ArticleFrontiers in veterinary science2020
Flow Cytometric Analysis of Mediastinal Masses in Cats: A Retrospective Study.
Article in Frontiers in veterinary science, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cutaneous paraneoplastic syndromes in cats: a comparative clinical review.Journal of feline medicine and surgery · 2026Review
- Flow cytometric features of lymphoid subsets in healthy and diseased cats.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2025Article
- Investigating comparative polymerase chain reaction for antigen receptor rearrangement analysis in different types of feline lymphoma samples.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2024Article
- Clinical outcome and Ki67 evaluation in dogs with nodal small cell B-cell lymphoma diagnosed by flow cytometry.Journal of veterinary internal medicine · 2022Article
- Successful management of feline CD4Veterinarni medicina · 2022Article
- Clinical outcome and prognostic factors in dogs with B-cell chronic lymphocytic leukemia: A retrospective study.Journal of veterinary internal medicine · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Mediastinal masses occur in dogs and cats and are often investigated with cytology. However, discrimination between the two most common lesions (thymoma and lymphoma) may be challenging, especially when small/medium lymphocytes represent the prevalent population. The aim of the present study is to describe the flow cytometric aspects of mediastinal masses in cats and to assess the ability of flow cytometry (FC) to differentiate lymphoma from non-lymphomatous lesions. We retrospectively describe FC features of fine needle aspiration cytology from cats with mediastinal masses. Cases were grouped in lymphoma and non-lymphoma based on results of cytology, histopathology, PCR for antigen receptor rearrangement (PARR), clinical presentation, and follow-up. Scatter properties, positivities to CD5, CD4, CD8, CD21, CD18, and their co-expressions were recorded using a multicolour approach. Twenty cats were included, 12 lymphomas and eight non-lymphomatous cases. Forward scatter (FSC) of lymphoid cells was higher in the lymphoma group. Double positive CD4+CD8+ T-cells were the dominant population in eight out of 12 lymphomas, whereas non-lymphomatous lesions showed no dominant lymphoid population in five out of eight cases. Unlike dogs, the high prevalence of CD4+CD8+ lymphomas in cats it makes difficult to differentiate lymphoma from non-lymphomatous lesions using FC alone. FC may add interesting information to refine diagnosis in some cases, but PARR and histopathology remain mandatory to solve differential in case of expansion of small-medium sized double positive lymphoid cells.
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.