Absolutely need to commend the authors for leading such a magnificent effort! Congratulations to everyone but few caveats here: 1. OS didn't move. HR 0.82 (0.52 to 1.28), 37 deaths against 41, curves overlapping past 20 months. 2. The remission gap narrows as the bar rises: ORR +26 points, CRc +25, CR-or-CRh +14, CR alone +7 (56% vs 49%, overlapping CIs). MRD negativity landed at 71% vs 74%. Most of the extra responses were CRh and CRi, remissions without count recovery. 3. Screening removed the genotypes chemotherapy handles best. CBF, FLT3, and NPM1 under 60 were excluded, 78 of 366 patients failed screening on molecular criteria alone, and the cohort came out 72% adverse-risk. Lu et al (ashpublications.org/blood/ar…) ran the comparison without those exclusions and found EFS and OS equal. 4. Aza-ven was not gentler on the marrow. Febrile neutropenia 57% vs 63%, with neutropenia and leukopenia running higher in the aza-ven arm. 5. One EFS definition (main endpoint of the study), two treatments with different room to maneuver. Unblinded investigators judged "persistent disease prompting therapy change," and aza-ven pts could keep cycling while deriving benefit. 7+3 patients got one permitted reinduction, used by 8.1%, then came off trial as an event.