ArticleMolecular cytogenetics2021
Which prognostic marker is responsible for the clinical heterogeneity in CLL with 13q deletion?
Article in Molecular cytogenetics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Cytogenetic Profile of Chromosomal Aberrations in Leukemia Using the Fluorescence In Situ Hybridization (FISH) Method at a Tertiary Institution in Gauteng Province.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Myelodysplastic syndrome diagnosed by genetic testing for hereditary cancer: a case report.NPJ genomic medicine · 2025Article
- Review
- Multiple omics levels of chronic lymphocytic leukemia.Cell death discovery · 2024Review
- Article
- Copy Number Variations and Gene Mutations Identified by Multiplex Ligation-Dependent Probe Amplification in Romanian Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia Patients.Journal of personalized medicine · 2023Article
- Prognostic Value of the miR-17~92 Cluster in Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Article
- Review
- Monoclonal Gammopathy of Renal Significance (MGRS) - Case Series from a Tertiary Center in Kerala.Indian journal of nephrologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDeletion of 13q14 [del(13q)] is the most common cytogenetic change (50%) in chronic lymphoblastic leukemia (CLL), and it is a good prognostic factor if it is detected as a sole aberration by FISH. However, it is observed the clinical course of CLL cases with del(13q) are quite heterogeneous and the responsible for this clinical heterogeneity has not been established yet. Some investigators suggest type II deletion (include RB1 gene) is associated with more aggressive clinical course. Also, it is suggested that the deletion burden and the deletion type have a prognostic effect. In this study, we aimed to investigate the effect of RB1 gene deletion, deletion burden and deletion type on overall survival (OS), disease stage and time to first treatment (TTFT) in patients with isolated del(3q). Sixty eight cases, detected isolated del(13q) were included in the study. Also, RB1 deletion was analyzed from peripheral blood of them using FISH.
resultsRB1 deletion was detected in 41% of patients, but there was no statistically significant difference between RB1 deletion and TTFT, stage and OS (p > 0.05). At same time, statistically significant difference was detected between high del(13q) (> 80%) and TTFT (p < 0.05).
conclusionThe statistical analysis of our data regarding to the association between RB1 deletion and deletion type, TTFT, disease stage, and OS has not confirmed type II deletion or biallelic deletion cause poor prognosis. However, our data supports the deletion burden has a prognostic effect. More studies are needed to elucidate the cause of the clinical heterogeneity of CLL cases with del(13q).
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.