ArticleCancers2022
Impact of
Article in Cancers, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- The clinical relevance of RAS pathway gene mutations in childhood B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia.Annals of hematology · 2026Article
- Integrated Genomic Profiling of Pediatric Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia: Genomic Landscape, Risk Stratification and Association of RAS Pathway Mutations with Early Treatment Response.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Article
- Genomic characterization and prognostic significance of copy number alterations in Tunisian patients with acute lymphoblastic leukemia.PloS one · 2026Article
- Comprehensive biomarker profiles in hematological malignancies: improving diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment.Biomarkers in medicine · 2025Review
- [The progress in classification and prognosis evaluation of BCR::ABL1 positive acute lymphoblastic leukemia].Zhonghua xue ye xue za zhi = Zhonghua xueyexue zazhi · 2024Review
- Article
- PersonALL: a genetic scoring guide for personalized risk assessment in pediatric B-cell precursor acute lymphoblastic leukemia.British journal of cancer · 2023Article
- Design and Validation of a Custom Next-Generation Sequencing Panel in Pediatric Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
23 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
An association of deletions in the IKZF1 gene (IKZF1del) with poor prognosis in acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) has been demonstrated. Additional deletions in other genes (IKZF1plus) define different IKZF1del subsets. We analyzed the influence of IKZF1del and/or IKZF1plus in the survival of children with ALL. From October 2009 to July 2021, 1055 bone marrow samples from patients with ALL were processed by Multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification (MLPA). Of them, 28 patients died during induction and 4 were lost-in-follow-up, resulting in an eligible 1023 cases. All patients were treated according to ALLIC-BFM-2009-protocol. Patients were classified into three subsets: IKZF1not-deleted (IKZFF1not-del), IKZF1deleted (IKZF1del) and IKZF1del plus deletion of PAX5, CDKN2A, CDKN2B and/or alterations in CRLF2 with ERG-not-deleted (IKZF1plus). The LFSp and SE were calculated with the Kaplan−Meier calculation and compared with a log-rank test. From the 1023 eligible patients, 835 (81.6%) were defined as IKZF1not-del, 94 (9.2%) as IKZF1del and 94 (9.2%) as IKZF1plus. Of them, 100 (9.8%) corresponded to Standard-Risk (SRG), 629 (61.5%) to Intermediate-Risk (IRG) and 294 (28.7%) to High-Risk (HRG) groups. LFSp(SE) was 7 5(2)% for IKZF1not-del, 51 (6)% for IKZF1del and 48 (6)% for IKZF1plus (p-value < 0.00001). LFSp(SE) according to the risk groups was: in SRG, 91 (4)% for IKZF1not-del, 50 (35)% IKZF1del and 100% IKZF1plus (p-value = ns); in IRG, 77 (2)% IKZF1not-del, 61 (10)% IKZF1del and 54 (7)% IKZF1plus (p-value = 0.0005) and in HRG, 61 (4)% IKZF1not-del, 38 (8)% IKZF1del and 35 (9)% IKZF1plus (p-value = 0.0102). The IKZF1 status defines a population of patients with a poor outcome, mainly in IRG. No differences were observed between IKZF1del versus IKZF1plus. MLPA studies should be incorporated into the risk-group stratification of pediatric ALL.
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.