute, Treatment Outcome

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