ArticleInternational journal of hematology2020
Comparison of starting doses of anagrelide as a first-line therapy in patients with cytoreductive therapy-naïve essential thrombocythemia: difference between starting at 0.5 and 1.0 mg/day.
Article in International journal of hematology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Bioequivalence and Pharmacokinetics of Low-Dose Anagrelide 0.5 mg Capsules in Healthy Volunteers.Biomedicines · 2025Article
- Clinical characteristics, prognostic factors, and outcomes of patients with essential thrombocythemia in Japan: the JSH-MPN-R18 study.International journal of hematology · 2022Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Anagrelide is widely used for cytoreductive therapy in patients with essential thrombocythemia who are at high risk for thrombosis. The recommended starting dose in the package insert of anagrelide varies by country. A high starting dose leads to an early onset of action, but causes a higher incidence of adverse events. This relationship indicates that both the onset of action and side effects of anagrelide are dose dependent. We retrospectively compared the efficacy and safety of anagrelide as a first-line drug between patients with essential thrombocythemia who started at 0.5 or 1.0 mg/day. Incidence of total adverse events and anagrelide-related palpitation, discontinuation rates, and the median daily dose of anagrelide were lower in the 0.5 mg/day group than in the 1.0 mg/day group; however, comparable platelet-lowering effects were achieved in both groups. These data suggest that a low starting dose of anagrelide followed by dose escalation may result in fewer adverse events and lower discontinuation rates, while providing desirable platelet-lowering effects. Initiating anagrelide at a lower dose may be a useful approach in actual clinical practice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.