ReviewAnnals of laboratory medicine2014
Cancer cytogenetics: methodology revisited.
Review in Annals of laboratory medicine, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 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
22 citing papers in PubMed, 60 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diagnostic performance of DNA index for detection of high hyperdiploidy in childhood B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia.PloS one · 2026Article
- DeepKaryo-Check: a two-stage automated screening framework for chromosomal numerical and structural abnormalities in clinical karyotype analysis.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2026Article
- Cytogenetic landscape aberrations in paediatric acute lymphoblastic leukaemia - a polish paediatric population treated according to ALL-IC BFM 2009 protocol.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Oncogenic gene fusions in cancer: from biology to therapy.Signal transduction and targeted therapy · 2025Review
- Genomic structural variants analysis in leukemia by a novel cytogenetic technique: Optical genome mapping.Cancer science · 2024Review
- Role of Interphase FISH Assay on Air-Dried Smears in Identifying Specific Structural Chromosomal Abnormalities among Pediatric Patients with Acute Leukemias.Indian journal of hematology & blood transfusion : an official journal of Indian Society of Hematology and Blood Transfusion · 2024Article
- Review
- Chromosome Bandings and Recognition.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2024Article
- Analytic Validation of Optical Genome Mapping in Hematological Malignancies.Biomedicines · 2023Article
- PLPPR4 haploinsufficiency causes neurodevelopmental disorders by disrupting synaptic plasticity via mTOR signalling.Journal of cellular and molecular medicine · 2023Article
- Article
- EagleC: A deep-learning framework for detecting a full range of structural variations from bulk and single-cell contact maps.Science advances · 2022Article
- Analysis of Hi-C Data for Discovery of Structural Variations in Cancer.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2022Article
- Mosaicism in Human Health and Disease.Annual review of genetics · 2020Review
- Variability in Cytogenetic Testing for Multiple Myeloma: A Comprehensive Analysis From Across the United States.JCO oncology practice · 2020Article
- A Practical Guide for Structural Variation Detection in the Human Genome.Current protocols in human genetics · 2020Review
- Use of Fluorescence In Situ Hybridization (FISH) in Diagnosis and Tailored Therapies in Solid Tumors.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Review
- Evaluation of Cytogenetic Abnormalities in Patients with Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia.Indian journal of hematology & blood transfusion : an official journal of Indian Society of Hematology and Blood Transfusion · 2019Article
- Sexual dimorphism in solid and hematological malignancies.Seminars in immunopathology · 2019Review
- Integrative detection and analysis of structural variation in cancer genomes.Nature genetics · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The Philadelphia chromosome was the first genetic abnormality discovered in cancer (in 1960), and it was found to be consistently associated with CML. The description of the Philadelphia chromosome ushered in a new era in the field of cancer cytogenetics. Accumulating genetic data have been shown to be intimately associated with the diagnosis and prognosis of neoplasms; thus, karyotyping is now considered a mandatory investigation for all newly diagnosed leukemias. The development of FISH in the 1980s overcame many of the drawbacks of assessing the genetic alterations in cancer cells by karyotyping. Karyotyping of cancer cells remains the gold standard since it provides a global analysis of the abnormalities in the entire genome of a single cell. However, subsequent methodological advances in molecular cytogenetics based on the principle of FISH that were initiated in the early 1990s have greatly enhanced the efficiency and accuracy of karyotype analysis by marrying conventional cytogenetics with molecular technologies. In this review, the development, current utilization, and technical pitfalls of both the conventional and molecular cytogenetics approaches used for cancer diagnosis over the past five decades will be discussed.
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.