ReviewGenes2023
Insights into the New Molecular Updates in Acute Myeloid Leukemia Pathogenesis.
Review in Genes, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Molecular, Cytogenetic, and Immunophenotypic Biomarkers in Acute Myeloid Leukemia: Current Evidence and Future Directions-A Narrative Review.Health science reports · 2026Article
- Mitochondrial RNA helicase DDX28 promotes cell cycle and DNA repair programs and shapes an immunosuppressive microenvironment in acute myeloid leukemia.Translational oncology · 2026Article
- Dysregulation of IL-37/SIGIRR Axis in De Novo acute myeloid leukemia patients: association with treatment response.Molecular biology reports · 2026Article
- Genomic Evaluation of AML-Main Techniques and Novel Approaches.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Antineoplastic Activity of Sodium Caseinate in a Cytarabine-Resistant Mouse Acute Myeloid Leukemia Cell Line.Nutrients · 2024Article
- Discovery of 5-trifluoromethyl-2-aminopyrimidine derivatives as potent dual inhibitors of FLT3 and CHK1.RSC medicinal chemistry · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
As our understanding of the biologic basis of acute myeloid leukemia evolves, so do the classification systems used to describe this group of cancers. Early classification systems focused on the morphologic features of blasts and other cell populations; however, the explosion in genomic technologies has led to rapid growth in our understanding of these diseases and thus the refinement of classification systems. Recently, two new systems, the International Consensus Classification system and the 5th edition of the World Health Organization classification of tumors of hematopoietic and lymphoid tissues, were published to incorporate the latest genomic advances in blood cancer. This article reviews the major updates in acute myeloid leukemia in both systems and highlights the biologic insights that have driven these changes.
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.