ArticleInternational journal of laboratory hematology2026
Utility of Iron Staining in Bone Marrow Aspirates in the Era of Next-Generation Sequencing: A Retrospective Single-Centre Study.
Article in International journal of laboratory hematology, 2026. 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionBone marrow iron staining is traditionally used to assess iron stores and identify ring sideroblasts (RS), a key feature of sideroblastic anaemia and historically important in the classification of myelodysplastic and myelodysplastic/myeloproliferative overlap neoplasms. With the adoption of the WHO 2022 classification and increasing availability of next-generation sequencing (NGS), the diagnostic relevance of routine iron staining warrants re-evaluation.
methodsWe retrospectively analysed 101 consecutive adult diagnostic bone marrow examinations (51 myeloid, 50 lymphoid) performed at a regional Australian hospital between January 2023 and June 2024. Perls' Prussian blue staining was routinely performed. Ferritin was available in 76% of cases, and molecular testing in 35% of cases. Two independent reviewers graded bone marrow iron using the Gale score and enumerated RS. Diagnostic impact was categorised as either no impact, supportive but non-essential, or potential diagnostic miss. Interobserver agreement, correlation with serum ferritin, and diagnostic performance for iron deficiency were evaluated.
resultsIron staining had no diagnostic impact in 94% of cases and was supportive but non-essential in 6%; omission would not have altered the final diagnosis in any case. RS ≥ 15% were identified in seven myeloid cases, including MDS, AML, and therapy-related myeloid neoplasms. SF3B1 mutations were present in three RS-positive cases; RS presence did not independently determine diagnosis. Interobserver agreement for iron grading was good (weighted κ = 0.77, 95% CI 0.64-0.89). Correlation between marrow iron grade and serum ferritin was weak (r ≈ 0.38). Low marrow iron grade (≤ 1) showed variable sensitivity (33% to 67%) but high specificity (> 90%) for iron deficiency.
conclusionRoutine bone marrow iron staining rarely influences diagnostic classification in contemporary practice. RS morphology is supportive but not determinative, and marrow iron grading correlates poorly with systemic iron status. These data support a targeted rather than routine approach to marrow iron staining, particularly where NGS is available and routinely performed in de novo diagnoses.
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.