Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current
    • Archive
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Subscribers
    • Advertisers
    • Editorial Board
  • Other Publications
    • Anticancer Research
    • Cancer Genomics & Proteomics
  • More
    • IIAR
    • Conferences
  • About Us
    • General Policy
    • Contact
  • Other Publications
    • In Vivo
    • Anticancer Research
    • Cancer Genomics & Proteomics

User menu

  • Register
  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
In Vivo
  • Other Publications
    • In Vivo
    • Anticancer Research
    • Cancer Genomics & Proteomics
  • Register
  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart
In Vivo

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current
    • Archive
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Subscribers
    • Advertisers
    • Editorial Board
  • Other Publications
    • Anticancer Research
    • Cancer Genomics & Proteomics
  • More
    • IIAR
    • Conferences
  • About Us
    • General Policy
    • Contact
  • Visit iiar on Facebook
  • Follow us on Linkedin
Research ArticleClinical Studies

A Pilot Study of Allogeneic Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation for Intermediated-risk Acute Myeloid Leukemia Patients

MI JIN OH, DONG-YEOP SHIN, YOUNGIL KOH, JUNSHIK HONG, INHO KIM, SUNG-SOO YOON and JA MIN BYUN
In Vivo January 2021, 35 (1) 617-622; DOI: https://doi.org/10.21873/invivo.12299
MI JIN OH
1Department of Internal Medicine, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
DONG-YEOP SHIN
1Department of Internal Medicine, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea;
2Cancer Research Institute, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea;
3Center for Medical Innovation, Biomedical Research Institute, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
YOUNGIL KOH
1Department of Internal Medicine, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea;
2Cancer Research Institute, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea;
3Center for Medical Innovation, Biomedical Research Institute, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
JUNSHIK HONG
1Department of Internal Medicine, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea;
2Cancer Research Institute, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea;
3Center for Medical Innovation, Biomedical Research Institute, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
INHO KIM
1Department of Internal Medicine, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
SUNG-SOO YOON
1Department of Internal Medicine, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea;
2Cancer Research Institute, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea;
3Center for Medical Innovation, Biomedical Research Institute, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
JA MIN BYUN
1Department of Internal Medicine, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea;
2Cancer Research Institute, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea;
3Center for Medical Innovation, Biomedical Research Institute, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: jaminbyun@naver.com
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

Background/Aim: For intermediate risk acute myeloid leukemia patients, allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (alloSCT) and chemotherapy are equally recommended as consolidation after first complete remission (CR1). In real-world, alloSCT might not be readily available, but there is paucity of data on the optimal timing of alloSCT for these patients. Patients and Methods: In this pilot study, we compared the outcomes of 13 patients undergoing alloSCT in CR1 with 13 patients undergoing alloSCT after relapse (non-CR1) to examine whether upfront alloSCT yields a better prognosis. Results: There were no differences between the two groups with regards to relapse-free survival (p=0.507) and overall survival (p=0.798). There were more chronic graft-versus-host-disease (GVHD) in the CR1 group compared to the non-CR group (p=0.001), but no difference in acute GVHD. Conclusion: The outcome of alloSCT after relapse is not inferior to that of alloSCT in CR1, supporting the role of alloSCT after relapse in the setting of limited donors and resources.

  • Acute myeloid leukemia
  • intermediate risk
  • allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation

Allogeneic stem cell transplantation (alloSCT) remains an integral part of acute myeloid leukemia (AML) treatment due to its curative potential (1). For poor risk AML patients, alloSCT in first complete remission (CR1) is an established treatment (2, 3). For intermediate risk AML patients on the other hand, both alloSCT and high-dose cytarabine-based chemotherapy are recommended as consolidation treatments, leaving the decision to the attending physician. A comprehensive meta-analysis of 24 prospective clinical trials showed that alloSCT can improve relapse-free survival (RFS) in intermediate risk AML patients (4). However, this study was based on meticulously controlled clinical trial results, and in real-world there are unfortunate circumstances in which alloSCT in CR1 is not readily available. If alloSCT in non-CR1 can procure similar outcomes as alloSCT in CR1 for these patients, postponing the transplant until after relapse can be an attractive option. Recognizing the paucity of data on the optimal timing of alloSCT in intermediate risk AML patients, we conducted this pilot study.

Patients and Methods

Study design and subjects. This study was a single-center, retrospective, longitudinal cohort study of de novo, non-acute promyeocytic AML patients over 18 years old, who were newly diagnosed and treated at Seoul National University. Biphenotypic leukemias were excluded. The study period was set between January 2013 and December 2018. During the study period, a total of 282 patients were screened. After excluding 94 patients for undergoing hypomethylating agent-based treatment, the remaining 188 patients were stratified according to prognostic grouping per Southwest Oncology Group (SWOG) criteria (5). One hundred-and-twenty-three intermediate risk AML patients were recognized, among whom 49 underwent alloSCT in CR1 and 18 in non-CR1. After case matching according to age, sex, year of alloSCT and induction regimen, 13 patients who underwent alloSCT in CR1 and 13 patients who underwent alloSCT in non-CR1 were enrolled for final analyses. Their medical records were reviewed and analyzed for demographics, baseline disease characteristics, chemotherapy, factors related to alloSCT, response to alloSCT, adverse events, and survival outcomes (Figure 1). This study was conducted according to the Declaration of Helsinki and was approved by the institutional review board of Seoul National University Hospital (H-1911-042-107).

Figure 1.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 1.

CONSORT diagram.

Definitions. The diagnosis of AML was made according to the WHO Classification of Hematopoietic Neoplasms, which requires identification of 20% or more leukemic blasts in the bone marrow (6). Complex karyotype was defined as any karyotype with at least 3 chromosome aberrations, regardless of their type and the individual chromosomes involved. Cytogenetic studies were performed in-house. Bone marrow cells were cultured for 24 h, and then, karyotypes were analyzed using the standard G-banding technique. The karyotypes were constructed and chromosomal abnormalities were reported in accordance with the International System for Human Cytogenetic Nomenclature (ISCN 2009). Fms-related tyrosine kinase 3 (FLT3) internal tandem duplication (ITD) mutations were analyzed using DNA samples obtained at diagnosis and with use of polymerase chain reaction (PCR). Relapse was defined by the morphologic evidence of disease in the peripheral blood, bone marrow, or extra-medullary sites.

Acute graft-versus-host-disease (GVHD) was graded according to the Glucksberg grading system (7), and chronic GVHD was classified as mild, moderate, or severe according to the 2014 National Institutes of Health consensus (8). Neutrophil engraftment was defined as an absolute neutrophil count (ANC) >0.5×109/l on 3 consecutive measurements after the nadir. Platelet recovery was defined as 7 consecutive measurements of 20.0×109/l without transfusion.

Statistical analysis. The RFS and overall survival (OS) curves were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. RFS was defined as the time from the date of alloSCT to that of relapse or death from any cause. OS was defined as the time from AML diagnosis to death of any cause. If patients survived without relapse, RFS was censored on the latest date of follow-up when no relapse was confirmed.

Student’s t-test was used to compare continuous variables when the two groups showed a normal distribution, and otherwise, Mann-Whitney test was used. For categorical variables, chi-square test was used, but when the expected counts were below 5, Fisher’s exact test was used instead. All data were analyzed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences software (IBM® SPSS®Statistics, version 22.0). p-Values of <0.05 were considered statistically significant.

Results

Baseline characteristics and details of alloSCT. Baseline characteristics of all patients are summarized in Table I. Baseline white blood cell (WBC) count was higher (p=0.014) in the non-CR1 group, but the percentage of blasts in the bone marrow showed no difference. There was no significant difference between the two groups regarding FLT3-ITD mutation and extramedullary involvement.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
  • Download powerpoint
Table I.

Baseline characteristics at initial AML diagnosis.

All patients in the CR1 group were in complete remission at the time of alloSCT (Table II). On the other hand, in the non-CR1 group, 8 out of 13 patients were in complete remission at the time of alloSCT and the remaining 5 patients underwent salvage alloSCT after induction failure. There were no significant differences with regards to the conditioning intensity, donor source, infused CD34 count, and GVHD prophylaxis strategies.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
  • Download powerpoint
Table II.

Details and outcomes of allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation.

Outcomes of alloSCT. The median follow-up duration for the whole cohort was 345 days. As shown in Figure 2, the RFS for alloSCT in CR1 was similar to that in non-CR1 (median RFS 10 months vs. 7 months, p=0.507, respectively). The OS was also similar between the two groups (median OS 13.9 months vs. 21.5 months, p=0.798, respectively). There were 2 patients in the CR1 group who underwent second alloSCT after relapse. One patient underwent alloSCT from a matched unrelated donor after achieving second complete remission with FLAG (fludarabine-cytarabine-G-CSF) induction. The other patient underwent salvage alloSCT using umbilical cord blood after engraftment failure from the first alloSCT from haplo-identical donor.

Figure 2.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 2.

Survival curves after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation for the CR1 group versus non-CR1 group. (A) Relapse-free survival, (B) Overall survival. CR1: First complete.

There was no difference in neutrophil engraftment rates between the two groups as shown in Table II. Although the rates of platelet engraftment were slightly lower in the non-CR1 group, the difference did not reach statistical significance (100% in the CR1 group vs. 69.2% in the non-CR1 group, p=0.096). There was no difference in median time to neutrophil engraftment and platelet recovery with regards to exposure to consolidation chemotherapy.

GVHD and other complications. The rate of grades II-IV acute GVHD was 61.5% for the CR1 group versus 38.5% for the non-CR1 group (p=0.234, Table II). More patients in the CR1 group developed chronic GVHD compared to the non-CR1 group (p=0.001).

There were seven deaths in the CR1 group versus 10 deaths in the non-CR1 group. The most common cause of death was disease progression, followed by infection and GVHD. There was one case of transplant-related mortality in the non-CR1 group, and none in the CR1 group. Although there was more infection-related morality in the non-CR1 group, the difference did not reach clinical significance (p=0.135).

During follow-up, there was no incidence of veno-occlusive disease/sinusoidal obstruction syndrome (VOD/SOS) or post-transplant lymphoproliferative disease (PTLD).

Discussion

As alloSCT in CR1 for intermediate risk AML is somewhat optional according to current guidelines, we carried out this pilot study to provide some guidance regarding the optimal timing of alloSCT. Although based on small number of patients, we found that alloSCT in non-CR1 yields similar outcomes compared to alloSCT in CR1, supporting alloSCT as a reasonable post-remission treatment option after relapse from CR1. The importance of this finding lies in that it can be readily incorporated into daily practice and that we provide evidence to justify postponement of alloSCT in difficult circumstances, thereby relieving moral conundrum of attending physicians.

There are only a few previous studies comparing the timing of alloSCT for intermediate risk AML, but existing reports support our findings. Burnett et al. showed a survival benefit of alloSCT after the second CR after relapse, especially in the intermediate risk patients (9). Another cohort study showed no significant difference in OS between patients who underwent alloSCT in CR1 and patients who underwent alloHSCT in subsequent CR after relapse (10). The latter study included AML patients of all risk groups, but the risk group did not affect the OS. In our study, the survival outcomes were similar between patients undergoing alloSCT in CR1 compared to those undergoing alloSCT after relapse and not necessarily achieving CR before alloSCT. More representative of real-world situations, we believe our findings provide more insights into the timing to perform alloSCT.

Interestingly, there were more cases of chronic GVHD in the CR1 group. This could possibly be due to the shorter follow-up duration in the non-CR1 group (median follow-up after alloSCT 223 days, range=11-1,001 days) compared to the CR1 group (median follow-up after alloSCT 466 days, range=120-1,732 days). However, as all of the patients in the CR1 group ultimately relapsed, this means that many patients were subjected to second line treatment in lieu of chronic GVHD making the subsequent treatment much more difficult.

One of the most obvious limitations of our study is its small sample size, but since this was a pilot study, we are planning to expand the study to validate our findings. Another major pitfall is the lack of next-generation sequencing (NGS) data for half of the patients, thus, the risk stratification was done according to SWOG criteria rather than the updated ELN guidelines (11, 12). However, since not all centers can perform NGS, risk stratification based on cytogenetics and molecular abnormalities is still widely used, thus if anything, our data are more representative of real-world practice.

In conclusion, our study shows that the outcomes of alloSCT after relapse are not inferior to alloSCT in CR1, supporting the role of alloSCT after relapse in the setting of limited donors and resources.

Acknowledgements

The results of this study have been submitted to the 71st Fall Conference of the Korean Association of Internal Medicine, October 24th-25th, 2020, Republic of Korea.

Footnotes

  • Authors’ Contributions

    Designed the study: Ja Min Byun. Patient enrollment and data collection: all the Authors. Analyzed the data: Mi Jin Oh, Ja Min Byun. Wrote the paper: Mi Jin Oh, Ja Min Byun. Revised the paper: all the Authors.

  • This article is freely accessible online.

  • Conflicts of Interest

    The Authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose in relation to this study.

  • Received October 24, 2020.
  • Revision received November 23, 2020.
  • Accepted November 24, 2020.
  • Copyright© 2021, International Institute of Anticancer Research (Dr. George J. Delinasios), All rights reserved

References

  1. ↵
    1. Passweg JR,
    2. Baldomero H,
    3. Chabannon C,
    4. Basak GW,
    5. Corbacioglu S,
    6. Duarte R,
    7. Dolstra H,
    8. Lankester AC,
    9. Mohty M,
    10. Montoto S,
    11. Peffault de Latour R,
    12. Snowden JA,
    13. Styczynski J,
    14. Yakoub-Agha I,
    15. Kröger N, European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation (EBMT)
    : The EBMT activity survey on hematopoietic-cell transplantation and cellular therapy 2018: CAR-T’s come into focus. Bone Marrow Transplant 55(8): 1604-1613, 2020. PMID: 32066864. DOI: 10.1038/s41409-020-0826-4
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  2. ↵
    1. National Comprehensive Cancer Network
    . Available at: https://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/pdf/aml.pdf [Last accessed on November 20, 2020]
  3. ↵
    1. Heuser M,
    2. Ofran Y,
    3. Boissel N,
    4. Mauri SB,
    5. Craddock C,
    6. Janssen J,
    7. Wierzbowska A,
    8. Buske C and ESMO Guidelines Committee
    : Acute myeloid leukaemia in adult patients: ESMO clinical pratice guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol 17(20): 36079-36078, 2020. PMID: 32171751. DOI: 10.1016/j.annonc.2020.02.018
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  4. ↵
    1. Koreth J,
    2. Schlenk R,
    3. Kopecky KJ,
    4. Honda S,
    5. Sierra J,
    6. Djulbegovic BJ,
    7. Wadleigh M,
    8. DeAngelo DJ,
    9. Stone RM,
    10. Sakamaki,
    11. Appelbaum FR,
    12. Döhner H,
    13. Antin JH,
    14. Soiffer, RJ and
    15. Cutler C
    : Allogeneic stem cell transplantation for acute myeloid leukemia in first complete remission: systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective clinical trials. JAMA 301(22): 2349-2361, 2009. PMID: 19509382. DOI: 10.1001/jama.2009.813
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  5. ↵
    1. Slovak ML,
    2. Kopecky KJ,
    3. Cassileth PA,
    4. Harrington DH,
    5. Theil KS,
    6. Mohamed A,
    7. Paietta E,
    8. Willman CL,
    9. Head DR,
    10. Rowe JM,
    11. Forman SJ and
    12. Appelbaum FR
    : Karyotypic analysis predicts outcome of preremission and postremission therapy in adult acute myeloid leukemia: a Southwest Oncology Group/Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Study. Blood 96(13): 4075-4083, 2000. PMID: 11110676.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  6. ↵
    1. Vardiman JW,
    2. Thiele J,
    3. Arber DA,
    4. Brunning RD,
    5. Borowitz MJ,
    6. Porwit A,
    7. Harris NL,
    8. Le Beau MM,
    9. Hellstrom-Lindberg E,
    10. Tefferi A and
    11. Bloomfield CD
    : The 2008 revision of the World Health Organization (WHO) classification of myeloid neoplasms and acute leukemia: rationale and important changes. Blood 114(5): 937-951, 2009. PMID: 19357394. DOI: 10.1182/blood-2009-03-209262
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  7. ↵
    1. Glucksberg H,
    2. Storb R,
    3. Fefer A,
    4. Buckner CD,
    5. Neiman PE,
    6. Clift RA,
    7. Lerner KG,
    8. Thomas ED
    : Clinical manifestations of graft-versus-host disease in human recipients of marrow from HL-A-matched sibling donors. Transplantation 18(4): 295-304, 1974. PMID: 4153799. DOI: 10.1097/00007890-197410000-00001
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  8. ↵
    1. Filipovich AH,
    2. Weisdorf D,
    3. Pavletic S,
    4. Socie G,
    5. Wingard JR,
    6. Lee SJ,
    7. Martin P,
    8. Chien J,
    9. Przepiorka D,
    10. Couriel D,
    11. Cowen EW,
    12. Dinndorf P,
    13. Farrell A,
    14. Hartzman R,
    15. Henslee-Downey J,
    16. Jacobsohn D,
    17. McDonald G,
    18. Mittleman B,
    19. Rizzo D,
    20. Robinson M,
    21. Schbert M,
    22. Schultz K,
    23. Shulman H,
    24. Turner M,
    25. Vogelsang G and
    26. Flowers MED
    : National Institutes of Health consensus development project on criteria for clinical trials in chronic graft-versus-host disease: I. Diagnosis and staging working group report. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant 11(12): 945-956, 2005. PMID: 16338616. DOI: 10.1016/j.bbmt.2005.09.004
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  9. ↵
    1. Burnett AK,
    2. Goldstone A,
    3. Hills RK,
    4. Milligan D,
    5. Prentice A,
    6. Yin J,
    7. Wheatley K,
    8. Hunter A and
    9. Russell N
    : Curability of patients with acute myeloid leukemia who did not undergo transplantation in first remission. J Clin Oncol 31(10): 1293-1301, 2013. PMID: 23439754. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2011.40.5977
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  10. ↵
    1. Hu N,
    2. Cheng Z,
    3. Pang Y,
    4. Zhao H,
    5. Ding H,
    6. Chen L,
    7. Li Q,
    8. Han Y,
    9. Qin T,
    10. Dai Y,
    11. Zhang Y,
    12. Shi J,
    13. Wu D and
    14. Fu L
    : Prognostic effect of allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation on first and non-first complete remission in acute myeloid leukemia. Ann Transl Med 7(18): 500, 2019. PMID: 31700936. DOI: 10.21037/atm.2019.08.120
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  11. ↵
    1. Dohner H,
    2. Estey E,
    3. Grimwade D,
    4. Amadori S,
    5. Appelbaum FR,
    6. Buchner T,
    7. Dombret H,
    8. Ebert BL,
    9. Fenaux P,
    10. Larson RA,
    11. Levine RL,
    12. Lo-Coco F,
    13. Naoe T,
    14. Neiderwieser D,
    15. Ossenkoppele GK,
    16. Sanz M,
    17. Sierra J,
    18. Tallman MS,
    19. Tien H-F,
    20. Wei AH,
    21. Löwenberg B and
    22. Bloomfield CD
    : Diagnosis and management of AML in adults: 2017 ELN recommendations from an international expert panel. Blood 129(4): 424-447, 2017. PMID: 27895058. DOI: 10.1182/blood-2016-08-733196
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  12. ↵
    1. Estey E
    : Acute myeloid leukemia: 2019 update on risk-stratification and management. Am J Hematol 93(10): 1267-1291, 2018. PMID: 30328165. DOI: 10.1002/ajh.25214
    OpenUrlCrossRef
View Abstract
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

In Vivo: 35 (1)
In Vivo
Vol. 35, Issue 1
January-February 2021
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • Index by author
  • Back Matter (PDF)
  • Ed Board (PDF)
  • Front Matter (PDF)
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on In Vivo.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
A Pilot Study of Allogeneic Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation for Intermediated-risk Acute Myeloid Leukemia Patients
(Your Name) has sent you a message from In Vivo
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the In Vivo web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
4 + 1 =
Solve this simple math problem and enter the result. E.g. for 1+3, enter 4.
Citation Tools
A Pilot Study of Allogeneic Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation for Intermediated-risk Acute Myeloid Leukemia Patients
MI JIN OH, DONG-YEOP SHIN, YOUNGIL KOH, JUNSHIK HONG, INHO KIM, SUNG-SOO YOON, JA MIN BYUN
In Vivo Jan 2021, 35 (1) 617-622; DOI: 10.21873/invivo.12299

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Reprints and Permissions
Share
A Pilot Study of Allogeneic Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation for Intermediated-risk Acute Myeloid Leukemia Patients
MI JIN OH, DONG-YEOP SHIN, YOUNGIL KOH, JUNSHIK HONG, INHO KIM, SUNG-SOO YOON, JA MIN BYUN
In Vivo Jan 2021, 35 (1) 617-622; DOI: 10.21873/invivo.12299
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Patients and Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Acknowledgements
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • No citing articles found.
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Three-month Prostate-specific Antigen Level After Androgen Deprivation Therapy Predicts Survival in Patients With Metastatic Castration-sensitive Prostate Cancer
  • A Finnish Version of RAND-36-Item Health Survey Versus Structured Interview 8 Years Postoperatively
  • Cytotoxic T-lymphocyte Antigen-4 (CTLA-4) Gene Polymorphism (rs3087243) Is Related to Risk and Survival in Patients With Colorectal Cancer
Show more Clinical Studies

Similar Articles

Keywords

  • Acute myeloid leukemia
  • intermediate risk
  • allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation
In Vivo

© 2021 In Vivo

Powered by HighWire