English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

The availability of multiple tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) for the management of chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) has created the debate on which one to use frontline.1,2 This debate would have been a straightforward one had there not been the huge cost differences between the first and second generation TKIs. The importance of early and deeper molecular responses on the risk of progression and blast crisis has been proven in the DASISION and ENESTnd trials leading to the approval of both dasatinib and nilotinib as first line TKIs along with imatinib in both the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) and European Leukemia Net (ELN) guidelines.3–5 However, imatinib continues to be the most commonly used first line TKI for CML, especially in developing countries like India. Patients with CML who are started on imatinib at diagnosis and fail to achieve the appropriate milestones as defined in the ELN guidelines are shifted to any one of the second generation TKIs and then continued on the same indefinitely until progression to blast crisis or allogeneic stem cell transplantation.6

Primary imatinib failure rescued by dasatinib and maintained by reintroduction of imatinib