Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,169

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Multicenter, Randomized, Open-Label, Phase III Trial of Decitabine Versus Patient Choice, With Physician Advice, of Either Supportive Care or Low-Dose Cytarabine for the Treatment of Older Patients With Newly Diagnosed Acute Myeloid Leukemia

Open access
Kantarjian, Hagop M., Thomas, Xavier G., Dmoszynska, Anna, Wierzbowska, Agnieszka, Mazur, Grzegorz, Mayer, Jiri, Gau, Jyh-Pyng, Chou, Wen-Chien, Buckstein, Rena, Cermak, Jaroslav, Kuo, Ching-Yuan, Oriol, Albert, Ravandi, Farhad, Faderl, Stefan, Delaunay, Jacques, Lysák, Daniel, Minden, Mark, Arthur, Christopher·2012·Journal of Clinical Oncology

Abstract

Purpose: This multicenter, randomized, open-label, phase III trial compared the efficacy and safety of decitabine with treatment choice (TC) in older patients with newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia (AML) and poor- or intermediate-risk cytogenetics. Patients and Methods: Patients (N = 485) age ≥ 65 years were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive decitabine 20 mg/m 2 per day as a 1-hour intravenous infusion for five consecutive days every 4 weeks or TC (supportive care or cytarabine 20 mg/m 2 per day as a subcutaneous injection for 10 consecutive days every 4 weeks). The primary end point was overall survival (OS); the secondary end point was the complete remission (CR) rate plus the CR rate without platelet recovery (CRp). Adverse events (AEs) were recorded. Results: The primary analysis with 396 deaths (81.6%) showed a nonsignificant increase in median OS with decitabine (7.7 months; 95% CI, 6.2 to 9.2) versus TC (5.0 months; 95% CI, 4.3 to 6.3; P = .108; hazard ratio [HR], 0.85; 95% CI, 0.69 to 1.04). An unplanned analysis with 446 deaths (92%) indicated the same median OS (HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.68 to 0.99; nominal P = .037). The CR rate plus CRp was 17.8% with decitabine versus 7.8% with TC (odds ratio, 2.5; 95% CI, 1.4 to 4.8; P = .001). AEs were similar for decitabine and cytarabine, although patients received a median of four cycles of decitabine versus two cycles of TC. The most common drug-related AEs with decitabine were thrombocytopenia (27%) and neutropenia (24%). Conclusion: In older patients with AML, decitabine improved response rates compared with standard therapies without major differences in safety. An unplanned survival analysis showed a benefit for decitabine, which was not observed at the time of the primary analysis.

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 · 10.1200/jco.2011.38.9429

Cites

3 of 3 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

Cites

Show all 3 references

Cited by

See all 1,169

Metadata

Authors
Kantarjian, H. M., Thomas, X. G., Dmoszynska, A., Wierzbowska, A., Mazur, G., Mayer, J., Gau, J.-P., Chou, W.-C., Buckstein, R., Cermak, J., Kuo, C.-Y., Oriol, A., Ravandi, F., Faderl, S., Delaunay, J., Lysák, D., Minden, M., & Arthur, C.
Venue
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Published
2012-07-20
Volume
30
Issue
21
Pages
2670-2677
ISSN
  • 0732-183X (ISSN-L)
  • 1527-7755
OpenAlex
W2106084333
Cited by
1,169
References
3
FWCI
50.90
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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: Multicenter, Randomized, Open-Label, Phase III Trial of Decitabine Versus Patient Choice, With Physician Advice, of Either Supportive Care or Low-Dose Cytarabine for the Treatment of Older Patients With Newly Diagnosed Acute Myeloid Leukemia. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1200/jco.2011.38.9429
The paper
Kantarjian, H. M., Thomas, X. G., Dmoszynska, A., Wierzbowska, A., Mazur, G., Mayer, J., Gau, J.-P., Chou, W.-C., Buckstein, R., Cermak, J., Kuo, C.-Y., Oriol, A., Ravandi, F., Faderl, S., Delaunay, J., Lysák, D., Minden, M., & Arthur, C. (2012). Multicenter, Randomized, Open-Label, Phase III Trial of Decitabine Versus Patient Choice, With Physician Advice, of Either Supportive Care or Low-Dose Cytarabine for the Treatment of Older Patients With Newly Diagnosed Acute Myeloid Leukemia. Journal of Clinical Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2011.38.9429

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.