ArticleCancers2024
Utility of Targeted Sequencing Compared to FISH for Detection of Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia Copy Number Alterations.
Article in Cancers, 2024. 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.
- Exploring copy number alterations (CNAs) to gain new insight into SCLC heterogeneity.Molecular biology reports · 2026Review
- Genetic Profiling of Acute and Chronic Leukemia via Next-Generation Sequencing: Current Insights and Future Perspectives.Hematology reports · 2025Review
- Analytical Validation and Performance Evaluation of Amplicon-Based Next-Generation Sequencing Assays for DetectingCancers · 2024Article
- Clinical Potential of Copy Number Aberration as a Diagnostic and Prognostic Biomarker in Lymphoma.Technology in cancer research & treatmentReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) is characterized by multiple copy number alterations (CNAs) and somatic mutations that are central to disease prognosis, risk stratification, and mechanisms of therapy resistance. Fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) panels are widely used in clinical applications as the gold standard for screening prognostic chromosomal abnormalities in CLL. DNA sequencing is an alternative approach to identifying CNAs but is not an established method for clinical CNA screening. We sequenced DNA from 509 individuals with CLL or monoclonal B-cell lymphocytosis (MBL), the precursor to CLL, using a targeted sequencing panel of 59 recurrently mutated genes in CLL and additional amplicons across regions affected by clinically relevant CNAs [i.e., del(17p), del(11q), del(13q), and trisomy 12]. We used the PatternCNV algorithm to call CNA and compared the concordance of calling clinically relevant CNAs by targeted sequencing to that of FISH. We found a high accuracy of calling CNAs via sequencing compared to FISH. With FISH as the gold standard, the specificity of targeted sequencing was >95%, sensitivity was >86%, positive predictive value was >90%, and negative predictive value was >84% across the clinically relevant CNAs. Using targeted sequencing, we were also able to identify other common CLL-associated CNAs, including del(6q), del(14q), and gain 8q, as well as complex karyotype, defined as the presence of 3 or more chromosomal abnormalities, in 26 patients. In a single and cost-effective assay that can be performed on stored DNA samples, targeted sequencing can simultaneously detect CNAs, somatic mutations, and complex karyotypes, which are all important prognostic features in CLL.
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.