Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28447422›Full record

ReviewInternational journal of laboratory hematology2017

Minimal residual disease in acute myelogenous leukemia.

N M Cruz, N Mencia-Trinchant, D C Hassane, M L Guzman

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in International journal of laboratory hematology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing 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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 39 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Minimal Residual Disease in Acute Myeloid Leukemia: Old and New Concepts.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Flow Cytometric Minimal Residual Disease Analysis in Acute Leukemia: Current Status.Indian journal of hematology & blood transfusion : an official journal of Indian Society of Hematology and Blood Transfusion · 2020
    Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

N M CruzDivision of Hematology/Oncology, Department of Medicine, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, USA.
N Mencia-TrinchantDivision of Hematology/Oncology, Department of Medicine, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, USA.
D C HassaneDivision of Hematology/Oncology, Department of Medicine, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, USA.
M L GuzmanDivision of Hematology/Oncology, Department of Medicine, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, USA.
Cornell University · US

Funding

PHARMACOLOGICAL MODULATION OF EPIGENETIC CHANTGES IN AMLR01CA102031 · NCI · OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY · PI GUZMAN, MONICA L, MARCUCCI, GUIDO · 2004 to 2017
$3.8M
Biomarkers for predicting response to Hsp90 therapyR01CA172546 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INST CAN RESEARCH · PI CHIOSIS, GABRIELA, DUNPHY, MARK P. · 2013 to 2017
$2.9M
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA102031NCI NIH HHS R01 CA172546
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Treatment of acute myelogenous leukemia (AML) over the past four decades remains mostly unchanged and the prognosis for the majority of patients remains poor. Most of the significant advances that have been observed are in defining cytogenetic abnormalities, as well as the genetic and epigenetic profiles of AML patients. While new cytogenetic and genetic aberrations such as the FLT3-ITD and NPM1 mutations are able to guide prognosis for the majority of patients with AML, outcomes are still dismal and relapse rates remain high. It is thought that relapse in AML is in part driven by minimal residual disease (MRD) that remains in the patient following treatment. Thus, there is a need for sensitive and objective methodology for MRD detection. Methodologies such as multiparameter flow cytometry (MFC), quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction (RQ-PCR), digital PCR (dPCR), or next-generation sequencing (NGS) are being employed to evaluate their utility in MRD assessment. In this review, we will provide an overview of AML and the clinical utility of MRD measurement. We will discuss optimal timing to MRD measurement, the different approaches that are available, and efforts in the standardization across laboratories.

Indexed as

fms-Like Tyrosine Kinase 3Leukemia, Myeloid, AcuteMutationNuclear ProteinsFlow CytometryHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingHumansNeoplasm, ResidualNucleophosminReal-Time Polymerase Chain ReactionFLT3 protein, humanfms-Like Tyrosine Kinase 3NPM1 protein, humanNuclear ProteinsNucleophosminacute myelogenous leukemiadigital polymerase chain reaction, leukemia stem cellsleukemia-associated immunophenotypesminimal residual diseasemultiparameter flow cytometryquantitative polymerase chain reaction

Identifiers

PMID28447422
PMCPMC5652069
OpenAlexW2609856348

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.