| Title |
Treosulfan-based conditioning regimens for allogeneic HSCT in children with acute lymphoblastic leukaemia
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Annals of Hematology, September 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00277-014-2196-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Heidrun Boztug, Marco Zecca, Karl-Walter Sykora, Paul Veys, Arjan Lankester, Mary Slatter, Roderick Skinner, Jacek Wachowiak, Ulrike Pötschger, Evgenia Glogova, Christina Peters, on behalf of the EBMT paediatric diseases working party |
| Abstract |
Standard myeloablative conditioning regimens for children with acute lymphoblastic leukaemia are based on total body irradiation (TBI). However, TBI causes profound short-term and long-term side effects, provoking the necessity for alternative regimens. Treosulfan combines a potent immunosuppressive and antileukaemic effect with myeloablative activity and low toxicity profile. We retrospectively studied toxicity and outcome of 71 paediatric patients with acute lymphoblastic leukaemia (ALL) undergoing haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) following treosulfan-based conditioning aiming to identify risk factors for treatment failure and dose-depending outcome differences. Early regimen-related toxicity was low. No case of veno-occlusive disease was reported. There was no association of toxicity with age or number of HSCT. Event-free survival (EFS) of infants was significantly better compared to older children. Overall survival (OS) at 3 years was 51 % and not significantly influenced by number of HSCT (first HSCT 54 %, ≥second HSCT 44 %, p = 0.71). In multivariate analysis, OS and EFS were significantly worse for patients transplanted without complete remission (p = 0.04 and 0.004). Treatment-related mortality was low at 14 %. We conclude that treosulfan-based conditioning is a safe and efficacious approach for paediatric ALL. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 57 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 57 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 10 | 18% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 14% |
| Researcher | 5 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 7% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 7% |
| Other | 11 | 19% |
| Unknown | 15 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 26 | 46% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 5 | 9% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 5% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 4% |
| Linguistics | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 4 | 7% |
| Unknown | 16 | 28% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 January 2020.
All research outputs
#8,262,193
of 26,017,215 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Hematology
#496
of 2,454 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#81,407
of 264,967 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Hematology
#6
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,017,215 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,454 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its peers.
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 264,967 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 27 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.