ArticleFrontiers in medicine2023
Swiss Survey on current practices and opinions on clinical constellations triggering the search for PNH clones.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors at 10 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This national survey investigated the current practice in Switzerland by collecting participants' opinions on paroxysmal nocturnal hemoglobinuria (PNH) clone assessment and clinical practice. Aim: This study aimed to investigate clinical indications prompting PNH clones' assessment and physician's accessibility of a flow cytometry facility, and also to understand clinical attitudes on the follow-up (FU) of patients with PNH clones. Methods: The survey includes 16 multiple-choice questions related to PNH and targets physicians with a definite level of experience in the topic using two screener questions. Opinion on clinical management was collected using hypothetical clinical situations. Each participant had the option of being contacted to further discuss the survey results. This was an online survey, and 264 physicians were contacted through email once a week for 5 weeks from September 2020. Results: In total, 64 physicians (24.2%) from 23 institutions participated (81.3% hematologists and 67.2% from university hospitals). All had access to flow cytometry for PNH clone testing, with 76.6% having access within their own institution. The main reasons to assess for PNH clones were unexplained thrombosis and/or hemolysis, and/or aplastic anemia (AA). Patients in FU for PNH clones were more likely to be aplastic anemia (AA) and symptomatic PNH. In total, 61% of the participants investigated PNH clones repetitively during FU in AA/myelodysplastic syndromes patients, even when there was no PNH clone found at diagnosis, and 75% of the participants tested at least once a year during FU. Opinions related to clinical management were scattered. Conclusion: The need to adhere to guidelines for the assessment, interpretation, and reporting of PNH clones emerges as the most important finding, as well as consensus for the management of less well-defined clinical situations. Even though there are several international guidelines, clear information addressing specific topics such as the type of anticoagulant to use and its duration, as well as the indication for treatment with complement inhibitors in some borderline situations are needed. The analysis and the discussion of this survey provide the basis for understanding the unmet needs of PNH clone assessment and clinical practice in Switzerland.
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.