Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38113472›Full record

ArticleBlood advances2024

Prognostic risk signature in patients with acute myeloid leukemia treated with hypomethylating agents and venetoclax.

Alex Bataller, Alexandre Bazinet, Courtney D DiNardo, Abhishek Maiti, Gautam Borthakur, Naval G Daver, Nicholas J Short, Elias J Jabbour, Ghayas C Issa, Naveen Pemmaraju and 8 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Blood advances, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 63 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
63citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

63 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Risk Prognostication After Hypomethylating Agents Combined With Venetoclax in AML: The PRISM Risk Model.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2026
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

3 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

18 authors.

Alex BatallerDepartment of Leukemia, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX.ORCID 0000-0002-6085-2745
Alexandre BazinetDepartment of Leukemia, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX.ORCID 0000-0001-5538-4943
Courtney D DiNardoDepartment of Leukemia, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX.ORCID 0000-0001-9003-0390
Abhishek MaitiDepartment of Leukemia, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX.ORCID 0000-0001-9043-538X
Gautam BorthakurDepartment of Leukemia, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX.ORCID 0000-0001-7679-6453
Naval G DaverDepartment of Leukemia, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX.ORCID 0000-0001-7103-373X
Nicholas J ShortDepartment of Leukemia, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX.ORCID 0000-0002-2983-2738
Elias J JabbourDepartment of Leukemia, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX.ORCID 0000-0003-4465-6119
Ghayas C IssaDepartment of Leukemia, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX.ORCID 0000-0002-4339-8683
Naveen PemmarajuDepartment of Leukemia, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX.ORCID 0000-0002-1670-6513
Musa YilmazDepartment of Leukemia, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX.
Guillermo Montalban-BravoDepartment of Leukemia, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX.ORCID 0000-0002-4533-5176
Koichi TakahashiDepartment of Leukemia, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX.ORCID 0000-0002-8027-9659
Sanam LoghaviDepartment of Hematopathology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX.ORCID 0000-0001-8980-3202
Guillermo Garcia-ManeroDepartment of Leukemia, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX.ORCID 0000-0002-3631-2482
Farhad RavandiDepartment of Leukemia, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX.ORCID 0000-0002-7621-377X
Hagop M KantarjianDepartment of Leukemia, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX.ORCID 0000-0002-1908-3307
Tapan M KadiaDepartment of Leukemia, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX.ORCID 0000-0002-9892-9832

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

abstractHypomethylating agents (HMAs) and venetoclax (Ven) represent the standard of care for patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) who are ineligible for intensive chemotherapy. However, the European LeukemiaNet (ELN) risk classifications have been validated for patients treated with intensive therapy. In this study, we validate a recently proposed new molecular prognostic risk signature (mPRS) for patients with AML treated with HMAs and Ven. This classification allocated patients to favorable, intermediate (N/KRAS or FLT3-internal tandem duplication mutations), and lower (TP53 mutations) benefit groups. We retrospectively analyzed 159 patients treated with HMA and Ven. The mPRS classification allocated 74 (47%), 31 (19%), and 54 (34%) patients to the higher, intermediate, and lower-benefit groups, respectively. The overall response rate was 71% (86%, 54%, and 59% in the higher, intermediate, and lower-benefit groups, respectively). The median overall survival (OS) and event-free survival (EFS) times were 30 and 19 months, respectively, in the higher-benefit group; 12 and 8 months in the intermediate-benefit group; and 5 and 4 months in the lower-benefit group (P < .001). The C-index for OS and EFS was higher when stratifying patients according to mPRS classification than with the ELN 2022 classification. The 2-year cumulative incidence of relapse was 35%, 70%, and 60% in the higher, intermediate, and lower-benefit groups, respectively (P = .005). The mPRS classification accurately segregated groups of patients with AML treated with HMA plus Ven. In these patients, N/KRAS and TP53 mutations appear to negatively affect outcomes; therefore, new treatment approaches are warranted.

Indexed as

Bridged Bicyclo Compounds, HeterocyclicLeukemia, Myeloid, AcuteProto-Oncogene Proteins p21(ras)SulfonamidesHumansPrognosisRetrospective StudiesBridged Bicyclo Compounds, HeterocyclicProto-Oncogene Proteins p21(ras)Sulfonamidesvenetoclax

Identifiers

PMID38113472
PMCPMC10877112

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.