ArticleFrontiers in oncology2023
Misdiagnosis analysis of 2291 cases of haematolymphoid neoplasms.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2023. 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.
- DNA methylation-based classification of hematolymphoid neoplasms.Blood advances · 2026Article
- Article
- Integration of CD200, CD43 and ROR1 in Multiparameter Flow Cytometry (MFC) Routine Panels for the Differential Diagnosis of B-cell lymphoproliferative Disorders (B-LPDs).Mediterranean journal of hematology and infectious diseases · 2025Article
- Favorable outcome of a histiocytic sarcoma patient treated with immune checkpoint inhibitor: a case report.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To retrospectively analyze the reasons for misdiagnosis of haematolymphoid neoplasms and provide experience for improving the diagnostic level in China. Methods: A retrospective analysis was performed on 2291 cases of haematolymphoid diseases evaluated by the Department of Pathology of our hospital from 1 July 2019 to 30 June 2021. All 2291 cases were reviewed by two hematopathologist experts and classified according to the 2017 revised WHO classification criteria, supplemented immunohistochemistry (IHC), molecular biology and genetic information as needed. The diagnostic discordance between primary and expert review was evaluated. The possible causes of the diagnostic discrepancies were analyzed for each step involved in the procedure of diagnosis. Results: In total, 912 cases did not conform to the expert diagnoses among all the 2291 cases, with a total misdiagnosis rate of 39.8%. Among them, misdiagnosis between benign and malignant lesions accounted for 24.3% (222/912), misdiagnosis between haematolymphoid neoplasms and non-haematolymphoid neoplasms accounted for 3.3% (30/912), misdiagnosis among lineages accounted for 9.3% (85/912), misclassification in lymphoma subtypes accounted for 60.8% (554/912), and other misdiagnoses among benign lesions accounted for 2.3% (21/912) of cases, among which misclassification of lymphoma subtypes was the most common. Conclusion: The accurate diagnosis of haematolymphoid neoplasms is challenging, involving various types of misdiagnosis and complicated causes, however, it is important for precise treatment. Through this analysis, we aimed to highlight the importance of accurate diagnosis, avoid diagnostic pitfalls and to improve the diagnostic level in our country.
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.