ArticleAmerican journal of translational research2024
Comparison of efficacy and safety of different asparaginases in adult acute lymphoblastic leukemia based on nano-magnetic beads immunoassay.
Article in American journal of translational research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo compare the efficacy and safety of different asparaginase formulations in the treatment of acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) based on nano-magnetic bead immunoassay.
methodsRetrospective analysis of adult ALL patients' clinical data who admitted to The Affiliated Hospital of Changsha Health Vocational College from August 2020 to August 2023. Finally, 65 adult ALL patients were included in this study, including the polyethylene glycol conjugated asparaginase (PEG-ASNase) group (n = 32) and the L-asparaginase (L-ASNase) group (n = 33). Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) based on magnetic nanoparticles was used to determine the activity of ASNase in both groups. The levels of asparagine or glutamine in two groups were detected by automatic biochemical analyzer during induction therapy, and the adverse events of the two groups were observed during the treatment.
resultsPEG-ASNase demonstrated a slower decrease in enzyme activity, longer action duration, and higher safety profile compared to L-ASNase. PEG-ASNase group and L-ASNase group demonstrated a similar complete remission rate (71.88% vs. 60.61%). Event-free survival was higher in patients receiving PEG-ASNase than those receiving L-ASNase (42.4% and 18.7%). The observed adverse reactions included allergic reactions, pancreatic lesions, gastrointestinal reactions and liver function damage. The incidence of gastrointestinal reactions and liver function damage was higher in the L-ASNase group than that in PEG-ASNase group (45.45% and 33.33%).
conclusionThis study provides valuable insights into the asparaginase treatments in clinical, highlighting the importance of PEG-ASNase for improving treatment protocols in adult ALL patients.
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.