Nilotinib versus imatinib for newly diagnosed chronic myeloid leukemia.

By G. Saglio, Dong-Wook Kim, S. Issaragrisil, P. le Coutre, G. Étienne, C. Lobo, R. Pasquini, R. Clark, Andreas Hochhaus, T. Hughes and 6 more. New England Journal of Medicine, 2010

1,525 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Hematology, Plant Science, Rheumatology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/784d8089123dea12f873c86e6b8f4e4abf9fe070

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Hematology

1. Brian J. Druker
2. J. Cortes
3. J. Goldman
4. J. Apperley
5. Andreas Hochhaus
6. H. Kantarjian
7. M. Baccarani

In Plant Science

1. Brian J. Druker

In Rheumatology

1. Brian J. Druker
2. J. Cortes
3. Andreas Hochhaus
4. H. Kantarjian
5. M. Baccarani

Citations in the corpus

• European LeukemiaNet recommendations for the management of chronic myeloid leukemia: 2013. (2013, background): “The ENESTnd study, testing nilotinib 300 mg twice daily vs imatinib 400 mg once daily, reported a significantly higher rate of CCyR after 1 and 2 years (80% vs 65%, and 87% vs 77%), a significantly higher rate of MMR after 1 year (50% vs 27%) and 3 years (73% vs 53%), and a significantly higher rate”
• Ponatinib in Refractory Philadelphia Chromosome–Positive Leukemias (2012, methodology): “Quantitative reverse-transcriptase–polymerase-chain-reaction assays for molecular response were performed on day 1 of cycles 3, 5, 7, and 9 and every 3 cycles thereafter.”
• A novel ALK secondary mutation and EGFR signaling cause resistance to ALK kinase inhibitors (2011, neutral): “The understanding of the mechanistic bases for drug resistance will continue to inform the development of strategies to overcome or prevent clinical drug resistance, thereby providing a greater therapeutic benefit for cancer patients (6, 7).”