ArticleJournal of clinical laboratory analysis2018
Evaluation of the utility of peripheral blood vs bone marrow in karyotype and fluorescence in situ hybridization for myelodysplastic syndrome diagnosis.
Article in Journal of clinical laboratory analysis, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Do all patients with chronic phase CML require a diagnostic bone marrow biopsy in the modern TKI era?Blood neoplasia · 2025Article
- CYTO-SV-ML: A Machine Learning Tool for Cytogenetic Structural Variant Analysis in Somatic Cell Type Using Genome Sequences.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Article
- Clinical implications of sequential MRD monitoring by NGS at 2 time points after chemotherapy in patients with AML.Blood advances · 2021Article
- Evaluation of the utility of peripheral blood vs bone marrow in karyotype and fluorescence in situ hybridization for myelodysplastic syndrome diagnosis.Journal of clinical laboratory analysis · 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo clear the role of peripheral blood as a substitution for bone marrow in myelodysplastic syndrome and to evaluate the concordance between peripheral blood and bone marrow using karyotype and fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) methods.
methodsWe examined 35 bone marrow (BM) and peripheral blood (PB) samples from myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) patient using karyotype and FISH. Karyotype method for BM and PB samples performed using the standard protocol with an exception for peripheral blood in which growth factor for cultivation was not used. FISH testing was performed using a panel of MDS-associated probes to detect 20q12, 20qter, 5q31, 5q33, 5p15 and chromosome 7 and 8 centromeres.
resultsOur results showed karyotypes of BM and PB are concordant in 74% of cases, while about 53% of these concordances were achieved from cases with normal karyotypes. However, the results of BM FISH were completely concordant with PB FISH.
conclusionAlthough peripheral blood karyotype is not trustworthy for MDS diagnosis, examining peripheral blood, using the FISH method, could be useful for clinical monitoring.
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.