| 000 | 01918nam a22003497a 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 008 | 221213s20182018 xxu||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d | ||
| 022 | _a2040-6207 | ||
| 024 | _a10.1177_2040620718761778 [pii] | ||
| 024 | _a10.1177/2040620718761778 [doi] | ||
| 024 | _aPMC5900827 [pmc] | ||
| 040 | _aOvid MEDLINE(R) | ||
| 099 | _a29713444 | ||
| 245 | _aPersonalizing initial therapy in acute myeloid leukemia: incorporating novel agents into clinical practice. [Review] | ||
| 251 | _aTherapeutic Advances in Hematology. 9(5):109-121, 2018 May. | ||
| 252 | _aTher Adv Hematol. 9(5):109-121, 2018 May. | ||
| 253 | _aTherapeutic advances in hematology | ||
| 260 | _c2018 | ||
| 260 | _fFY2018 | ||
| 260 | _p2018 May | ||
| 265 | _sppublish | ||
| 265 | _tPubMed-not-MEDLINE | ||
| 266 | _d2022-12-13 | ||
| 520 | _aWhile the past decade has seen a revolution in understanding of the genetic and molecular etiology of the disease, in clinical practice, initial therapy for acute myeloid leukemia (AML) patients has been a relatively straightforward choice between intensive combination cytotoxic induction therapy as used for decades or less-intensive hypomethylating therapy. The year 2017, however, witnessed US Food and Drug Administration approvals of midostaurin, enasidenib, gemtuzumab ozogamicin and CPX-351 for AML patients, with many other promising agents currently in clinical trials. This review discusses these options, highlights unanswered questions regarding optimal combinations and proposes some suggested approaches for the personalization of initial therapy for AML patients. | ||
| 546 | _aEnglish | ||
| 651 | _aWashington Cancer Institute | ||
| 657 | _aJournal Article | ||
| 657 | _aReview | ||
| 700 | _aDeStefano, Christin B | ||
| 790 | _aDeStefano CB, Hourigan CS | ||
| 856 |
_uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2040620718761778 _zhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2040620718761778 |
||
| 942 |
_cART _dArticle |
||
| 999 |
_c4 _d4 |
||