ArticleLeukemia research2018
Widespread use of measurable residual disease in acute myeloid leukemia practice.
Article in Leukemia research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Acute Myeloid Leukemia-Use of Measurable Residual Disease to Improve Outcomes.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2025Review
- Article
- MRD Tailored Therapy in AML: What We Have Learned So Far.Frontiers in oncology · 2020Review
- MRD evaluation of AML in clinical practice: are we there yet?Hematology. American Society of Hematology. Education Program · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeMeasurable residual disease (MRD) has prognostic importance for patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML). How leukemia providers incorporate MRD into routine practice remains undefined. PATIENTS AND
methodsA survey was developed and distributed to a large sample of leukemia physicians. Demographic information was collected along with details concerning MRD practices. A multivariable logistic regression model evaluated provider characteristics predictive of MRD utilization.
results268 responses were received (response rate of 41%). 69% of providers reported routine use of MRD in management of AML, most commonly (90%) for its role in guiding therapy; providers who did not use MRD routinely most frequently cited inadequate resources (58%). Providers utilized flow cytometry- more than polymerase chain reaction-based assays with nucleophosmin-1 being the most common target with the latter. We found substantial variability in how MRD affected clinical decision making, particularly in pre- and post-transplant scenarios.
conclusionsMRD was frequently used in making treatment decisions and in estimating prognosis. However, there was lack of uniformity in these practices. Standardization of assays, adoption of requisite technology, and dissemination of data about the value of MRD use would likely increase usage of MRD in the care of patients with AML.
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.