Relapse-free survival outcome by transplantation type and study arm. (A) Simon-Makuch plots for evaluating the impact of allo-SCT and auto-SCT on RFS. t0 was the time of hematologic CR achievement. RFS was significantly prolonged in the allo-SCT cohort vs the nongrafted cohort (hazard ratio [HR], 0.17 [95% CI, 0.08-0.32]; P < .0001) and vs the auto-SCT cohort (HR, 0.46 [95% CI, 0.24-0.87]; P = .018), and in the auto-SCT cohort vs the nongrafted cohort (HR, 0.36 [95% CI, 0.18-0.73]; P = .004). (B) Simon-Makuch plots for evaluating the impact of allo-SCT and auto-SCT on RFS in arm A. t0 was the time of hematologic CR achievement. RFS was statistically different between the allo-SCT cohort and the nongrafted one (HR, 0.33 [95% CI, 0.11-0.98]; P = .045) but not between the auto-SCT cohort and the nongrafted one (HR, 0.45 [95% CI, 0.13-1.55]; P = .20) nor between the allo-SCT cohort and the auto-SCT cohort (HR, 0.73 [95% CI, 0.24-2.18]; P = .57). (C) Simon-Makuch plots for evaluating the impact of allo-SCT and auto-SCT on RFS in arm B. t0 was the time of hematologic CR achievement. RFS was significantly prolonged in the allo-SCT cohort vs the nongrafted cohort (HR, 0.08 [95% CI, 0.03-0.18]; P = .0001) and the auto-SCT cohort (HR, 0.35 [95% CI, 0.15-0.78]; P = .011) as well as in the auto-SCT cohort (HR, 0.22 [95% CI, 0.09-0.52]; P = .0006).