ReviewHematological oncology2025
TP53-Mutated Acute Myeloid Leukemia: Unanswered Questions.
Review in Hematological oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Exploiting Metabolic Vulnerabilities in Acute Myeloid Leukemia: Rationale and Evidence for Combining Metabolic Modulators with Conventional Chemotherapy.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- The Mutational Landscape of Acute Myeloid Leukemia and Its Impact.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Dysregulation of Aurora Kinases andCurrent issues in molecular biology · 2026Article
- Integrating Targeted Therapies into AML Frontline Therapy: Who Gets What and What Does the Future Hold?Cancers · 2026Review
- Increased IL4I1 expression predicts poor survival and modulates the immune microenvironment in acute myeloid leukemia.Journal of translational medicine · 2026Article
- Novel therapeutic strategies targeting resistance mechanisms in hematologic malignancies: from BCL2 inhibition to immunomodulatory approaches.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
TP53-mutated acute myeloid leukemia (AML) remains one of the most treatment-resistant hematologic malignancies, with poor overall survival despite advancements in therapeutic strategies. The loss of functional p53 compromises DNA repair, apoptosis, and genomic stability, rendering both conventional and novel therapies largely ineffective. This review evaluates the efficacy of various treatment approaches, including intensive chemotherapy (IC), hypomethylating agents (HMAs), venetoclax-based regimens, and immune checkpoint inhibitors. Additionally, we discuss emerging strategies such as p53 reactivation, multi-targeted inhibition, and novel immunotherapies, including bispecific T-cell engagers (BiTEs) and CAR-T cell therapy. Current treatment options provide limited benefits in TP53-mutated AML, with complete remission rates ranging from 13% to 46% and median overall survival of only 6.1-6.5 months. Allogeneic stem cell transplantation (allo-SCT) offers minimal survival advantage due to high relapse rates. Despite promising preclinical data, checkpoint inhibitors and TIM-3 blockade have failed to demonstrate significant clinical efficacy, likely due to the immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment. Novel approaches, such as APR-246 (eprenetapopt) and MCL-1/CHK1 inhibitors, are under investigation, but their therapeutic impact remains uncertain. The failure of single-agent therapies underscores the need for combination strategies targeting multiple resistance mechanisms. Future research should focus on integrating targeted inhibitors with immunotherapy and bone marrow microenvironment modifiers. While TP53-mutated AML remains a formidable challenge, ongoing advances in precision medicine and immunotherapy hold the potential to improve patient outcomes.
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.