ReviewBone marrow transplantation2009
Interactive diagnostics in the indication to allogeneic SCT in AML.
Review in Bone marrow transplantation, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Early allo-SCT for AML with a complex aberrant karyotype--results from a prospective pilot study.Bone marrow transplantation · 2012Trial
- Article
- Lentivirus-induced dendritic cells for immunization against high-risk WT1(+) acute myeloid leukemia.Human gene therapy · 2013Article
- Allo-SCT for high-risk AML-CR1 in the molecular era: impact of FLT3/ITD outweighs the conventional markers.Bone marrow transplantation · 2012Article
- Reduced late mortality risk contributes to similar survival after double-unit cord blood transplantation compared with related and unrelated donor hematopoietic stem cell transplantation.Biology of blood and marrow transplantation : journal of the American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation · 2011Article
- Article
- Genetic tests to evaluate prognosis and predict therapeutic response in acute myeloid leukemia.The Journal of molecular diagnostics : JMD · 2010Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Owing to the heterogeneity of AML, the indication for allogeneic SCT (allo-SCT) requires an exact definition of the individual subentity and risk category. A comprehensive diagnostic approach is needed, which combines cytomorphology, cytogenetics, FISH, molecular genetics and immunophenotyping. Whereas the categorization in three prognostic karyotype groups is well established, rare recurrent aberrations as the unfavorable t(8;16)(p11;p13), inv(3)(q21q26) and t(6;9)(p23;q34) must also be considered. In normal karyotype, PCR analyses reveal prognostically relevant mutations in >85% of cases, and a molecular data set composed of the FLT3-ITD, MLL-PTD, NPM1 and CEBPA mutations was found able to guide the selection of patients for allo-SCT. Some novel markers as the WT1 mutations might further contribute to risk stratification in normal karyotype. The panel of minimal residual disease parameters is being expanded at this time, for example, by quantitative PCR for the NPM1 mutations. Immunophenotyping allows the definition of leukemia-associated phenotypes in nearly all cases, but its position in the indication to allo-SCT has to be validated. Thus, the optimization of the indication to allo-SCT is an ongoing process that should remain in continuous interaction with the increasing panel of known genetic markers and diagnostic methods.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.