ArticleHematology, transfusion and cell therapy2024
Comparison of plasma cell bone marrow counts by different methods in patients diagnosed with plasma cell disorders.
Article in Hematology, transfusion and cell therapy, 2024. 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.
- Comparative Diagnostic Performance of Flow Cytometry, Aspiration, and Biopsy with Immunohistochemistry in Plasma Cell Neoplasms.International journal of hematology-oncology and stem cell research · 2025Article
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
introductionPlasma cell quantification in bone marrow is important for diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment of plasma cell diseases. It can be performed by several methods such as aspiration, imprint and flow cytometry, and biopsy.
objectivesTo compare plasma cell counts at diagnosis of plasma cell diseases using different methods.
methodsAn observational study was carried out of laboratory results of adult patients with plasma cell diseases, who underwent aspiration, imprint cytology, flow cytometry (CD38, C138) and biopsy in a single institution between January 2015 and May 2021. The intraclass correlation coefficient was used to assess agreement between different methods with results stratified into three groups: <10%; 10-59% and ≥60% of infiltration.
resultsSixty-seven cases were studied: 59.7% were men with a median age of 70 (range: 32-85) years. The diagnoses were multiple myeloma in 61%, gammopathy of undetermined significance in 25.4%, smoldering myeloma in 6% and other plasma cell dyscrasias in 7.6%. Less than 10% infiltration was found in 32 (47.7%), 35 (52.2%), 44 (65.7%) and 25 (37.3%) of patients, respectively by aspiration, imprint cytology, flow cytometry and biopsy. Infiltration ≥60% was detected in 7 (10.4%), 4 (6.0%), 2 (3.0%) and 21 (31.3%) cases, respectively. There was disagreement between the results in 37 (55.2%) of patients. Of these, 28 had greater infiltration in biopsies. The concordance (Kappa index) of biopsy with aspiration, imprint and flow cytometry was 0.501, 0.408 and 0.17; of aspiration with imprint and flow cytometry, it was 0.738 and 0.541 and between imprint and flow cytometry, it was 0.573%.
conclusionsOnly aspiration and imprint cytology results agreed. Biopsy showed greater infiltrations than the other methods, but aspiration, and imprint and flow cytometry provided additional data in the diagnosis and thus should also be performed.
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.