ArticleAmerican journal of hematology2026
Risk-Adjusted Comparison of Survival in Chronic Myelomonocytic Leukemia With and Without Allogeneic Stem Cell Transplant: Mayo Clinic Experience in 775 Consecutive Patients.
Article in American journal of hematology, 2026. 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
31 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The recently published BLAST clinical risk model for chronic myelomonocytic leukemia (CMML) and its molecular version (BLAST-Mol) differentiate low, intermediate, and high-risk groups. The objective of the current retrospective study was to examine the survival impact of allogeneic stem cell transplant (ASCT) in a consecutive series of Mayo Clinic patients (n = 775; 68% males, median age 71 years) with CMML, overall and adjusted for baseline BLAST/BLAST-Mol risk categories. At a median follow-up of 77 months, 151 (20%) patients underwent ASCT. Overall survival (OS) was longer in the ASCT compared to the non-ASCT cohorts (median 77 vs. 28 months; p < 0.01). The significant difference in OS between the ASCT and non-ASCT cohorts was retained after adjusting for BLAST clinical risk groups: high-risk (median 50 vs. 14 months; p < 0.01), intermediate-risk (81 vs. 28 months; p < 0.01), and low-risk (111 vs. 65 months; p = 0.04), respectively. The same was mostly the case when OS comparison was adjusted for BLAST-Mol with respective p values of < 0.01, < 0.01, and 0.08, respectively. Time-dependent cox models confirmed the favorable survival impact of ASCT in the BLAST/BLAST-Mol high- and intermediate-risk groups. The current study highlights the benefit of ASCT for BLAST/BLAST-Mol high- and intermediate-risk groups in CMML and its potential to overcome the adverse impact of some high risk cytogenetic or molecular abnormalities. These observations support the early use of ASCT in CMML, ideally before BT and regardless of genetic characteristics.
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.