How to define treatment failure for JAK inhibitors.

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

1. Management of classical Philadelphia chromosome-negative myeloproliferative neoplasms in Asia: consensus of the Asian Myeloid Working Group.Clinical and experimental medicine · 2023
   Review
2. RR6 prognostic model provides information about survival for myelofibrosis treated with ruxolitinib: validation in a real-life cohort.Blood advances · 2022
   Article
3. A prognostic model to predict survival after 6 months of ruxolitinib in patients with myelofibrosis.Blood advances · 2022
   Observational
4. Management of myelofibrosis after ruxolitinib failure.Annals of hematology · 2020
   Review
5. Clinical Proteomics for Post-Hematopoeitic Stem Cell Transplantation Outcomes.Proteomics. Clinical applications · 2019
   Review

Corrections and comments

• Comment on
  Janus kinase-2 inhibitor fedratinib in patients with myelofibrosis previously treated with ruxolitinib (JAKARTA-2): a single-arm, open-label, non-randomised, phase 2, multicentre study.2017

Authors and funding

1 author.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as