ArticlePloS one2015
Developing Molecular Signatures for Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia.
Article in PloS one, 2015. 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, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Biallelic germline mutations in MAD1L1 induce a syndrome of aneuploidy with high tumor susceptibility.Science advances · 2022Article
- Hairy cell leukemia: a specific 17-gene expression signature points to new targets for therapy.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2022Article
- Decreased TCF1 and BCL11B expression predicts poor prognosis for patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia.Frontiers in immunology · 2022Article
- Improved classification of leukemic B-cell lymphoproliferative disorders using a transcriptional and genetic classifier.Haematologica · 2017Article
- High-level ROR1 associates with accelerated disease progression in chronic lymphocytic leukemia.Blood · 2016Article
- Differential expression, localization and activity of MARCKS between mantle cell lymphoma and chronic lymphocytic leukemia.Blood cancer journal · 2016Article
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 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) is a clonal malignancy of mature B cells that displays a great clinical heterogeneity, with many patients having an indolent disease that will not require intervention for many years, while others present an aggressive and symptomatic leukemia requiring immediate treatment. Although there is no cure for CLL, the disease is treatable and current standard chemotherapy regimens have been shown to prolong survival. Recent advances in our understanding of the biology of CLL have led to the identification of numerous cellular and molecular markers with potential diagnostic, prognostic and therapeutic significance. We have used the recently developed digital multiplexed gene-expression technique (DMGE) to analyze a cohort of 30 CLL patients for the presence of specific genes with known diagnostic and prognostic potential. Starting from a set of 290 genes we were able to develop a molecular signature, based on the analysis of 13 genes, which allows distinguishing CLL from normal peripheral blood and from normal B cells, and a second signature based on 24 genes, which distinguishes mutated from unmutated cases (LymphCLL Mut). A third classifier (LymphCLL Diag), based on a 44-gene signature, distinguished CLL cases from a series of other B-cell chronic lymphoproliferative disorders (n = 51). While the methodology presented here has the potential to provide a "ready to use" classification tool in routine diagnostics and clinical trials, application to larger sample numbers are still needed and should provide further insights about its robustness and utility in clinical practice.
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.