ArticleClinical and experimental medicine2025
A novel prognostic signature integrating disulfidptosis- and ferroptosis-related genes in acute myeloid leukemia.
Article in Clinical and experimental medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- IFI44 Orchestrates an IL-10-Driven M2 Macrophage Program in Breast Cancer: An Immune Prognostic Signature.Breast cancer (Dove Medical Press) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Acute myeloid leukemia is a highly heterogeneous hematopoietic malignancy, and we constructed a prognostic signature combining disulfidptosis-related genes and ferroptosis-related genes to predict the prognosis, immunotherapy response, and drug sensitivity of acute myeloid leukemia (AML) patients. The TCGA-LAML datasets underwent random partitioning into training and validation sets. Subsequently, a prognostic risk signature was formulated using the least absolute shrinkage and selection operator algorithm. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and receiver operating characteristic curve analysis were employed to assess the clinical significance of the signature. The results of the immune infiltration difference analyses are displayed, and the drug sensitivity analyses were used to identify potentially effective drugs for AML patients. qPCR was employed to validate the expression levels of the signature genes and compared the signature with existing signatures and mutated genes. Univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses have underscored the signature as an autonomous prognostic risk determinant. Scrutiny into immune infiltration has unveiled significant associations: the risk score exhibits a favorable correlation with monocyte and M2 macrophage counts but an adverse correlation with resting mast cell counts. The expression patterns of immune checkpoint genes diverge between the distinct risk cohorts. Patients categorized as high-risk demonstrate enhanced benefits from cyclopamine, 443654, and 770041, whereas those classified as low-risk exhibit more pronounced advantages from cytarabine and AZD6244. The risk signature demonstrates superior prognostic accuracy compared to established signatures and mutated genes. In summary, our study may provide potential prognostic biomarkers and individualized precision therapy for AML patients.
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.