Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Clinical Trial
. 2017 Dec 14;7(12):644.
doi: 10.1038/s41408-017-0018-7.

Validation of a post-hypomethylating agent failure prognostic model in myelodysplastic syndromes patients treated in a randomized controlled phase III trial of rigosertib vs. best supportive care

Aziz Nazha  1 , Mikkael A Sekeres  2 , Rami Komrokji  3 , David P Steensma  4 , Hagop Kantarjian  5 , Gail Roboz  6 , Pierre Fenaux  7 , Thomas Prebet  8 , Nozar Azarnia  9 , Patrick S Zbyszewski  9 , Steven M Fruchtman  9 , Valeria Santini  10 , Lewis R Silverman  11 , Uwe Platzbecker  12 , Guillermo Garcia-Manero  9
Affiliations
Clinical Trial

Validation of a post-hypomethylating agent failure prognostic model in myelodysplastic syndromes patients treated in a randomized controlled phase III trial of rigosertib vs. best supportive care

Aziz Nazha et al. Blood Cancer J. .
No abstract available

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
a Overall survival based on post-HMAF model, b overall survival based on post-HMAF model in the rigosertib arm, c overall survival based on post-HMAF model in the best supportive care arm
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
a Overall survival based on post-HMAF lower-risk category in patients treated with rigosertib vs. best supportive care, b overall survival based on post-HMAF higher-risk category in patients treated with rigosertib vs. best supportive care
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Fenaux P, et al. Efficacy of azacitidine compared with that of conventional care regimens in the treatment of higher-risk myelodysplastic syndromes: a randomised, open-label, phase III study. Lancet. Oncol. 2009;10:223–232. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(09)70003-8. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Lubbert M, et al. Low-dose decitabine versus best supportive care in elderly patients with intermediate- or high-risk myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) ineligible for intensive chemotherapy: final results of the randomized phase III study of the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Leukemia Group and the German MDS Study Group. J. Clin. Oncol. 2011;29:1987–1996. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2010.30.9245. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Prebet T, et al. Outcome of high-risk myelodysplastic syndrome after azacitidine treatment failure. J. Clin. Oncol. 2011;29:3322–3327. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2011.35.8135. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Greenberg P, et al. International scoring system for evaluating prognosis in myelodysplastic syndromes. Blood. 1997;89:2079–2088. - PubMed
    1. Greenberg PL, et al. Revised international prognostic scoring system for myelodysplastic syndromes. Blood. 2012;120:2454–2465. doi: 10.1182/blood-2012-03-420489. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

MeSH terms