Tyrosine kinase inhibitors have transformed survival in chronic-phase chronic myeloid leukemia, yet long-term treatment success increasingly depends on treatment tolerability. Despite its recognized influence on adherence and quality of life, tolerability remains poorly defined and inconsistently addressed. To characterize existing review literature, a structured PubMed search identified review articles published between October 24, 2019, and October 23, 2024. Of 771 articles screened, 30 met inclusion criteria, 14 discussed tolerability in depth, and only 2 centered it as a primary theme. Definitions varied widely with no consensus across articles. Most reviews focused on toxicity or hospitalization, with limited coverage of low-grade, persistent adverse events or patient-reported outcomes. These findings highlight the absence of a unified understanding and prioritization of tolerability in the literature and underscore the need for a dedicated framework that clearly defines tolerability, distinguishes it from “lack of toxicity”, and incorporates patient perspectives to better guide long-term CML care.
Underreported and underreviewed: Addressing the gaps in TKI tolerability literature for chronic myeloid leukemia / Kim, D.D.H., Zackova, D., Breccia, M., Lang, F., Sakaida, E., Jiang, Q., De Paz, R., Liu, B., Isfort, S., Yeung, D., Takaku, T., Brümmendorf, T.H.. - In: BLOOD REVIEWS. - ISSN 0268-960X. - (2026). [10.1016/j.blre.2026.101366]
Underreported and underreviewed: Addressing the gaps in TKI tolerability literature for chronic myeloid leukemia
Breccia, Massimo;
2026
Abstract
Tyrosine kinase inhibitors have transformed survival in chronic-phase chronic myeloid leukemia, yet long-term treatment success increasingly depends on treatment tolerability. Despite its recognized influence on adherence and quality of life, tolerability remains poorly defined and inconsistently addressed. To characterize existing review literature, a structured PubMed search identified review articles published between October 24, 2019, and October 23, 2024. Of 771 articles screened, 30 met inclusion criteria, 14 discussed tolerability in depth, and only 2 centered it as a primary theme. Definitions varied widely with no consensus across articles. Most reviews focused on toxicity or hospitalization, with limited coverage of low-grade, persistent adverse events or patient-reported outcomes. These findings highlight the absence of a unified understanding and prioritization of tolerability in the literature and underscore the need for a dedicated framework that clearly defines tolerability, distinguishes it from “lack of toxicity”, and incorporates patient perspectives to better guide long-term CML care.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.


