ArticleEinstein (Sao Paulo, Brazil)2020
Myelodysplastic syndrome: validation of flow cytometry multilineage score system.
Article in Einstein (Sao Paulo, Brazil), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo validate multilineage score system correlating results of flow cytometry, cytogenetics, cytomorphology and histology from samples of patients with suspected myelodysplastic syndrome or cytopenia of unknown origin.
methodsA retrospective study analyzing laboratory data of 49 patients with suspected myelodysplastic syndrome or cytopenia of unknown origin, carried out between May and September 2017. The inclusion criteria were availability of flow cytometry results, and at least one more method, such as morphology, histology or cytogenetics. Thirty-eight patients were classified as diagnosis of myelodysplastic syndromes, whereas 11 were classified as normal. Patients were evaluated based on score systems, Ogata score and flow cytometry multilineage score.
resultsComparing the scores obtained in the Ogata score and the multilineage score, it was observed that in four cases the Ogata score was zero or 1 point, while the multilineage score was higher than 3 points. In addition, in 12 cases with Ogata score of 2, the multilineage score was greater than 3.
conclusionThe flow cytometry multilineage score system demonstrated to be more effective in dysplasia analysis, by assessing the erythroid, monocytic, granulocytic and precursor cell lineages, apart from the parameters evaluated by the Ogata score.
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.