A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Do we Need to Perform Bone Marrow Examination in all Subjects Suspected of MDS? Evaluation and Validation of Non-Invasive (Web-Based) Diagnostic Algorithm. | LitMetric

Background: Bone marrow examination (BME) is the gold standard of diagnosing myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS).

Problems: it is invasive, painful, causing possible bleeding, inaccurate (aspirate hemodilution), and subjective (inter-observer interpretation discordance). We developed non-invasive diagnostic tools: A logistic regression formula [LeukRes 2018], then a web algorithm using 10 variables (age, gender, Hb, MCV, WBC, ANC, monocytes, PLT, glucose, creatinine) to diagnose/exclude MDS [BldAdv 2021]. Here, we perform external validation of the model.

Methods: From the TASMC BM registry (2019-22) we identified and compared the model performance between MDS patients and controls (> 50 year with unexplained anemia, not MDS), all BME diagnosed, and not used in model building.

Results: The model was accurate and predicted MDS in 63% of 103 patients, and excluded (correctly) in 83% of 101 controls. It miss-classified in 11%/7% respectively, and was indeterminate in 26%/10% respectively. The positive predictive value (PPV), NPV, sensitivity, and specificity (excluding the indeterminate group) were 90%, 88%, 86%, and 92%, respectively. Subgroup (Lower/higher risk, LR/HR) analysis results were similar.

Conclusions: The MDS diagnostic model was validated and can be used, mainly for MDS exclusion, especially in suspected LR-MDS, avoiding BME in some patients. In the future incorporating peripheral blood genetics and morphometry can further improve the model.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ejh.14379DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

bone marrow
8
marrow examination
8
mds
6
model
5
perform bone
4
examination subjects
4
subjects suspected
4
suspected mds?
4
mds? evaluation
4
evaluation validation
4

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!