ライフサイエンスコーパス: standard chemotherapy

1 eukemia (AML) have a high relapse rate after standard chemotherapy.

2 nation therapies with myeloid inhibitors and standard chemotherapy.

3 of cardiac toxicity among patients receiving standard chemotherapy.

4 fective therapies against cells resistant to standard chemotherapy.

5 older AML patients with del(5q) who declined standard chemotherapy.

6 sensitize nonresponsive NSCLC cell lines to standard chemotherapy.

7 t would be associated with a better QoL than standard chemotherapy.

8 all survival with capecitabine compared with standard chemotherapy.

9 nd greatly augments the antitumor effects of standard chemotherapy.

10 n in patients with sarcomas after failure of standard chemotherapy.

11 cer treatment, when used in conjunction with standard chemotherapy.

12 onse rate in colorectal cancer refractory to standard chemotherapy.

13 and compare autologous transplantation with standard chemotherapy.

14 he risk to the fetus might not reach that of standard chemotherapy.

15 , in combinations together and combined with standard chemotherapy.

16 s and seemingly higher overall survival than standard chemotherapy.

17 emotherapy-naive NSCLC patients treated with standard chemotherapy.

18 he first 30 days of treatment in addition to standard chemotherapy.

19 ve and to express p53, adverse features with standard chemotherapy.

20 ure rate and therefore, since 1984, has been standard chemotherapy.

21 Multiple myeloma is incurable with standard chemotherapy.

22 ewly diagnosed tumors for which there was no standard chemotherapy.

23 gnificantly longer for patients treated with standard chemotherapy.

24 mine its activity in patients who had failed standard chemotherapy.

25 gative breast cancer (TNBC) is refractive to standard chemotherapy.

26 anted, including its use in conjunction with standard chemotherapy.

27 rognostic marker for response of patients to standard chemotherapy.

28 t there is cross-resistance between 9-AC and standard chemotherapy.

29 orable outcomes in AML patients treated with standard chemotherapy.

30 ht provide greater oncological benefits than standard chemotherapy.

31 nosis in part due to an inferior response to standard chemotherapy.

32 ological heterogeneity and poor responses to standard chemotherapy.

33 ant metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) over standard chemotherapy.

34 time cost and utility of doublet therapy and standard chemotherapy.

35 h an improvement of 0.15 QALYs compared with standard chemotherapy.

36 , compared to 5.9 months for those receiving standard chemotherapy.

37 unfavorable prognosis and poor benefit from standard chemotherapy.

38 els (1'866-14'500 mg/m(2)/dose), followed by standard chemotherapy.

39 ted and could be concurrently performed with standard chemotherapy.

40 equent malignancy were low and comparable to standard chemotherapy.

41 d to none and 1% among controls who received standard chemotherapy.

42 also exhibit strong synergistic effects with standard chemotherapy.

43 ow PD-L1 expression, clinicians should offer standard chemotherapy.

44 heckpoint inhibitor, clinicians should offer standard chemotherapy.

45 ated in younger adults in the frontline with standard chemotherapy.

46 ich evaluated the addition of midostaurin to standard chemotherapy.

47 ed response rates and survival compared with standard chemotherapy.

48 prove therapeutic responses as compared with standard chemotherapy.

49 ntal cancer, particularly when combined with standard chemotherapy.

50 recurrence in OC and enhance the efficacy of standard chemotherapy.

51 stic leukemia (ALL) and confer resistance to standard chemotherapy.

52 drug dose administered to brain tumors than standard chemotherapy.

53 r experimental anticancer therapy along with standard chemotherapy.

54 ded treatment, including tumors resistant to standard chemotherapy.

55 a 17p deletion, which predicts resistance to standard chemotherapy.

56 medical conditions are less able to undergo standard chemotherapy.

57 is a need for more effective treatment than standard chemotherapy.

58 ties and chemoresistance are shortcomings of standard chemotherapy.

59 lays tumor growth and enhances the effect of standard chemotherapies.

60 lineage leukemia-driven AML, and outperforms standard chemotherapies.

61 and variable response of advanced tumors to standard chemotherapies.

62 d in this phase 2 study (n = 171) to receive standard chemotherapy (3 + 7) with or without bevacizuma

63 izumab (15 mg/kg, q3w until progression) and standard chemotherapy (4-6 cycles of carboplatin area un

64 After standard chemotherapy, 41 patients with non-Hodgkin's B-

65 < 0.01, t test), which performed better than standard chemotherapy (5-FU and oxaliplatin).

66 tes were 91% and 15% in patients assigned to standard chemotherapy, 59% and 35% in patients assigned

67 ficacy of an alternate regimen that combines standard chemotherapy, a proteasome inhibitor, and high-

68 The addition of ifosfamide to standard chemotherapy achieved a 3-year EFS rate of 61%.

69 The addition of MTP to standard chemotherapy achieved a 3-year EFS rate of 68%.

70 ms had similar outcomes because of mandatory standard chemotherapy after non-pCR.

71 shown to have survival benefit compared with standard chemotherapy after progression on platinum-cont

72 DP ribose) polymerase inhibitor, potentiated standard chemotherapy against small-cell lung cancer (SC

73 ia stem cells (LSCs), which are resistant to standard chemotherapy agents and likely to be a major ca

74 Systemic treatments for lung cancer with standard chemotherapy agents are still relatively ineffe

75 esyl transferase inhibitor combinations with standard chemotherapy agents, future studies of this age

76 ompared with sensitivities to a panel of 122 standard chemotherapy agents, the most striking relation

77 e myeloid leukemia (AML) in combination with standard chemotherapy agents, the pediatric maximum-tole

78 y for synergistic sensitization of NSCLCs to standard chemotherapy agents, which seems to occur indep

79 tumors are less likely to benefit from these standard chemotherapy agents.

80 wth as well as make tumors more sensitive to standard chemotherapy agents.

81 We randomly assigned 234 patients to receive standard chemotherapy alone and 235 patients to receive

82 he AAML1031 trial were randomized to 2 arms, standard chemotherapy alone or standard chemotherapy wit

83 enefit in survival, TTP, or RR compared with standard chemotherapy alone.

84 stress responses to enhance the efficacy of standard chemotherapies and evolving cancer immunotherap

85 (38%) of 135 parents overall would recommend standard chemotherapy and 46 (33%) of 140 would recommen

86 Improvements to standard chemotherapy and a wave of new targeted therapi

87 , a multikinase tyrosine kinase inhibitor to standard chemotherapy and as single-agent maintenance th

88 -year-old patient with myeloma refractory to standard chemotherapy and autologous transplantation rec

89 ents with T790M-positive resistance, whereas standard chemotherapy and clinical trials are preferred

90 icult disease to treat, being incurable with standard chemotherapy and having a median survival of ap

91 HCC is not amenable to standard chemotherapy and is resistant to radiotherapy.

92 Although data are limited, standard chemotherapy and radiation therapy have not bee

93 ic cancer, which is notoriously resistant to standard chemotherapy and radiation.

94 The addition of cetuximab to standard chemotherapy and radiotherapy cannot be recomme

95 also possess resistant phenotypes that evade standard chemotherapy and radiotherapy, resulting in tum

96 ntain hypoxic regions which are resistant to standard chemotherapy and radiotherapy.

97 rectal cancer whose disease progressed after standard chemotherapy and who had not received prior reg

98 e a common cause of resistance of cancers to standard chemotherapy and, thus, treatment failure.

99 ad shown progressive disease while receiving standard chemotherapy, and 55 patients (23%) had chromos

100 reatment compare favorably with results with standard chemotherapy, and IDEC-C2B8 has a better safety

101 orrelated with poor prognosis, resistance to standard chemotherapy, and insensitivity to targeted inh

102 atment most widely used, to date there is no standard chemotherapy, and new combinations with targete

103 iridol, other schedules and combination with standard chemotherapies are ongoing.

104 tion with rituximab (chimeric anti-CD20) and standard chemotherapy are ongoing.

105 ce in DFS or OS between the blinatumomab and standard chemotherapy arms overall.

106 , suggesting the addition of atezolizumab to standard chemotherapy as first-line treatment in this sp

107 ical need in that it is largely resistant to standard chemotherapy as well as modern therapeutics, su

108 n of these targeted epigenetic agents to the standard chemotherapy backbone is a promising approach t

109 arsenic trioxide treatment regimen with the standard chemotherapy-based regimen (ATRA and idarubicin

110 nd are associated with lower cure rates from standard chemotherapy-based treatment.

111 than 60 years but considered unsuitable for standard chemotherapy because of a cardiac ejection frac

112 yeloma can prolong survival as compared with standard chemotherapy but cannot be considered curative,

113 Improving the efficacy of standard chemotherapy by targeting DNA repair mechanisms

114 Preoperative standard chemotherapy can be recommended for downsizing

115 or 1 received zanidatamab intravenously plus standard chemotherapy (CAPOX [capecitabine plus oxalipla

116 Resistance to standard chemotherapy (carboplatin + paclitaxel) is one

117 s for this class of patients is poor, and no standard chemotherapy combination so far has demonstrate

118 ludarabine and high-dose cytosine (FLA) with standard chemotherapy comprising cytosine arabinoside, d

119 Standard chemotherapy consisting of doxorubicin-cyclopho

120 homa [NHL]) were randomized to either InO or standard chemotherapy (controls).

121 ositive patients (n = 459) were allocated to standard chemotherapy (cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, a

122 on days 1 and 3 for the second induction) or standard chemotherapy (cytarabine 100 mg/m(2) per day co

123 hildren's Oncology Group (COG) that compared standard chemotherapy (cytarabine, daunorubicin, and eto

124 vacizumab, an anti-angiogenic drug, added to standard chemotherapy demonstrated no improvement in out

125 Infants received standard chemotherapy, depending on MYCN status and ploi

126 ition of ifosfamide in this dose schedule to standard chemotherapy did not enhance EFS.

127 rall, the addition of brentuximab vedotin to standard chemotherapy does not add significant toxicity

128 udy show that the addition of bevacizumab to standard chemotherapy does not improve the therapeutic o

129 Notably, in comparison to the standard chemotherapy drug cytosine arabinoside (Ara-C),

130 ombination of RGD-M/sPMI and temozolomide--a standard chemotherapy drug for GBM increased antitumor e

131 s and subsequently enhanced sensitivity to a standard chemotherapy drug, cyclophosphamide, in DLBCL c

132 oside (ara-C) and gemcitabine (dFdC) are two standard chemotherapy drugs used in the treatment of pat

133 s for solid tumors are dominated by a set of standard chemotherapy drugs, and alternative therapies a

134 way to treat p53-deficient cancer cells with standard chemotherapy drugs.

135 way to treat p53-deficient cancer cells with standard chemotherapy drugs.

136 stage I, II, IIIA, or IIIB breast cancer to standard chemotherapy (either cyclophosphamide, methotre

137 Standard chemotherapy fails in 40% to 50% of patients wi

138 200 mg or placebo, both to be combined with standard chemotherapy (fluoropyrimidine and platinum-bas

139 Compared with standard chemotherapy followed by stem cell transplant,

140 TERPRETATION: The addition of bevacizumab to standard chemotherapy, followed by maintenance therapy u

141 ed in combination with radioimmunotherapy or standard chemotherapy for a more durable response.

142 Standard chemotherapy for acute myeloid leukemia (AML) t

143 urse, late diagnosis, and limited benefit of standard chemotherapy for advanced disease.

144 Standard chemotherapy for advanced ovarian cancer curren

145 ved the use of rituximab in combination with standard chemotherapy for aggressive NHL.

146 of patients who have experienced failure of standard chemotherapy for AIDS-KS.

147 r colon cancer (92.7% vs. 90.5%; P < 0.010), standard chemotherapy for diffuse large B-cell non-Hodgk

148 Standard chemotherapy for first relapse of B-cell acute

149 in combination with temozolomide (TMZ), the standard chemotherapy for GBM, in both 2D (monolayer) an

150 The most standard chemotherapy for metastatic disease is gemcitab

151 Patients treated with standard chemotherapy for metastatic or relapsed cervica

152 Standard chemotherapy for newly diagnosed ovarian cancer

153 DNA damaging agents are a mainstay of standard chemotherapy for ovarian cancer.

154 Platinum-based regimens are the standard chemotherapy for patients with advanced non-sma

155 Docetaxel is a standard chemotherapy for patients with metastatic prost

156 a role for the addition of pembrolizumab to standard chemotherapy for the first-line treatment of me

157 Docetaxel (DTX) has been used as a standard chemotherapy for the mCRPC.

158 that selumetinib could be an alternative to standard chemotherapy for these subgroups of patients, a

159 d safety of adding bevacizumab to first-line standard chemotherapy for treatment of extensive-stage s

160 Here, we show that gemcitabine, a standard chemotherapy for various solid tumors, triggers

161 Even parents who would not recommend standard chemotherapy generally felt the physician shoul

162 d irinotecan are being tested to replace the standard chemotherapy given during thoracic radiation.

163 rognosis disease, 332 (66%) died (174 in the standard chemotherapy group and 158 in the bevacizumab g

164 At baseline, 684 (90%) of women in the standard chemotherapy group and 691 (90%) of those in th

165 764 women were randomly assigned to the standard chemotherapy group and 764 to the bevacizumab g

166 bevacizumab group and 388 (51%) women in the standard chemotherapy group provided QoL data.

167 obal QoL score at 54 weeks was higher in the standard chemotherapy group than in the bevacizumab grou

168 l time 44.6 months [95% CI 43.2-45.9] in the standard chemotherapy group vs 45.5 months [44.2-46.7] i

169 oups (49.7 months [95% CI 48.3-51.1]) in the standard chemotherapy group vs 48.4 months [47.0-49.9] i

170 in the capecitabine group versus 85% in the standard-chemotherapy group, and the overall survival ra

171 pecitabine, twice as many patients receiving standard chemotherapy had moderate-to-severe toxic effec

172 Addition of anti-VEGF antibody therapy to standard chemotherapies has improved survival and is an

173 Standard chemotherapy has a response rate of around 25%

174 se of epithelial ovarian tumors treated with standard chemotherapy has highlighted the necessity to i

175 e addition of thoracic radiotherapy (TRT) to standard chemotherapy has led to improvements in long-te

176 cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients receiving standard chemotherapy (hazard ratio=0.63, P=0.07).

177 w likelihood of durable complete response to standard chemotherapy, ie, weight loss, visceral metasta

178 nt therapy in conjunction with radiotherapy, standard chemotherapy, immunotherapy, or surgical debulk

179 ective was to determine whether adding GO to standard chemotherapy improved event-free survival (EFS)

180 agents, namely bevacizumab and cetuximab, to standard chemotherapies in stage III disease, despite im

181 evaluated the activity of verapamil added to standard chemotherapy in both C3HeB/FeJ (which produce n

182 ethods to assess early metabolic response to standard chemotherapy in DLBCL.

183 FR)-targeted antibody cetuximab was added to standard chemotherapy in first-line treatment of advance

184 indings indicate that FLA may be inferior to standard chemotherapy in high-risk AML and that the outc

185 Resistance to standard chemotherapy in metastatic triple-negative brea

186 stent senescent cells that accumulate during standard chemotherapy in NSCLC and HNSCC.

187 of sequential gemtuzumab ozogamicin (GO) and standard chemotherapy in older patients with newly diagn

188 d tumor growth, synergized with cisplatin (a standard chemotherapy in ovarian cancer care), and impro

189 and BAY 12-9566 alone or in combination with standard chemotherapy in patients with advanced cancers

190 The addition of bevacizumab to standard chemotherapy in patients with advanced ovarian

191 se in DFS by adding extended capecitabine to standard chemotherapy in patients with early TNBC.

192 ed adjuvant capecitabine after completion of standard chemotherapy in patients with early TNBC.

193 erapy in patients with low-grade disease and standard chemotherapy in patients with high-grade diseas

194 rgeted therapy by combining trastuzumab with standard chemotherapy in patients with metastatic osteos

195 icity of this combination when provided with standard chemotherapy in patients with newly diagnosed m

196 Crizotinib is superior to standard chemotherapy in patients with previously treate

197 sess the benefit of addition of cetuximab to standard chemotherapy in patients with resectable colore

198 ed as window therapy and in combination with standard chemotherapy in pediatric patients with newly d

199 n-label, phase III trial of nivolumab versus standard chemotherapy in relapsed SCLC.

200 Pamidronate is a useful adjunct to standard chemotherapy in the palliative treatment of met

201 with those of matched controls treated with standard chemotherapy in the UKALL 2003 trial.

202 ree survival and response rate compared with standard chemotherapy in this setting; however, resistan

203 growth kinetics and drug sensitivity against standard chemotherapy in vivo.

204 inferiority of capecitabine as compared with standard chemotherapy in women with breast cancer who we

205 do not respond to or relapse soon after the standard chemotherapy, indicating a critical need to bet

206 monstrated that the addition of rituximab to standard chemotherapy induction has improved the overall

207 All patients received standard chemotherapy induction regimens.

208 Patients were randomly assigned to receive standard chemotherapy (induction therapy with daunorubic

209 apse, metastasis, and drug resistance render standard chemotherapy ineffective in the treatment of TN

210 ether or not the addition of rindopepimut to standard chemotherapy is able to improve survival in pat

211 Standard chemotherapy is associated with low response ra

212 Standard chemotherapy is poorly tolerated in patients wh

213 , C-reactive protein </= 4 mg/L, and pre-HDT standard chemotherapy </= 12 months.

214 The addition of pembrolizumab to standard chemotherapy maintained GHS/QOL, with improved

215 Notably, the timing of administration of standard chemotherapy markedly impacted the induction of

216 lication of 2-FG as an adjuvant treatment to standard chemotherapy may enhance the treatment of retin

217 therapy was highly likely to be inferior to standard chemotherapy met a prescribed level, and enroll

218 women were enrolled and randomly assigned to standard chemotherapy (n=337) or chemotherapy plus bevac

219 Beyond standard chemotherapy, newer treatment regimens in HNSCC

220 would improve patient outcome compared with standard chemotherapy of similar duration.

221 d its efficacy in NHL patients refractory to standard chemotherapy or immunotherapy with the widely u

222 ie as patients who were randomly assigned to standard chemotherapy (P=0.02).

223 Compared with patients who were treated with standard chemotherapy, patients who were treated with ca

224 garding how to optimally integrate them with standard chemotherapy platforms.

225 emotherapy alone and 235 patients to receive standard chemotherapy plus trastuzumab.

226 n implicated in tumor growth, sensitivity to standard chemotherapy, prognosis of patients, and diseas

227 trial, the sequential combination of GO and standard chemotherapy provides no benefit for older pati

228 For most patients, however, standard chemotherapy, radiation therapy, topical therap

229 in five older patients with EBC treated with standard chemotherapy received low RDI and had inferior

230 f chemotherapy flow sheets; and adherence to standard chemotherapy recommendations for patients with

231 s (bevacizumab or panitumumab) combined with standard chemotherapy reduced interlesion heterogeneity

232 iogenic effect and sensitizes tumor cells to standard chemotherapy regardless of the mutational, MSI,

233 Patients with breast cancer treated with a standard chemotherapy regimen (n = 764) were enrolled in

234 ial comparing paclitaxel plus cisplatin to a standard chemotherapy regimen consisting of cisplatin an

235 ) expression renders cells more sensitive to standard chemotherapy regimen due to a DNA repair defect

236 ine, doxorubicin, and cisplatin (M-VAC), the standard chemotherapy regimen for locally advanced and m

237 There is currently no standard chemotherapy regimen for patients with lymphoid

238 There is no standard chemotherapy regimen for relapsed disease, alth

239 ls confirm that the addition of rituximab to standard chemotherapy regimens (chemoimmunotherapy) impr

240 ues to support the addition of ifosfamide to standard chemotherapy regimens and help further refine p

241 Both standard chemotherapy regimens and mAbs directed against

242 or selected one of the two protocol-approved standard chemotherapy regimens before randomisation.

243 s (and anti-proliferative compounds) used in standard chemotherapy regimens for the treatment of peop

244 Current research suggests that standard chemotherapy regimens have been optimized to ma

245 rently, there is little information on using standard chemotherapy regimens in AML xenografts.

246 accrued by the same patient while receiving standard chemotherapy regimens just before (PRE; n = 41)

247 One possibility is that standard chemotherapy regimens that include CYP3A substr

248 cacy and safety of bevacizumab combined with standard chemotherapy regimens versus chemotherapy alone

249 bevacizumab (BV) when combined with several standard chemotherapy regimens versus those regimens alo

250 ents with gynecologic malignancies beginning standard chemotherapy regimens were enrolled between Apr

251 In combination with standard chemotherapy regimens, bevacizumab significantl

252 pecificity and, thus, improved efficacy over standard chemotherapy regimens.

253 ntravenous (IV) rhuMAbVEGF with one of three standard chemotherapy regimens.

254 f patients achieve long-term remissions with standard chemotherapy regimens.

255 elated to the toxicity and deliverability of standard chemotherapy regimens.

256 Although standard chemotherapy remains associated with a poor out

257 Standard chemotherapy remains inadequate in metastatic p

258 er (HGSC) prognosis, yet its adaptation upon standard chemotherapy remains poorly understood.

259 With longer follow-up, standard chemotherapy remains superior to capecitabine a

260 vitamin D3, vs standard-dose vitamin D3, to standard chemotherapy resulted in a difference in median

261 ial cancer, the addition of pembrolizumab to standard chemotherapy resulted in significantly longer p

262 HL, FDG-PET performed after a few cycles of standard chemotherapy seems to be a reliable prognostic

263 ultitargeted kinase inhibitor midostaurin to standard chemotherapy significantly prolonged overall an

264 lled and randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to standard chemotherapy (six 3-weekly cycles of intravenou

265 Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to standard chemotherapy (six 3-weekly cycles of paclitaxel

266 When combined with standard chemotherapies, some significant improvements i

267 (GGAA)(3)s sensitized Ewing sarcoma cells to standard chemotherapy, suggesting their potential use in

268 Due to the marginal benefits of current standard chemotherapy, the identification of new therape

269 oma, the feasibility of combining HAART with standard chemotherapy, the molecular classification of l

270 nts into prognostic subgroups when receiving standard chemotherapy, the predictive value of the genet

271 However, with the addition of rituximab to standard chemotherapy, the prognostic significance of th

272 ncer, evaluated multiple new agents added to standard chemotherapy to assess the effects on rates of

273 0.46; P = .02) were less likely to recommend standard chemotherapy to other families.

274 n's Oncology Group phase 3 studies comparing standard chemotherapy to selumetinib in patients with ne

275 how that inhibition of SMYD2 cooperates with standard chemotherapy to treat PDAC cells and tumors.

276 had received 12 months or less of preceding standard chemotherapy, to evaluate the feasibility of la

277 andomisation to receive either six cycles of standard chemotherapy (total 18 weeks) with carboplatin

278 Internationally, a single standard chemotherapy treatment for Ewing sarcoma is not

279 efit of adding immune checkpoint blockade to standard chemotherapy, tumors acquire the ability to eva

280 At 10 years, in patients treated with standard chemotherapy versus capecitabine, the RFS rates

281 9907 was a randomly assigned trial comparing standard chemotherapy versus oral chemotherapy with cape

282 val time 34.5 months [95% CI 32.0-37.0] with standard chemotherapy vs 39.3 months [37.0-41.7] with be

283 After two cycles, standard chemotherapy was added to RLI for six additiona

284 Standard chemotherapy was superior to capecitabine in im

285 operable mCRC and prior stable disease after standard chemotherapy were enrolled at a single center a

286 ginal haemorrhage, in a patient treated with standard chemotherapy) were reported.

287 reased response rate and poorer prognosis to standard chemotherapy when compared with lymphoma in the

288 s chemotherapy, survival was extended beyond standard chemotherapy with a favorable safety profile in

289 , including the SQUIRE trial, which compared standard chemotherapy with and without necitumumab as fi

290 ere randomly assigned to receive 49 weeks of standard chemotherapy with doxorubicin, vincristine, cyc

291 py to 70 Gy at 2 Gy/fraction concurrent with standard chemotherapy with or without adjuvant durvaluma

292 Whether crizotinib is superior to standard chemotherapy with respect to efficacy is unknow

293 ed to 2 arms, standard chemotherapy alone or standard chemotherapy with the addition of bortezomib.

294 e-receptor-negative breast cancer to receive standard chemotherapy with the GnRH agonist goserelin (g

295 rates of pathological complete response than standard chemotherapy with trastuzumab among patients wi

296 d point) and overall survival, compared with standard chemotherapy with WLI in Ewing sarcoma (ES) pre

297 gressing disease after four to six cycles of standard chemotherapy (with pemetrexed 500 mg/m(2) plus

298 n cancer with the addition of bevacizumab to standard chemotherapy, with the greatest effect in patie

299 GnRH agonist goserelin (goserelin group) or standard chemotherapy without goserelin (chemotherapy-al

300 active in patients with a FLT3 mutation - to standard chemotherapy would prolong overall survival in