ReviewCancer medicine2026
CO-Rebreathing in Essential Thrombocythemia and Polycythemia Vera. A Revival of an Old Methodology to Improve Diagnosis and Phlebotomy Decisions.
Review in Cancer medicine, 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The diagnostic landscape for the Philadelphia-negative myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs), particularly in distinguishing Essential Thrombocythemia (ET) from Polycythemia Vera (PV), is compromised. The gold standard for diagnosing PV-measurement of red cell mass (RCM) by radioisotope dilution-has been largely abandoned, leading to widespread misclassification. Thus, an estimated 30%-50% (varying by diagnostic center and testing practice) of JAK2V617F-positive ET patients may, in fact, have "hidden" PV, depriving them of the cornerstone PV therapy: phlebotomy. This diagnostic inaccuracy exposes a sizable patient population to an unfortunate high risk of life-threatening thrombotic events. Concurrently, the management of established PV is suboptimal, often relying solely on hematocrit, a flawed parameter especially in iron-deficient or hydroxyurea-treated patients. This perspective calls for the revival and clinical implementation of the Carbon Monoxide (CO)-rebreathing technique as a promising, rapid, and nonradioactive alternative for RCM assessment. Herein, we review the history of this methodology and discuss its potential to improve MPN care by ensuring precise diagnosis, guiding rational phlebotomy, and ultimately reducing thrombotic morbidity and mortality, while also candidly addressing the current evidentiary and practical limitations that must be resolved before clinical adoption, while also offering potential health-economic benefits.
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.