ArticleResearch square2024
Long-read epigenomic diagnosis and prognosis of Acute Myeloid Leukemia.
Article in Research square, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
Authors and funding
26 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Acute Myeloid Leukemia (AML) is an aggressive cancer with dismal outcomes, vast subtype heterogeneity, and suboptimal risk stratification. In this study, we harmonized DNA methylation data from 3,314 patients across 11 cohorts to develop the Acute Leukemia Methylome Atlas (ALMA) of diagnostic relevance that predicted 27 WHO 2022 acute leukemia subtypes with an overall accuracy of 96.3% in discovery and 90.1% in validation cohorts. Specifically, for AML, we also developed
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.