Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22965955›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology2012

Comparative analysis of different approaches to measure treatment response in acute myeloid leukemia.

Hiroto Inaba, Elaine Coustan-Smith, Xueyuan Cao, Stanley B Pounds, Sheila A Shurtleff, Kathleen Y Wang, Susana C Raimondi, Mihaela Onciu, Jeffrey Jacobsen, Raul C Ribeiro and 9 more

Open access · bronzeAbstract readComparative StudyEvaluation StudyMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 94 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
94citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
9.6field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

94 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 208 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Measurable Residual Disease.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2027
    Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Adverse prognostic impact ofHaematologica · 2025
    Article
  16. Acute Myeloid Leukemia-Use of Measurable Residual Disease to Improve Outcomes.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2025
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

34 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

19 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Hiroto InabaDepartment of Oncology, MS 260, St Jude Children's Research Hospital, 262 Danny Thomas Place, Memphis, TN 38105-3678, USA. hiroto.inaba@stjude.org
Elaine Coustan-Smith
Xueyuan Cao
Stanley B Pounds
Sheila A Shurtleff
Kathleen Y Wang
Susana C Raimondi
Mihaela Onciu
Jeffrey Jacobsen
Raul C Ribeiro
Gary V Dahl
W Paul Bowman
Jeffrey W Taub
Barbara Degar
Wing Leung
James R Downing
Ching-Hon Pui
Jeffrey E Rubnitz
Dario Campana
St. Jude Children's Research Hospital · US

Funding

Viral Vector Technology (VVTSR)P30CA021765 · NCI · ST. JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL · PI CHARLES ROBERTS · 1985 to 2026
$166.9M
PROFESSIONAL ONCOLOGY EDUCATION PROGRAMR25CA023944 · NCI · ST. JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL · PI SUZANNE A. GRONEMEYER · 1986 to 2026
$8.3M
Clinical Significance of Residual Myeloid LeukemiaR01CA115422 · NCI · ST. JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL · PI CAMPANA, DARIO · 2006 to 2010
$1.3M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA021765NCI NIH HHS P30CA21765NCI NIH HHS R01 CA115422NCI NIH HHS R01CA115422NCI NIH HHS R25 CA023944NCI NIH HHS R25 CA23944
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeIn acute myeloid leukemia (AML), initial treatment response by morphologic analysis of bone marrow predicts long-term outcome. Response can now be assessed by minimal residual disease (MRD) monitoring with flow cytometry or polymerase chain reaction (PCR). We determined the relation among the results of these approaches and their prognostic value. PATIENTS AND

methodsIn the multicenter AML02 study, follow-up bone marrow samples from 203 children and adolescents with newly diagnosed AML were examined by flow cytometry (n = 1,514), morphology (n = 1,382), and PCR amplification of fusion transcripts (n = 508). Results were correlated with treatment outcome.

resultsAmong 1,215 samples with less than 5% leukemic myeloblasts by morphology, 100 (8.2%) were MRD positive (≥ 0.1%) by flow cytometry, whereas 96 (57.5%) of the 167 samples with ≥ 5% blasts were MRD negative. Virtually all (308 of 311; 99.0%) MRD-negative samples by PCR were also MRD negative by flow cytometry. However, only 19 (9.6%) of the 197 PCR-positive samples were flow cytometry positive, with analyses of AML1-ETO and CBFβ-MYH11 accounting for most discrepancies, whereas eight of 13 MLL-positive samples had detectable MRD by flow cytometry. MRD by flow cytometry after induction 1 or 2 predicted lower event-free survival and higher relapse rate (P < .001) and was an independent prognostic factor in a multivariable analysis; prediction was not improved by morphologic information or molecular findings.

conclusionIn childhood AML, morphologic assessment of treatment response has limited value if MRD is measured by flow cytometry. MLL fusion transcripts can provide prognostic information in some patients, whereas monitoring of AML1-ETO and CBFβ-MYH11 transcripts is largely uninformative.

Indexed as

AdolescentAge FactorsAnalysis of VarianceAntineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsBone MarrowChildCohort StudiesDisease-Free SurvivalFemaleFlow CytometryHumansImmunohistochemistryKaplan-Meier EstimateLeukemia, Myeloid, AcuteMaleMonte Carlo Method

Identifiers

PMID22965955
PMCPMC3462046
OpenAlexW2163358530

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.