ArticleHeliyon2024
Immunotherapy-relevance of a candidate prognostic score for Acute Myeloid Leukemia.
Article in Heliyon, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- MAP3K1: A Multifunctional Kinase at the Crossroads of Cancer Progression and Tumor Suppression.Cells · 2026Review
- The multifaceted roles of the ACSL family in cancer: Metabolic reprogramming, ferroptosis regulation and tumour immune microenvironment remodelling.Clinical and translational medicine · 2026Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Acute Myeloid Leukemia (AML) exhibits a wide array of phenotypic manifestations, progression patterns, and heterogeneous responses to immunotherapies, suggesting involvement of complex immunobiological mechanisms. This investigation aimed to develop an integrated prognostic model for AML by incorporating cancer driver genes, along with clinical and phenotypic characteristics of the disease, and to assess its implications for immunotherapy responsiveness. Methods: Critical oncogenic driver genes linked to survival were identified by screening primary effector and corresponding gene pairs using data from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA), through univariate Cox proportional hazard regression analysis. This was independently verified using dataset GSE37642. Primary effector genes were further refined using LASSO regression. Transcriptomic profiling was quantified using multivariate Cox regression, and the derived prognostic score was subsequently validated. Finally, a multivariate Cox regression model was developed, incorporating the transcriptomic score along with clinical parameters such as age, gender, and French-American-British (FAB) classification subtype. The 'Accurate Prediction Model of AML Overall Survival Score' (APMAO) was developed and subsequently validated. Investigations were conducted into functional pathway enrichment, alterations in the gene mutational landscape, and the extent of immune cell infiltration associated with varying APMAO scores. To further investigate the potential of APMAO scores as a predictive biomarker for responsiveness to cancer immunotherapy, we conducted a series of analyses. These included examining the expression profiles of genes related to immune checkpoints, the interferon-gamma signaling pathway, and m6A regulation. Additionally, we explored the relationship between these gene expression patterns and the Tumor Immune Dysfunction and Exclusion (TIDE) dysfunction scores. Results: Through the screening of 95 cancer genes associated with survival and 313 interacting gene pairs, seven genes (ACSL6, MAP3K1, CHIC2, HIP1, PTPN6, TFEB, and DAXX) were identified, leading to the derivation of a transcriptional score. Age and the transcriptional score were significant predictors in Cox regression analysis and were integral to the development of the final APMAO model, which exhibited an AUC greater than 0.75 and was successfully validated. Notable differences were observed in the distribution of the transcriptional score, age, cytogenetic risk categories, and French-American-British (FAB) classification between high and low APMAO groups. Samples with high APMAO scores demonstrated significantly higher mutation rates and pathway enrichments in NFKB, TNF, JAK-STAT, and NOTCH signaling. Additionally, variations in immune cell infiltration and immune checkpoint expression, activation of the interferon-γ pathway, and expression of m6A regulators were noted, including a negative correlation between CD160, m6A expression, and APMAO scores. Conclusion: The combined APMAO score integrating transcriptional and clinical parameters demonstrated robust prognostic performance in predicting AML survival outcomes. It was linked to unique phenotypic characteristics, distinctive immune and mutational profiles, and patterns of expression for markers related to immunotherapy sensitivity. These observations suggest the potential for facilitating precision immunotherapy and advocate for its exploration in upcoming clinical trials.
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.