ArticlePloS one2010
A molecular score by quantitative PCR as a new prognostic tool at diagnosis for chronic lymphocytic leukemia patients.
Article in PloS one, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.
- Investigating the prognostic value of non-coding RNAs in chronic lymphocytic leukemia: insights from a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC cancer · 2025Pooled it
- Prognostic models for newly-diagnosed chronic lymphocytic leukaemia in adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2020Pooled it
- Preclinical and Virtual Models of Mucosal Melanoma: Bridging Translational Gaps in a Rare and Lethal Cancer.Pigment cell & melanoma research · 2026Review
- Review
- RNA-Seq profiling of deregulated miRs in CLL and their impact on clinical outcome.Blood cancer journal · 2020Article
- Comparison of the mRNA expression profile of B-cell receptor components in normal CD5-high B-lymphocytes and chronic lymphocytic leukemia: a key role of ZAP70.Cancer medicine · 2017Article
- MicroRNAs in chronic lymphocytic leukemia: miRacle or miRage for prognosis and targeted therapies?Seminars in oncology · 2016Review
- Opposite Prognostic Significance of Cellular and Serum Circulating MicroRNA-150 in Patients with Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia.Molecular medicine (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2015Article
- IL-4 Up-Regulates MiR-21 and the MiRNAs Hosted in the CLCN5 Gene in Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia.PloS one · 2015Article
- Identification of a 20-gene expression-based risk score as a predictor of clinical outcome in chronic lymphocytic leukemia patients.BioMed research international · 2014Article
- Article
- Autoimmune cytopenias in chronic lymphocytic leukemia, facts and myths.Mediterranean journal of hematology and infectious diseases · 2013Review
- CLLU1 expression has prognostic value in chronic lymphocytic leukemia after first-line therapy in younger patients and in those with mutated IGHV genes.Haematologica · 2013Article
- HDAC isoenzyme expression is deregulated in chronic lymphocytic leukemia B-cells and has a complex prognostic significance.Epigenetics · 2012Article
- MiR-181b: new perspective to evaluate disease progression in chronic lymphocytic leukemia.Oncotarget · 2012Article
- LPL is the strongest prognostic factor in a comparative analysis of RNA-based markers in early chronic lymphocytic leukemia.Haematologica · 2011Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSeveral markers have been proposed to predict the outcome of chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) patients. However, discordances exist between the current prognostic factors, indicating that none of these factors are totally perfect. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL
findingsHere, we compared the prognostic power of new RNA-based markers in order to construct a quantitative PCR (qPCR) score composed of the most powerful factors. ZAP70, LPL, CLLU1, microRNA-29c and microRNA-223 were measured by real time PCR in a cohort of 170 patients with a median follow-up of 64 months (range3-330). For each patient, cells were obtained at diagnosis and RNA was extracted from purified CD19 cells. The best markers were included in a qPCR score, which was thereafter compared to each individual factor. Statistical analysis showed that all five RNA-based markers can predict treatment-free survival (TFS), but only ZAP70, LPL and microRNA-29c could significantly predict overall survival (OS). These three markers were thus included in a simple qPCR score that was able to significantly predict TFS and OS by dividing patients into three groups (0/3, 1-2/3 and 3/3). Median TFS were >210, 61 and 24 months (P<0.0001) and median OS were >330, 242 and 137 months (P<0.0001), respectively. Interestingly, TFS results were also confirmed in Binet stage A patients (P<0.0001). When compared to other classical factors, this score displays the highest univariate Cox hazard ratio (TFS: HR=9.45 and OS: HR=13.88) but also provides additional prognostic information.
conclusionsIn our hands, this score is the most powerful tool for CLL risk stratification at the time of diagnosis.
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.