Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31041670›Full record

ReviewCurrent hematologic malignancy reports2019

Next-Generation Sequencing in Myeloproliferative Neoplasms: Is This Indicated in All Patients?

Alain Antoine Mina, Brady Stein

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Current hematologic malignancy reports, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.1field-weighted citation impact, top 49% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. The Pan African medical journal · 2021
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Alain Antoine MinaDivision of Hematology/Oncology, Department of Medicine, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine and Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center, Chicago, IL, USA.
Brady SteinDivision of Hematology/Oncology, Department of Medicine, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine and Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center, Chicago, IL, USA. brady.stein@nm.org.
Northwestern University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewTo discuss the impact that next-generation sequencing has had on myeloproliferative neoplasm prognosis and treatment response. RECENT

findingsExtended genetic testing has led to a more comprehensive understanding of the mutational landscape in the myeloproliferative neoplasms. More refined prognostic models that predict disease course have therefore been developed. In myelofibrosis, this has led to a more nuanced prognostic assessment which is a necessary tool for the identification of potential transplant patients. The extended molecular profile may also help set expectations for ruxolitinib response duration. In essential thrombocythemia and polycythemia vera, elucidation of the molecular landscape beyond driving mutations may identify patients at risk for more rapid progression. However, results from testing are less likely to lead to action, at least in the current era. Use of next-generation sequencing has become routine in myelofibrosis, as a means of identifying patients at highest risk for progression, who may be eligible for transplantation. Extended genetic sequencing is still investigational in essential thrombocytosis and polycythemia vera, and not recommended by guidelines.

Indexed as

High-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingHumansMutationMyeloproliferative DisordersEssential thrombocythemiaMyelofibrosisMyeloproliferative neoplasmsNext-generation sequencingPolycythemia vera

Identifiers

PMID31041670
OpenAlexW2943127363

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.