ArticleAnnals of laboratory medicine2025
Reclassification of Myelodysplastic Neoplasms According to the 2022 World Health Organization Classification and the 2022 International Consensus Classification Using Open-Source Data: Focus on
Article in Annals of laboratory medicine, 2025. 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.
- Clinical Characteristics and Molecular Profiling ofInternational journal of molecular sciences · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: In 2022, the WHO and International Consensus Classification (ICC) published diagnostic criteria for myelodysplastic neoplasms (MDSs). We examined the influence of the revised diagnostic criteria on classifying MDSs in a large population. Methods: We retrieved an open-source pre-existing dataset from cBioPortal and included 2,454 patients with MDS in this study. Patients were reclassified based on the new diagnostic 2022 WHO and ICC criteria. Survival analysis was performed using Cox regression to validate the new criteria and to assess risk factors. Results: Based on the 2022 WHO criteria, 1.4% of patients were reclassified as having AML. The 2022 WHO criteria provide a superior prognostic/diagnostic model to the 2017 WHO criteria (Akaike information criterion, 14,152 vs. 14,516; concordance index, 0.705 vs. 0.681). For classifying MDS with low blast counts and Conclusions: Our findings support the refinements of the new WHO criteria. We recommend the complementary use of the new WHO and ICC criteria in classifying
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.