ArticleBMC cancer2025
Pilot evaluation of optical genome mapping in chronic lymphocytic leukemia: complementing FISH analysis.
Article in BMC cancer, 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe clinical heterogeneity observed in chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) is largely attributed to diverse underlying genomic alterations. Fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) remains the standard cytogenetic technique but is limited to predefined loci. As a genome-wide approach, optical genome mapping (OGM) facilitates the identification of structural variants (SVs), such as copy number variations (CNVs), offering a broader genomic perspective. This study was designed to compare the findings of FISH and OGM in a cohort of CLL patients. By integrating these two cytogenetic approaches, we sought to evaluate the potential of OGM in detecting additional or cryptic genomic alterations that may impact prognosis and therapeutic decision-making.
methodsTwenty newly diagnosed or treatment-naive CLL patients were analyzed using both FISH and OGM. SVs, CNVs, and chromosomal abnormalities were compared across methods. Concordance and discordance were evaluated, and OGM-specific alterations were examined for clinical relevance. Statistical analysis was performed using IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 26.0. Given the limited sample size (n=20), only descriptive statistics were applied. Frequencies and percentages were used to summarize categorical variables, while continuous variables were expressed as median and range.
resultsThe cohort had a median age of 61.5 years (range: 44-83), with 60% male. No abnormalities were detected by either method in 2 patients. Among the remaining 18 patients OGM revealed 22 SVs, 32 CNVs, and 8 aneuploidies. In 3 patients, FISH results were negative, whereas OGM identified various abnormalities.
conclusionsAccording to our results OGM identified additional chromosomal abnormalities not covered by the FISH panel in three of our patient cohort out of the five patients in whom FISH analysis had not detected any abnormalities, highlighting the potential to reshape prognostic algorithms in CLL. Our data emphasize the utility of OGM as a valuable adjunct to standard cytogenetic assessment.
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.