The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Prognostic significance and modalities of flow cytometric minimal residual disease detection in childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia
Open accessAbstract
Detection of minimal residual disease (MRD) in acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) predicts outcome. Previous studies were invariably based on relative quantification and did not investigate sample-inherent parameters that influence test accuracy, which makes comparisons and clinical conclusions cumbersome. Hence, we conducted a prospective, population-based MRD study in 108 sequentially recruited children with ALL uniformly treated with the ALL-Berlin-Frankfurt-Münster (ALL-BFM) 95 protocol in Austria (median follow-up of 40 months). Using sensitive, limited antibody panel flow cytometry applicable to 97% of patients, we investigated 329 bone marrow samples from 4 treatment time points. MRD was quantified by blast percentages among nucleated cells (NCs) and by absolute counts (per microliter). Covariables such as NC count, normal B cells, and an estimate of the test sensitivity were also recorded. Presence and distinct levels of MRD correlated with a high probability of early relapse at each of the time points studied. Sequential monitoring at day 33 and week 12 was most useful for predicting outcome independently from clinical risk groups: patients with persistent disease (≥ 1 blast/μL) had a 100% probability of relapse, compared to 6% in all others. Absolute MRD quantification was more appropriate than relative, due to considerable variations in total NC counts between samples. Regeneration of normal immature B cells after periods of rest from treatment limited the test sensitivity. In conclusion, MRD detection by flow cytometry is a strong and independent outcome indicator in childhood ALL. Standardization regarding absolute quantification on the basis of NCs and assessment during periods of continuous treatment promise to increase the accuracy, simplicity, and cost efficiency of the approach.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Cited by
Pui, C.-H., Robison, L. L., & Look, A. T. (2008) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(08)60457-2 · Cited by 1,564
Theunissen, P., Mejstrikova, E., Sedek, L., van der Sluijs-Gelling, A. J., Gaipa, G., Bartels, M., Sobral da Costa, E., Kotrová, M., Novakova, M., Sonneveld, E., et al. (2017) · Blood · doi:10.1182/blood-2016-07-726307 · Cited by 435
Deep-sequencing approach for minimal residual disease detection in acute lymphoblastic leukemia
Faham, M., Zheng, J., Moorhead, M., Carlton, V. E. H., Stow, P., Coustan-Smith, E., Pui, C.-H., & Campana, D. (2012) · Blood · doi:10.1182/blood-2012-07-444042 · Cited by 423
De Angulo, G., Yuen, C., Palla, S. L., Anderson, P. M., & Zweidler‐McKay, P. A. (2008) · Cancer · doi:10.1002/cncr.23168 · Cited by 123
Metadata
- Authors
- Dworzak, M. N., Fröschl, G., Printz, D., Mann, G., Pötschger, U., Mühlegger, N., Fritsch, G., & Gadner, H.
- Venue
- Blood
- Publisher
- American Society of Hematology
- Published
- 2002-03-15
- Volume
- 99
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 1952-1958
- ISSN
- 0006-4971 (ISSN-L)
- 1528-0020
- OpenAlex
- W2019471283
- Cited by
- 325
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 18.66
- 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: Prognostic significance and modalities of flow cytometric minimal residual disease detection in childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1182/blood.v99.6.1952
- The paper
- Dworzak, M. N., Fröschl, G., Printz, D., Mann, G., Pötschger, U., Mühlegger, N., Fritsch, G., & Gadner, H. (2002). Prognostic significance and modalities of flow cytometric minimal residual disease detection in childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Blood. https://doi.org/10.1182/blood.v99.6.1952
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.