ArticleGenes, chromosomes & cancer2026
Pitfalls and Challenges in the Detection of ZNF384 Rearrangements by Fluorescence in Situ Hybridization.
Article in Genes, chromosomes & cancer, 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.
- Pitfalls and Challenges in the Detection of ZNF384 Rearrangements by Fluorescence in Situ Hybridization.Genes, chromosomes & cancer · 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
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Fusion genes involving ZNF384 define a rare subtype of B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia with favorable to intermediate outcomes. ZNF384 rearrangements (ZNF384-r) with diverse partner genes are often cryptic, making whole-transcriptome sequencing (RNA-seq) the most sensitive technique for their detection. For patient screening and routine diagnostics, fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) using a dual-color break-apart probe is considered a reliable alternative. However, the sensitivity and specificity of FISH for detecting ZNF384-r have not been systematically evaluated. In this study, we assessed the performance of FISH by comparing its results with RNA-seq data from the same patient cohort. We also performed single-nucleotide polymorphism array analysis to identify copy-number alterations indicative of ZNF384-r and the respective partner genes. While FISH proved highly specific, its sensitivity was lower than anticipated, potentially leading to misdiagnosis in a substantial proportion of patients.
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.