ArticleCytometry. Part B, Clinical cytometry2021
A multicenter study evaluation of the ClearLLab 10C panels.
Article in Cytometry. Part B, Clinical cytometry, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- MRI paving the way to diagnosis of acute lymphoblastic leukemia in children and adolescents - a retrospective observational study.Molecular and cellular pediatrics · 2026Article
- An Update on Flow Cytometry Analysis of Hematological Malignancies: Focus on Standardization.Cancers · 2025Review
- Inflammation and Immune Reactions in the Fetus as a Response to COVID-19 in the Mother.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Article
- Commercial DURAClone panels for extending the repertoire of multicolour immunophenotypic panels in an academic flow cytometry laboratory in South Africa.African journal of laboratory medicine · 2022Article
- Evaluation of fixed-panel, multicolour ClearLLab 10C at an academic flow cytometry laboratory in Johannesburg, South Africa.African journal of laboratory medicine · 2022Article
- A multicenter study evaluation of the ClearLLab 10C panels.Cytometry. Part B, Clinical cytometry · 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
14 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Multiparameter flow cytometry plays an important role in the diagnosis, staging, and monitoring of patients with a suspected hematological malignancy. The ClearLLab 10C Panels consist of four reagent panels (B-Lineage Tube, T-Lineage Tube, and 2 Myeloid Lineage Tubes), each consisting of 10 color/10 antibody conjugates utilizing Beckman Coulters proprietary dry format optimized for investigating patients with suspected leukemia or lymphoma. A multicenter study was conducted to evaluate the performance of the ClearLLab 10C Panels for qualitative assessment of normal versus abnormal phenotype in peripheral blood, bone marrow, and lymph node samples with suspected hematological malignancies. ClearLLab 10C was compared to laboratory developed tests (LDTs) and final clinical diagnosis. Four clinical sites were used to enroll patient's spent specimens (n = 453); three laboratories in North America and one in Europe. Of the 453 specimens, 198 had no malignancy and 255 contained an abnormal population. The diagnostic accuracy of the ClearLLab 10C Panels was achieved with sensitivity of 96% and specificity of 95% with respect to patient final clinical diagnosis. The agreement of phenotyping between ClearLLab10C Panels and LDTs was 98%. Any differences noted between ClearLLab 10C and LDT were due to either the presence of populations below the level of detection, the lack of clinical information provided to the evaluators, or marker(s) not present in these panels. Overall, the ClearLLab 10C demonstrated excellent agreement to LDTs and diagnosis. These four reagent panels can be adopted by individual laboratories to assess the presence or absence of malignancy.
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.