ArticleNeoplasia (New York, N.Y.)2024
DNA methylation landscape reveals GNAS as a decitabine-responsive marker in patients with acute myeloid leukemia.
Article in Neoplasia (New York, N.Y.), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Liquid Biopsy and Epigenetic Signatures in AML, ALL, and CNS Tumors: Diagnostic and Monitoring Perspectives.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- A clinico-genomic prognostic model for primary myelodysplastic neoplasm in Asia.Blood cancer journal · 2025Article
- Mechanism of action of decitabine in treating acute lymphoblastic leukemia.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe demethylation agent decitabine (DAC) is a pivotal non-intensive alternative treatment for acute myeloid leukemia (AML). However, patient responses to DAC are highly variable, and predictive biomarkers are warranted. Herein, the DNA methylation landscape of patients treated with a DAC-based combination regimen was compared with that of patients treated with standard chemotherapy to develop a molecular approach for predicting clinical response to DAC.
methodsTwenty-five non-M3 AML patients were enrolled and subjected to DNA methylation sequencing and profiling to identify differentially methylated regions (DMRs) and genes of interest. Moreover, the effects of a DAC-based regimen on apoptosis and gene expression were explored using Kasumi-1 and K562 cells.
resultsOverall, we identified 541 DMRs that were specifically responsive to DAC, among which 172 DMRs showed hypomethylation patterns upon treatment and were aligned with the promoter regions of 182 genes. In particular, GNAS was identified as a critical DAC-responsive gene, with in vitro GNAS downregulation leading to reduced cell apoptosis induced by DAC and cytarabine combo treatment.
conclusionsWe found that GNAS is a DAC-sensitive gene in AML and may serve as a prognostic biomarker to assess the responsiveness of patients with AML to DAC-based therapy.
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.