ArticleInternational journal of hematology2002
Quantitative assessment of minimal residual disease in childhood lymphoid malignancies using an allele-specific oligonucleotide real-time quantitative polymerase chain reaction.
Article in International journal of hematology, 2002. 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, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Allogeneic transplantation for childhood ALL.Bone marrow transplantation · 2008Review
- Consensus JH gene probes with conjugated 3'-minor groove binder for monitoring minimal residual disease in acute lymphoblastic leukemia.The Journal of molecular diagnostics : JMD · 2005Article
- Development of immunoglobulin variable heavy chain gene consensus probes with conjugated 3' minor groove binder groups for monitoring minimal residual disease in childhood acute lymphoblastic leukaemia.Journal of clinical pathology · 2003Article
- Consensus primers for detecting monoclonal immunoglobulin heavy chain rearrangement in B cell lymphomas.Journal of clinical pathology · 2003Article
- Development of consensus fluorogenically labeled probes of the immunoglobulin heavy-chain gene for detecting minimal residual disease in B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphomas.Cancer science · 2003Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We developed an assay using a real-time quantitative polymerase chain reaction (RQ-PCR) for the quantitative assessment of minimal residual disease (MRD) in childhood lymphoid malignancies by using a consensus V-region probe combining a allele-specific oligonucleotide (ASO) reverse primer. Our strategy employs a set consisting of a consensus V-region probe, an ASO reverse primer, and a patient-specific forward primer for clonal antigen-receptor (IgH, immunoglobulin heavy chain; TCR, T-cell receptor) gene rearrangements (IgH-ASO and TCR-ASO RQ-PCR assays). The limit of detection in both assays was 5 copies of the target/10(5) cell equivalents. We tested the assays in 17 childhood malignancies (14 cases of acute lymphoblastic leukemia and 3 of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma). High correlation coefficients of the standard curves (>0.980) and PCR efficiency (>0.95) were achieved with all primer/probe sets. In 2 (12%) of the 17 patients, ASO primers could not be designed because there was no junctional N-sequence. The quantitative data suggest that the copy number of clonal antigen receptors markedly decreased after induction therapy in 15 of 17 patients and that 1 patient relapsed and died of the disease. Consensus probes make it possible to examine a large number of patients with only a limited number of probes. The strategy used for IgH-ASO and TCR-ASO RQ-PCR assays is accurate and reliable in the clinical prospective study of MRD in childhood lymphoid malignancies.
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.