Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 1,317

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 99 of the 99 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

‘Acute myeloid leukemia: a comprehensive review and 2016 update’

Open access
De Kouchkovsky, I, Abdul-Hay, M·2016·Blood Cancer Journal
DOI 10.1038/bcj.2016.50
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Acute myeloid leukemia (AML) is the most common acute leukemia in adults, with an incidence of over 20 000 cases per year in the United States alone. Large chromosomal translocations as well as mutations in the genes involved in hematopoietic proliferation and differentiation result in the accumulation of poorly differentiated myeloid cells. AML is a highly heterogeneous disease; although cases can be stratified into favorable, intermediate and adverse-risk groups based on their cytogenetic profile, prognosis within these categories varies widely. The identification of recurrent genetic mutations, such as FLT3-ITD, NMP1 and CEBPA, has helped refine individual prognosis and guide management. Despite advances in supportive care, the backbone of therapy remains a combination of cytarabine- and anthracycline-based regimens with allogeneic stem cell transplantation for eligible candidates. Elderly patients are often unable to tolerate such regimens, and carry a particularly poor prognosis. Here, we review the major recent advances in the treatment of AML.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/bcj.2016.50

Cites

99 of 99 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Cited by

See all 1,317

Metadata

Authors
De Kouchkovsky, I., & Abdul-Hay, M.
Venue
Blood Cancer Journal
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2016-07-01
Volume
6
Issue
7
Pages
e441-e441
ISSN
2044-5385 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1038/bcj.2016.50
OpenAlex
W2461928138
Cited by
1,317
References
99
FWCI
59.78
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.