ArticleFrontiers in oncology2025
Artificial intelligence-assisted early screening of acute promyelocytic leukaemia in blood smears: a prospective evaluation of MC-100i.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2025. 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
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: Identification of abnormal promyelocytes is crucial for early diagnosis of Acute promyelocytic leukaemia (APL) and for reducing the early mortality rate of APL patients, which can be achieved by microscopic blood smear observation. However, microscopic observation has shortcomings, including interobserver variability and training difficulty. This is the first study evaluating the performance of MC-100i, an artificial intelligence (AI)-based digital morphology analyser, in identifying abnormal promyelocytes in blood smears and thus assisting in the early screening of APL. Methods: One hundred ninety-two patients suspected of having APL were enrolled prospectively. The precision, accuracy, consistency with manual classification and turnaround time of MC-100i were studied in detail. Results: The precision of MC-100i in identifying all cell types was acceptable. MC-100i had excellent performance in preclassifying normal cell types, but its sensitivities for identifying blasts, abnormal promyelocytes, promyelocytes and neutrophilic myelocytes were relatively low, respectively. The Passing-Bablok and Bland-Altman tests revealed that the preclassification abnormal promyelocyte percentage obtained with MC-100i was proportionally different from that obtained with manual classification, whereas the postclassification and manual classification results were consistent. The clinical sensitivity and specificity for the early screening of APL were 95.8% and 100.0%, respectively. The turnaround and classification times were significantly shorter with the use of MC-100i for both the technologist and the experienced expert. Conclusions: MC-100i is an effective tool for identifying abnormal promyelocytes in blood smears and assisting in the early screening of APL. It is useful when experienced morphological experts or advanced tests are not available.
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.