Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 667

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 26 of the 26 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Myeloablative Versus Reduced-Intensity Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation for Acute Myeloid Leukemia and Myelodysplastic Syndromes

Open access
Scott, Bart L., Pasquini, Marcelo C., Logan, Brent R., Wu, Juan, Devine, Steven M., Porter, David L., Maziarz, Richard T., Warlick, Erica D., Fernandez, Hugo F., Alyea, Edwin P., Hamadani, Mehdi, Bashey, Asad, Giralt, Sergio, Geller, Nancy L., Leifer, Eric, Le-Rademacher, Jennifer, Mendizabal, Adam M., Horowitz, Mary M., Deeg, H. Joachim, Horwitz, Mitchell E.·2017·Journal of Clinical Oncology

Abstract

Purpose: The optimal regimen intensity before allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) is unknown. We hypothesized that lower treatment-related mortality (TRM) with reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) would result in improved overall survival (OS) compared with myeloablative conditioning (MAC). To test this hypothesis, we performed a phase III randomized trial comparing MAC with RIC in patients with acute myeloid leukemia or myelodysplastic syndromes. Patients and Methods: Patients age 18 to 65 years with HCT comorbidity index ≤ 4 and < 5% marrow myeloblasts pre-HCT were randomly assigned to receive MAC (n = 135) or RIC (n = 137) followed by HCT from HLA-matched related or unrelated donors. The primary end point was OS 18 months post–random assignment based on an intent-to-treat analysis. Secondary end points included relapse-free survival (RFS) and TRM. Results: Planned enrollment was 356 patients; accrual ceased at 272 because of high relapse incidence with RIC versus MAC (48.3%; 95% CI, 39.6% to 56.4% and 13.5%; 95% CI, 8.3% to 19.8%, respectively; P < .001). At 18 months, OS for patients in the RIC arm was 67.7% (95% CI, 59.1% to 74.9%) versus 77.5% (95% CI, 69.4% to 83.7%) for those in the MAC arm (difference, 9.8%; 95% CI, −0.8% to 20.3%; P = .07). TRM with RIC was 4.4% (95% CI, 1.8% to 8.9%) versus 15.8% (95% CI, 10.2% to 22.5%) with MAC ( P = .002). RFS with RIC was 47.3% (95% CI, 38.7% to 55.4%) versus 67.8% (95% CI, 59.1% to 75%) with MAC ( P < .01). Conclusion: OS was higher with MAC, but this was not statistically significant. RIC resulted in lower TRM but higher relapse rates compared with MAC, with a statistically significant advantage in RFS with MAC. These data support the use of MAC as the standard of care for fit patients with acute myeloid leukemia or myelodysplastic syndromes.

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.2016.70.7091

Cites

26 of 26 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 26 references

Cited by

See all 667

Metadata

Authors
Scott, B. L., Pasquini, M. C., Logan, B. R., Wu, J., Devine, S. M., Porter, D. L., Maziarz, R. T., Warlick, E. D., Fernandez, H. F., Alyea, E. P., Hamadani, M., Bashey, A., Giralt, S., Geller, N. L., Leifer, E., Le-Rademacher, J., Mendizabal, A. M., Horowitz, M. M., Deeg, H. J., & Horwitz, M. E.
Venue
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Published
2017-04-10
Volume
35
Issue
11
Pages
1154-1161
ISSN
  • 0732-183X (ISSN-L)
  • 1527-7755
OpenAlex
W2590030902
Cited by
667
References
26
FWCI
47.59
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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: Myeloablative Versus Reduced-Intensity Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation for Acute Myeloid Leukemia and Myelodysplastic Syndromes. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1200/jco.2016.70.7091
The paper
Scott, B. L., Pasquini, M. C., Logan, B. R., Wu, J., Devine, S. M., Porter, D. L., Maziarz, R. T., Warlick, E. D., Fernandez, H. F., Alyea, E. P., Hamadani, M., Bashey, A., Giralt, S., Geller, N. L., Leifer, E., Le-Rademacher, J., Mendizabal, A. M., Horowitz, M. M., Deeg, H. J., & Horwitz, M. E. (2017). Myeloablative Versus Reduced-Intensity Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation for Acute Myeloid Leukemia and Myelodysplastic Syndromes. Journal of Clinical Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2016.70.7091

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.