ArticleJournal of neuro-oncology2019
Cytometric analysis of cell suspension generated by cavitron ultrasonic surgical aspirator in pediatric brain tumors.
Article in Journal of neuro-oncology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Novel intraoperative strategies for enhancing tumor control: Future directions.Neuro-oncology · 2022Review
- A Toolkit for Profiling the Immune Landscape of Pediatric Central Nervous System Malignancies.Frontiers in immunology · 2022Review
- Experimental Assessment of Leptomeningeal Metastasis Diagnosis in Medulloblastoma Using Cerebrospinal Fluid Metabolomic Profiles.Metabolites · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThe aim of this study was to test the possibility of using specimens obtained by a cavitron ultrasonic surgical aspirator (CUSA) in flow and mass cytometry investigations of pediatric brain tumors.
methodsCUSA specimens obtained from 19 pediatric patients with brain tumors were investigated. Flow and mass cytometry methods were applied to analyze the composition of material collected using the CUSA. Cell suspensions were prepared from CUSA aspirates. Then sample viability was assessed by conventional flow cytometry and subsequently stained with a panel of 31 metal-labeled antibodies.
resultsViability assessment was performed using conventional flow cytometry. Viability of cells in the acquired samples was below 50% in 16 of 19 cases. A mass cytometry investigation and subsequent analysis enabled us to discriminate brain tumor cells from contaminating leukocytes, whose proportions varied across the specimens. The addition of the viability marker cisplatin directly into the mass cytometry panel gave the means to selecting viable cells only for subsequent analyses. The proportion of non-viable cells was higher among tumor cells compared leukocytes.
conclusionsWhen the analysis of the tumor cell immunophenotype is performed with markers for determining viability, the expression of the investigated markers can be evaluated. Suitable markers can be selected by high-throughput methods, such as mass cytometry, and those that are diagnostically relevant can be investigated using flow cytometry, which is more flexible in terms of time.
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.