ArticleCureus2024
CD38 and CD58: A Gallant Savior in Under-Resourced Laboratories.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Background B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia (B-ALL) is one of the most common childhood malignancies and comprises almost the majority of acute leukemias in children. At the end of induction, minimal residual disease (MRD) is one of the most important prognostic indicators. MRD is commonly detected by multiparametric flow cytometry. Interpreting panels consisting of multiple tubes requires a lot of expertise and is subject to stringent standardization processes. Hence, there arises a need for an easier alternative that can be more universally applicable and reduce complexity in interpretation, resulting in uniform reporting and cost-effectiveness, especially in resource-deficient settings, without compromising clinical outcomes. Therefore, the aim is to find the usefulness of the MRD "lite" panel for post-induction MRD detection in pediatric B-ALL using CD38, CD10, CD34, CD19, and CD45 compared to the "standard tube" panel. Methods The study included 25 children diagnosed with B-ALL and undergoing treatment. MRD detection was performed on day 28 of post-induction chemotherapy using a standard tube panel consisting of three tubes (gold standard) and our single tube MRD "lite" panel. The results obtained by the two were compared. Results The sensitivity and specificity of the MRD "lite" panel were calculated as 100% and 84.2%, respectively, taking the standard tube panel as the gold standard. CD10, CD20, and CD200 were valuable in distinguishing MRD-positive cases from MRD-negative cases. Moreover, the MRD "lite" panel had 100% concordance between the two observers, suggesting simplicity in assessment and, hence, wider applicability.
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.