All content on this site is intended for healthcare professionals only. By acknowledging this message and accessing the information on this website you are confirming that you are a Healthcare Professional. If you are a patient or carer, please visit Know AML.
Introducing
Now you can personalise
your AML Hub experience!
Bookmark content to read later
Select your specific areas of interest
View content recommended for you
Find out moreThe AML Hub website uses a third-party service provided by Google that dynamically translates web content. Translations are machine generated, so may not be an exact or complete translation, and the AML Hub cannot guarantee the accuracy of translated content. The AML Hub and its employees will not be liable for any direct, indirect, or consequential damages (even if foreseeable) resulting from use of the Google Translate feature. For further support with Google Translate, visit Google Translate Help.
The AML Hub is an independent medical education platform, sponsored by Daiichi Sankyo, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Kura Oncology, Roche and Syndax and has been supported through a grant from Bristol Myers Squibb. The funders are allowed no direct influence on our content. The levels of sponsorship listed are reflective of the amount of funding given. View funders.
Bookmark this article
During the 1st NCRI AML academy meeting, the AML Global Portal was pleased to film the headline debate on recently licensed drugs versus recent advances in transplantation. The motion for this debate was 'Advances in diagnostics and new therapies reduce the need for allogeneic transplant in AML'.
The chair for this session was Dr Steve Knapper, Cardiff University School of Medicine, Cardiff, UK. Those proponents for the motion were Dr Mike Dennis, The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK and Dr David Taussig, The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK. The opposition included; Dr Rachel Protheroe, University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust, Bristol, UK and Dr Amit Patel, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK. The argument for centres around the lack of survival advantage particularly in high-risk groups, whereas the argument against focuses on how new therapeutic advances could be combined with transplant to improve patient outcomes.
Debate | Advances in diagnostics and new therapies reduce the need for allogeneic transplant in AML
Your opinion matters
Subscribe to get the best content related to AML delivered to your inbox