ArticleFrontiers in oncology2024
Comparison of cytomorphology and histomorphology in myelodysplastic syndromes.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Self-supervised learning can distinguish myelodysplastic neoplasms from clinical mimics using bone marrow biopsies.Blood neoplasia · 2026Article
- Enhancing Diagnostic Precision in Malignant Hematological Disorders Through Risk Factor Analysis for High-Quality Bone Marrow Aspirate.International journal of laboratory hematology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Gold standard for the establishment of the diagnosis of myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) are cytomorphological features of hematopoietic cells in peripheral blood and bone marrow aspirates. There is increasing evidence that bone marrow histomorphology not only aids in the diagnosis of MDS but can provide additional prognostic information, particularly through assessment of fibrosis and cellularity. However, there is only sparse data on direct comparison between histological and cytomorphological findings within the same MDS patient cohort. Therefore, we performed such an analysis under exceptionally well-standardized conditions. We reexamined biopsy material of 128 patients from the Düsseldorf MDS registry who underwent bone marrow trephine biopsy (in addition to bone marrow aspiration) at the time of diagnosis, addressing the following items: a. Analysis of concordance of diagnoses made by histology and cytomorphology b. Analysis of additional information by histology with regard to the diagnosis and prognosis. The respective biomaterials were available at our institution and had been processed according to unchanged protocols between 1992 and 2010. Fresh histopathological sections were obtained from the tissue blocks, stained under identical conditions and re-assessed by a designated expert pathologist (C.B.) without knowledge of the previous histopathological report or the respective cytomorphological diagnosis. The latter, likewise, was uniformly made by the same expert cytomorphologist (U.G.). Histopathology of bone marrow trephine biopsies reliably captured the diagnosis of MDS. Assignment to the diagnostic WHO subgroup was not entirely concordant with cytomorphology, mainly due to incongruences between the proportion of CD34-positive cells on histopathology and the cytomorphological blast count. Histopathology provided additional diagnostic and prognostic information with high diagnostic and prognostic significance, such as fibrosis. Likewise, histopathology allowed more reliable estimation of bone marrow cellularity.
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.