Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34679569›Full record

ArticleDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2021

Harmonization of Flow Cytometric Minimal Residual Disease Assessment in Multiple Myeloma in Centers of Polish Myeloma Consortium.

Agnieszka Krzywdzińska, Bartosz Puła, Anna Czyż, Beata Krzymieniewska, Jolanta Kiernicka-Parulska, Anna Mierzwa, Donata Szymczak, Aneta Milanowska, Aleksandra Kiraga, Iwona Kwiecień and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 23% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
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

12 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.

Agnieszka KrzywdzińskaLaboratory of Immunophenotyping, Institute of Hematology and Transfusion Medicine, 02-776 Warsaw, Poland.
Bartosz PułaDepartment of Hematology, Institute of Hematology and Transfusion Medicine, 02-776 Warsaw, Poland.
Anna CzyżDepartment of Hematology and Bone Marrow Transplantation, Wroclaw Medical University, 50-367 Wroclaw, Poland.ORCID 0000-0001-6641-0182
Beata KrzymieniewskaLaboratory of Immunophenotyping, Institute of Hematology and Transfusion Medicine, 02-776 Warsaw, Poland.
Jolanta Kiernicka-ParulskaFlow Cytometry Laboratory, Haematology Clinical Laboratory, Department of Haematology and Bone Marrow Transplantation, University Hospital of Lord's Transfiguration, 60-101 Poznan, Poland.
Anna MierzwaFlow Cytometry Laboratory, Haematology Clinical Laboratory, Department of Haematology and Bone Marrow Transplantation, University Hospital of Lord's Transfiguration, 60-101 Poznan, Poland.
Donata SzymczakFlow Cytometry and Cytomorphology Laboratory, Department and Clinic of Haematology, Blood Neoplasms and Bone Marrow Transplantation, University Hospital in Wroclaw, 50-367 Wroclaw, Poland.
Aneta MilanowskaFlow Cytometry and Cytomorphology Laboratory, Department and Clinic of Haematology, Blood Neoplasms and Bone Marrow Transplantation, University Hospital in Wroclaw, 50-367 Wroclaw, Poland.
Aleksandra KiragaFlow Cytometry and Cytomorphology Laboratory, Department and Clinic of Haematology, Blood Neoplasms and Bone Marrow Transplantation, University Hospital in Wroclaw, 50-367 Wroclaw, Poland.
Iwona KwiecieńLaboratory of Hematology and Flow Cytometry, Department of Internal Medicine and Hematology, Military Institute of Medicine, 04-141 Warsaw, Poland.ORCID 0000-0003-2266-971X
Joanna ZaleskaDepartment of Experimental Hematooncology, Medical University of Lublin, 20-059 Lublin, Poland.ORCID 0000-0002-4417-7831
Krzysztof JamroziakDepartment of Hematology, Transplantation and Internal Medicine, Medical University of Warsaw, 02-097 Warsaw, Poland.
Instytut Hematologii i Transfuzjologi · PLUniversity Hospital of Lord’s Transfiguration · PLMedical University of Lublin · PLMedical University of Warsaw · PLWojskowy Instytut Medycyny Lotniczej · PLWroclaw Medical University · PL

Funding

Polish Myeloma Consortium Educational grant
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Minimal residual disease (MRD) status is now considered as one of the most relevant prognostic factors in multiple myeloma (MM) while MRD negativity became an important endpoint in clinical trials. Here, we report the results of the first study evaluating the reproducibility of high-sensitivity flow cytometry MM MRD assessment in four laboratories in Poland. EuroFlow protocols for instrument setting standardization and sample preparation in MM MRD assessment were implemented in each laboratory. In the inter-laboratory reproducibility study, 12 bone marrow samples from MM patients were distributed and processed in participant laboratories. In the inter-operator concordance study, 13 raw data files from MM MRD measurements were analyzed by five independent operators. The inter-laboratory study showed high 95% overall concordance of results among laboratories. In the inter-operator study, 89% of MRD results reported were concordant, and the highest immunophenotype interpretation differences with regard to expression of CD27, CD45, CD81 were noticed. We confirmed the applicability and feasibility of the EuroFlow protocol as a highly sensitive method of MRD evaluation in MM. Results of our inter-center comparison study demonstrate that the standardization of MM MRD assessment protocols is highly desirable to improve quality and comparability of results within and between different clinical trials.

Indexed as

flow cytometryminimal residual diseasemultiple myeloma

Identifiers

PMID34679569
PMCPMC8534749
OpenAlexW3207764464

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.