ArticleLeukemia2026
Clinical evaluation of AI-assisted quantitative marrow fibrosis assessment using Continuous Indexing of Fibrosis (CIF).
Article in Leukemia, 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
24 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Assessment of fibrosis is central to the evaluation of diagnostic bone marrow trephine (BMT) biopsies. However, manual fibrosis grading is subjective and only semi-quantitative. We evaluated the clinical utility of a previously developed AI-based quantitative fibrosis assessment tool, Continuous Indexing of Fibrosis (CIF), using ~1000 consecutive BMT biopsies without pre-selection. An international panel of 14 haematopathologists performed manual reads using whole-slide images (WSI) of reticulin-stained slides and two types of CIF-assisted reads (Sequential-assisted and Concurrent-assisted) across three study rounds. The AI-derived CIF scores correlated strongly with the manual consensus MF grade (Spearman ρ = 0.770) and demonstrated good discriminative performance across adjacent MF grade boundaries. The CIF-assisted protocols significantly improved intra-observer and inter-observer agreement compared to manual assessment, without increasing read times. Sequential-assisted reads yielded the largest gain in inter-observer agreement (12.6 percentage points; 95% CI 10.5-14.8) and improved agreement with the consensus reference (3.0 percentage points; 95% CI 0.4-5.7). Both assisted protocols reduced discordance across the clinically significant MF-1 / MF-2 boundary. These findings demonstrate that AI-assisted quantitative bone marrow fibrosis assessment using CIF is reproducible, efficient and well suited for future clinical deployment testing. This supports a future role in standardising routine diagnostic haematopathology and enhancing the sensitivity of fibrosis-based clinical trial endpoints.
Identifiers
42749757What 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.