ArticlePloS one2025
Gene expression profiling and pathway analysis in acute myeloid leukaemia-normal karyotype patients.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Epigenetics and In Silico Transcriptome Analysis of Pediatric Acute Myeloid Leukemia.European journal of haematology · 2026Review
- Statistical Inference of Phenotype-Specific Molecular Mechanisms from Cell Line-Specific Gene Regulatory Networks with Application to Quizartinib Sensitivity.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Article
- Artificial inteligence and datasets for leukemia diagnosis: A scoping review of machine lerning and deep learning approaches.MethodsX · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Acute myeloid leukaemia-normal karyotype (AML-NK) exhibits heterogeneity in expression profiles, influencing the treatment response and survival outcome. Transcriptome sequencing allows a comprehensive analysis of differentially expressed genes (DEGs) and dysregulated pathways in AML-NK, shedding light on the molecular mechanisms and their implications in patients' management. DEG analyses utilising transcriptome sequencing were conducted using a customised DESeq2 pipeline on 51 AML-NK patients at diagnosis (DX), 12 AML-NK patients who attained first remission (CR1) and 12 healthy controls. The transcriptomic sequencing of AML-NK compared to healthy controls revealed 5,126 DEGs, comprising 85.8% coding genes and 14.2% non-coding elements across 37 pathway categories. The AML-NK DX versus CR1 identified 5,621 DEGs consisting of 84.7% coding genes and 15.3% non-coding elements affecting 20 categories of pathways. Gene set enrichment analysis in this study revealed consistent upregulation of proliferative pathways, including cell cycle and DNA replication. In contrast, immune-related pathways, such as cytokine-cytokine receptor interactions and MHC antigen presentation pathways, were downregulated. Overexpression of oncogenes (FLT3, MYB, DNMT3B, and MYCN) in DX vs CR1 samples reinforces their usefulness in minimal residual disease monitoring, especially in AML-NK with no genetic aberrations. These findings reiterate the known hallmarks of cancers and validate the transcriptomic dysregulation in the pathogenesis of AML-NK. The robustness of the transcriptome sequencing findings was confirmed by RT-qPCR validation of six genes that were not reported in AML-NK patients. The comprehensive analyses of pathways with dysregulation of a myriad of genes led to an understanding of AML-NK pathogenesis and highlighted the markers for minimal residual disease. In summary, this study performed the first transcriptome-wide analysis of AML-NK in a Malaysian cohort and underscored pathways that are candidates for therapeutic interventions.
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.