Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40075747›Full record

ReviewCancers2025

Revisiting the Role of Day 14 Bone Marrow Biopsy in Acute Myeloid Leukemia.

Omer Jamy, Garrett Bourne, Todd William Mudd, Haley Thigpen, Ravi Bhatia

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cancers, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
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

5 authors.

Omer JamyDivision of Hematology and Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL 35294, USA.
Garrett BourneDepartment of Internal Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL 35294, USA.
Todd William MuddDepartment of Internal Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL 35294, USA.ORCID 0009-0001-2300-4499
Haley ThigpenDepartment of Internal Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL 35294, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-9754-5036
Ravi BhatiaDivision of Hematology and Oncology, Department of Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL 35294, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In recent years, the practice of routinely obtaining day 14 bone marrow biopsies during AML intensive induction therapy has been scrutinized. While current guidelines recommend obtaining mid-induction biopsies to gauge early response to treatment and guide potential changes in future management, concerns have been raised that these biopsies may not be as prognostically accurate as hoped and subsequently may result in additional and unwarranted chemotherapy toxicity in select patients. In this review, our goal is to summarize the most recent evidence surrounding day 14 bone marrow biopsies that have been published and clarify the utility of this currently recommended practice. Here, we review major developments in mid-induction biopsy in AML, along with ongoing and future planned studies in this area, outlining the limitations of available data and our future goals.

Indexed as

AMLbone marrow biopsyday 14 marrowmid-induction marrow

Identifiers

PMID40075747
PMCPMC11899312

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.