ArticleLeukemia2026
Prognostic impact of measurable residual disease in AML patients treated frontline with azacitidine and venetoclax: results from the French VENAURA registry.
Article in Leukemia, 2026. 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.
- Host Fitness: A Missing Dimension of Precision Medicine in Older Acute Myeloid Leukemia.Hematological oncology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
31 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Measurable residual disease (MRD) is a key prognostic marker in acute myeloid leukemia (AML), but its significance in patients treated with azacitidine and venetoclax (AZA/VEN) outside clinical trials remains unclear. We retrospectively analyzed 220 newly diagnosed AML patients from the French VENAURA registry who achieved composite complete remission and underwent MRD evaluation by multiparametric flow cytometry (MFC, LAIP/LSC) and/or NPM1 RT-qPCR. Cumulative MRD negativity was achieved in 62-67% of patients. Attaining MRD negativity at any time was strongly associated with superior overall survival (OS: 31.3 months vs 15.7 months (HR = 0.47) for LAIP, not reached vs 10.8 months (HR = 0.38) for NPM1; all p < 0.001) and lower cumulative incidence of relapse. Dual LAIP/LSC negativity (NEG/NEG) conferred the best outcomes compared to NEG/POS (HR = 0.36, p = 0.02), POS/NEG (HR = 0.24, p < 0.001) and POS/POS (HR = 0.26, p = 0.26) status. Importantly, MRD response mitigated the adverse prognostic impact of ELN 2024 intermediate/poor risk, with MRD-negative patients achieving outcomes comparable to favorable-risk cases. MRD kinetics (early vs late responders) did not affect survival, while G-CSF use improved MRD conversion and OS. In real-world AZA/VEN-treated AML, achieving deep MRD negativity, by MFC or NPM1 RT-qPCR, emerges as the dominant prognostic determinant, overriding baseline risk and supporting its integration into response-adapted strategies.
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.