ArticleBlood advances2022
A predictive model for bone marrow disease in cytopenia based on noninvasive procedures.
Article in Blood advances, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Implications of Clonal Hematopoiesis in Hematological and Non-Hematological Disorders.Cancers · 2024Review
- Article
- Parallel genomic analysis from paired bone marrow and peripheral blood samples of 200 cytopenic patients.Leukemia · 2024Article
- Patterns of Diagnostic Evaluation and Determinants of Treatment in Older Patients With Non-transfusion Dependent Myelodysplastic Syndromes.The oncologist · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Bone marrow specimens are the core of the diagnostic workup of patients with cytopenia. To explore whether next-generation sequencing (NGS) could be used to rule out malignancy without bone marrow specimens, we incorporated NGS in a model to predict presence of disease in the bone marrow of patients with unexplained cytopenia. We analyzed the occurrence of mutations in 508 patients with cytopenia, referred for primary workup of a suspected hematologic malignancy from 2015 to 2020. We divided patients into a discovery (n = 340) and validation (n = 168) cohort. Targeted sequencing, bone marrow biopsy, and complete blood count were performed in all patients. Mutations were identified in 267 (53%) and abnormal bone marrow morphology in 188 (37%) patients. Patients with isolated neutropenia had the lowest frequency of both mutations (21%) and abnormal bone marrow morphology (5%). The median number of mutations per patient was 2 in patients with abnormal bone marrow morphology compared with 0 in patients with a nondiagnostic bone marrow morphology (P < .001). In a multivariable logistic regression, mutations in TET2, SF3B1, U2AF1, TP53, and RUNX1 were significantly associated with abnormal bone marrow morphology. In the validation cohort, a model combining mutational status and clinical data identified 34 patients (20%) without abnormal bone marrow morphology with a sensitivity of 100% (95% confidence interval: 93%-100%). Overall, we show that NGS combined with clinical data can predict the presence of abnormal bone marrow morphology in patients with unexplained cytopenia and thus can be used to assess the need of a bone marrow biopsy.
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.