ArticleBlood advances2026
Optical genome mapping in myelofibrosis: enhancing prognostic accuracy through high-resolution genomic profiling.
Article in Blood advances, 2026. 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.
- Optical genome mapping improves detection and characterisation of cytogenetic abnormalities in non-Hodgkin lymphomas.British journal of haematology · 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
25 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
abstractAccurate genomic stratification is essential for guiding therapeutic decisions in myelofibrosis (MF), particularly regarding allogeneic stem cell transplant. Conventional chromosome banding analysis (CBA), however, has limited resolution and provides an informative karyotype in only about half of patients with MF. In a prospective series of 107 patients with primary or secondary MF, we compared optical genome mapping (OGM) plus targeted next-generation sequencing with CBA. OGM generated interpretable cytogenetic data for every sample, whereas CBA succeeded in fewer than half. In addition, OGM revealed structurally complex alterations and copy-neutral loss of heterozygosity that conventional methods missed. Integration of OGM results into contemporary prognostic models, including DIPSS-plus, GIPSS, and MIPSS70-plus version 2.0 (MIPSS70v2), refined risk allocation across the cohort. The greatest impact was observed for the transplant-oriented MIPSS70v2: the proportion of patients assigned to high-risk or very-high-risk categories increased from 19% with CBA alone to 36% after incorporating OGM findings. Incorporation of OGM data enabled full risk stratification of all 57 individuals with nonevaluable CBA karyotypes; 16 were assigned directly to the high-risk or very high MIPSS70v2 risk categories, a reclassification with immediate implications for transplant referral and follow-up intensity. This study represents the largest prospective evaluation of OGM in MF, demonstrating that OGM overcomes the limitations of CBA, uncovers clinically relevant cryptic alterations, and refines prognostic stratification. These findings support integrating OGM with targeted sequencing as a step toward precision medicine in MF.
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.