Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23584566›Full record

ArticleLeukemia2013

Bone marrow WT1 levels at diagnosis, post-induction and post-intensification in adult de novo AML.

J F Nomdedéu, M Hoyos, M Carricondo, E Bussaglia, C Estivill, J Esteve, M Tormo, R Duarte, O Salamero, M P Q de Llano and 11 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Leukemia, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 38 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
38citing papers in PubMed
4.3field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

38 citing papers in PubMed, 72 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Early Peripheral BloodInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Acute Myeloid Leukemia-Use of Measurable Residual Disease to Improve Outcomes.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2025
    Review
  7. Efficacy ofZhong nan da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Central South University. Medical sciences · 2024
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

21 authors at 14 institutions in 1 country.

J F NomdedéuLaboratori \[dacute]Hematologia, Hospital de la Santa Creu i Sant Pau, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
M Hoyos
M Carricondo
E Bussaglia
C Estivill
J Esteve
M Tormo
R Duarte
O Salamero
M P Q de Llano
A García
J Bargay
I Heras
J M Martí-Tutusaus
A Llorente
J M Ribera
D Gallardo
A Aventin
S Brunet
J Sierra
CETLAM Group
Hospital de Sant Pau · ESUniversitat Autònoma de Barcelona · ESAjuntament de L’Hospitalet · ESClínica Girona · ESHospital Arnau de Vilanova · ESHospital Clínic de Barcelona · ESHospital Clínico Universitario de Valencia · ESHospital Clínico Universitario Virgen de la Victoria · ESHospital General Universitario Morales Meseguer · ESHospital Son Llatzer · ESHospital Universitari Joan XXIII de Tarragona · ESHospital Valle del Nalón · ESUniversitat de Barcelona · ESUniversity Hospital Mútua de Terrassa · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We retrospectively assessed whether normalized bone marrow WT1 levels could be used for risk stratification in a consecutive series of 584 acute myeloid leukemia (AML) patients. A cutoff value of 5065 copies at diagnosis identified two prognostic groups (overall survival (OS): 44 ± 3 vs 36 ± 3%, P=0.023; leukemia-free survival (LFS): 47 ± 3 vs 36 ± 4%, P=0.038; and cumulative incidence of relapse (CIR): 37 ± 3 vs 47 ± 4%, P=:0.043). Three groups were identified on the basis of WT1 levels post-induction: Group 0 (WT1 between 0 and 17.5 copies, 134 patients, OS: 59 ± 4%, LFS:59 ± 4% and CIR: 26 ± 4%); Group 1 (WT1 between 17.6 and 170.5 copies, 160 patients, OS: 48 ± 5%, LFS:41 ± 4% and CIR: 45 ± 4%); and Group 2 (WT1 >170.5 copies, 71 patients, OS: 23 ± 6%, LFS: 19 ± 7% and CIR: 68 ± 8%) (P<0.001). Post-intensification samples distinguished three groups: patients with WT1 >100 copies (47 patients, 16%); an intermediate group of patients with WT1 between 10 and 100 copies (148 patients, 52%); and a third group with WT1 <10 copies (92 patients, 32%). Outcomes differed significantly in terms of OS (30 ± 7%, 59 ± 4%, 72 ± 5%), LFS (24 ± 7%, 46 ± 4%, 65 ± 5%) and relapse probability (CIR 72 ± 7%, 45 ± 4%, 25 ± 5%), all P<0.001. WT1 levels in bone marrow assayed using the standardized ELN method provide relevant prognostic information in de novo AML.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedAntineoplastic AgentsBiomarkers, TumorBone MarrowConsolidation ChemotherapyFemaleFollow-Up StudiesGene DosageHumansImmunophenotypingLeukemia, Myeloid, AcuteMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalAntineoplastic AgentsBiomarkers, TumorWT1 protein, humanWT1 Proteins

Identifiers

PMID23584566
OpenAlexW2023267905

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.