MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4417004592 · doi:10.1182/blood-2025-6990

Time burden of treatment with parenteral hypomethylating agents in combination with venetoclax among patients with newly diagnosed Acute Myeloid Leukemia

2025· article· en· W4417004592 on OpenAlexaff
Amer M. Zeidan, Ruizhi Zhao, Arthur Voegel, Dina Terloyeva, Maryia Zhdanava, Anabelle Tardif‐Samson, Claire Vanden Eynde, Harold Keer, Dominic Pilon

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Myeloid Leukemia Research
Canadian institutionsGroup for Research in Decision Analysis
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVenetoclaxAzacitidineHypomethylating agentRegimenMyeloid leukemiaOff-label useChemotherapy regimenChemotherapyRetrospective cohort study

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract INTRODUCTION: Standard of care for patients with newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia (AML) who are not eligible for intensive chemotherapy is a parenteral hypomethylating agent (HMA) - azacitidine or decitabine, also referred to as DNA methyltransferase inhibitors - combined with oral venetoclax. This regimen requires repeated HMA administration in a clinical setting over a cycle of 28 days, placing a substantial time burden on patients affected by the disease. The logistical demands of frequent clinic visits may negatively impact patient quality of life and contribute to early treatment discontinuation. Despite the wide adoption of HMA-venetoclax therapy, its time burden for patients remains poorly characterized. The goal of this study is to address this gap by quantifying the time burden associated with initiation of parenteral HMA combined with venetoclax in routine clinical practice among patients with newly diagnosed AML. METHODS: This is a retrospective study of adults with newly diagnosed AML initiated on parenteral HMA combined with venetoclax using the Humana Healthcare Research Database (01/2019–12/2024), a US claims database of Medicare Advantage beneficiaries. The index date was defined as the date of the first HMA administration up to 60 days after the first AML diagnosis and between October 16, 2020 and June 30, 2024; patients had a prescription fill for venetoclax in the 30-day window before or after the index date. A washout period of ≥12 months of continuous insurance eligibility before the first observed AML diagnosis was required to ensure patients were newly diagnosed. The period of 12 months of continuous insurance eligibility before the index date (i.e., baseline) was used to describe patient characteristics. Outcomes were described during the follow-up period, which spanned from the index date until the end of continuous insurance eligibility or data availability, for a maximum of 6 months. Time burden was defined as the number of distinct days with all-cause healthcare visits, including inpatient days, and days with emergency room (ER), outpatient, and other visits. Days with outpatient visits were further stratified into distinct days with HMA administration, transfusion support, other AML treatment administration-related visits or other outpatient visits. Time at home was defined as days not spent in an inpatient or ER setting for any cause, and without outpatient visits related to cancer care. RESULTS: A total of 737 patients with newly diagnosed AML were initiated on the HMA combined with venetoclax therapy. Mean age at initiation was 76.3 years; 55.4% were male, 83.2% were White, 10.7% were Black, and the rest had other or unknown race. Over a third (38.7%) had myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) during the baseline period. The index HMA was azacitidine for 70.4% of patients and decitabine for 29.6%. Most patients (93.6%) received the index HMA in the outpatient setting, 4.2% in the inpatient setting, and 2.2% in other settings. During the mean follow-up period of 4.8 months, patients spent a mean of 12.9 days per month on all-cause healthcare visits, including 3.4 days spent in inpatient setting, 0.3 days in ER setting, and 9.2 days in outpatient setting. In terms of outpatient days, patients spent a mean of 3.8 days per month receiving HMA therapy, 1.0 days receiving transfusion support, and the rest of the outpatient time receiving other AML and non-AML care. Patients spent a mean of 18.6 days per month at home or receiving non-cancer-related outpatient care. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with newly diagnosed AML ineligible for intensive chemotherapy spend over a third of their time engaged in medical care, and a substantial portion of this time is dedicated to receiving HMA therapy. These findings highlight a substantial time burden among patients and a need for alternative effective treatment options to optimize the delivery of medical care.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.252 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBlood→Same topicAcute Myeloid Leukemia Research→French-language works237,207→