Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 184

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Monoallelic and biallelic inactivation of TP53 gene in chronic lymphocytic leukemia: selection, impact on survival, and response to DNA damage

Open access
Malcikova, Jitka, Smardova, Jana, Rocnova, Ludmila, Tichy, Boris, Kuglik, Petr, Vranova, Vladimira, Cejkova, Sona, Svitakova, Miluse, Skuhrova Francova, Hana, Brychtova, Yvona, Doubek, Michael, Brejcha, Martin, Klabusay, Martin, Mayer, Jiri, Pospisilova, Sarka, Trbusek, Martin·2009·Blood

Abstract

Deletion of TP53 gene, under routine assessment by fluorescence in situ hybridization analysis, connects with the worst prognosis in chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). The presence of isolated TP53 mutation (without deletion) is associated with reduced survival in CLL patients. It is unclear how these abnormalities are selected and what their mutual proportion is. We used methodologies with similar sensitivity for the detection of deletions (interphase fluorescence in situ hybridization) and mutations (yeast functional analysis) and analyzed a large consecutive series of 400 CLL patients; a subset of p53–wild-type cases (n = 132) was screened repeatedly during disease course. The most common type of TP53 inactivation, ie, mutation accompanied by deletion of the remaining allele, occurred in 42 patients (10.5%). Among additional defects, the frequency of the isolated TP53 mutation (n = 20; 5%) and the combination of 2 or more mutations on separate alleles (n = 5; 1.3%) greatly exceeded the sole deletion (n = 3; 0.8%). Twelve patients manifested defects during repeated investigation; in all circumstances the defects involved mutation and occurred after therapy. Monoallelic defects had a negative impact on survival and impaired in vitro response to fludarabine. Mutation analysis of the TP53 should be performed before each treatment initiation because novel defects may be selected by previous therapies.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1182/blood-2009-07-234708

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 2 references

Cited by

See all 184

Metadata

Authors
Malcikova, J., Smardova, J., Rocnova, L., Tichy, B., Kuglik, P., Vranova, V., Cejkova, S., Svitakova, M., Skuhrova Francova, H., Brychtova, Y., Doubek, M., Brejcha, M., Klabusay, M., Mayer, J., Pospisilova, S., & Trbusek, M.
Venue
Blood
Published
2009-12-17
Volume
114
Issue
26
Pages
5307-5314
ISSN
  • 0006-4971 (ISSN-L)
  • 1528-0020
OpenAlex
W2111893233
Cited by
184
References
2
FWCI
6.22
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Monoallelic and biallelic inactivation of TP53 gene in chronic lymphocytic leukemia: selection, impact on survival, and response to DNA damage. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1182/blood-2009-07-234708
The paper
Malcikova, J., Smardova, J., Rocnova, L., Tichy, B., Kuglik, P., Vranova, V., Cejkova, S., Svitakova, M., Skuhrova Francova, H., Brychtova, Y., Doubek, M., Brejcha, M., Klabusay, M., Mayer, J., Pospisilova, S., & Trbusek, M. (2009). Monoallelic and biallelic inactivation of TP53 gene in chronic lymphocytic leukemia: selection, impact on survival, and response to DNA damage. Blood. https://doi.org/10.1182/blood-2009-07-234708

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.