ArticleEJHaem2024
Optimization criteria for ordering myeloid neoplasm next-generation sequencing.
Article in EJHaem, 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.
- Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
Introduction: Myeloid neoplasms (MNs) frequently harbor pathogenic mutations not detected by karyotyping and fluorescence in situ hybridization; hence, next-generation sequencing (NGS) is necessary for diagnosis, risk stratification, and therapy. If, however, NGS is not clinically indicated but still performed, the results may promote futile avenues of investigation, heighten patient distress, and increase cost. Methods: We created criteria to approve NGS testing for MN (MN-NGS) with the goal of maximizing actionable results. These actionable results include making a new MN diagnosis, characterizing a MN with baseline mutational status, and altering treatment plans. Approval criteria included clinical suspicion of new, relapsed, or worsening disease and end-of-induction chemotherapy. Cancellation criteria included the suspicion of non-myeloid disease only, no suspicion of progression of a known MN, no evidence for recurrence post-transplant, a diagnosis of chronic myeloid leukemia, and cases using blood when a concurrent bone marrow NGS is being performed. We applied these criteria to NGS tests ordered at our institution between August and December 2018 and determined whether any tests meeting our cancelation criteria yielded actionable results. Results: Consecutive MN-NGS orders ( Conclusion: Approximately one third (59/174) of MN-NGS test orders can be safely canceled using these criteria, which would result in $150,370 of Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services-reimbursed savings annually.
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.