ArticleDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2022
Impact of Different Cell Counting Methods in Molecular Monitoring of Chronic Myeloid Leukemia Patients.
Article in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 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.
- Enhanced precision in cell culture analytics: leveraging artificial intelligence for unbiased and non-destructive assessment of cell growth and viability.Cell death discovery · 2026Article
- Prebiotic effects ofHeliyon · 2024Article
- Assessing the suitability of cell counting methods during different stages of a cell processing workflow using an ISO 20391-2 guided study design and analysis.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2023Article
- Label-Free Enrichment of Circulating Tumor Plasma Cells: Future Potential Applications of Dielectrophoresis in Multiple Myeloma.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDetection of
methodsWe tested five different types of measurements: one manual hemocytometer-based count and four FC-based automatic cell-counting methods, including absolute, based on beads, based on 7-amino actinomycin D, combining and associating beads and 7AAD. The recovery efficiency for each counting method was established considering the quality and quantity of total RNA isolated and the Q-PCR results in matched samples from 90 adults with CML.
resultsOur analyses showed no consistent bias between the different types of measurements, with comparable number of WBCs counted for each type of measurement. Similarly, we observed a 100% concordance in the amount of RNA extracted and in the Q-PCR cycle threshold values for both
conclusionsThis automatic method can replace the more laborious manual workflow, especially when high-throughput isolations from blood of CML patients are needed.
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.