SynthesisClinical and experimental medicine2025
The efficacy and safety of venetoclax combined with decitabine in elderly patients with acute myeloid leukemia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Clinical and experimental medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Acute Myeloid Leukemia (AML) carries a high mortality rate in elderly patients who often face limited treatment options and a poor overall prognosis. The combination of Venetoclax (VEN) and Decitabine (DEC) is recommended for treatment, yet there is insufficient evidence to fully support its efficacy. This study aims to perform a meta-analysis to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of the VEN + DEC regimen in treating elderly patients with AML. We systematically searched PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, CNKI, and WanFang. Efficacy was evaluated using complete remission (CR), composite response rate, overall response rate, and median overall survival. Safety was assessed based on adverse events. The fixed/random effect model was employed to evaluate the effect sizes. Seven articles were included in this meta-analysis. VEN + DEC group (OR 1.90, 95%CI 1.36-2.67) could significantly improve CR among the elderly patients with AML, compared to the control group. VEN + DEC was associated with a significantly lower risk of death (HR 0.55, 95%CI 0.40-0.75). VEN (400 mg) + DEC group (OR 1.99, 95%CI 1.37-2.87) could significantly increase CR. Subgroup analysis reported that there were significant differences in both any grade (OR 1.99, 95%CI 1.18-3.35) and grade 3/4 febrile neutropenia (OR 1.99, 95%CI 1.18-3.35) between VEN + DEC group and the control group. Our findings demonstrated that the VEN + DEC regimen is both effective and safe for treating elderly patients with AML. Besides, the combination of VEN (400 mg) with DEC had relatively high rate of CR.Trial registration We have registered out study on PROSPERO with the registration number CRD42024554185.
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.