MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2037350984 · doi:10.1002/cyto.b.20525

Guidelines for the diagnosis and monitoring of paroxysmal nocturnal hemoglobinuria and related disorders by flow cytometry

2010· article· en· W2037350984 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCytometry Part B Clinical Cytometry · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicComplement system in diseases
Canadian institutionsToronto General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsParoxysmal nocturnal hemoglobinuriaFlow cytometryPopulationMedicineImmunologyCytometryComputational biologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Paroxysmal nocturnal hemoglobinuria (PNH) is a rare hematopoietic stem cell disorder characterized by a somatic mutation in the PIGA gene, leading to a deficiency of proteins linked to the cell membrane via glycophosphatidylinositol (GPI) anchors. While flow cytometry is the method of choice for identifying cells deficient in GPI-linked proteins and is, therefore, necessary for the diagnosis of PNH, to date there has not been an attempt to standardize the methodology used to identify these cells. METHODS: In this document, we present a consensus effort that describes flow cytometric procedures for detecting PNH cells. RESULTS: We discuss clinical indications and offer recommendations on data interpretation and reporting but mostly focus on analytical procedures important for analysis. We distinguish between routine analysis (defined as identifying an abnormal population of 1% or more) and high-sensitivity analysis (in which as few as 0.01% PNH cells are detected). Antibody panels and gating strategies necessary for both procedures are presented in detail. We discuss methods for assessing PNH populations in both white blood cells and red blood cells and the relative advantages of measuring each. We present steps needed to validate the more elaborate high-sensitivity techniques, including the need for careful titration of reagents and determination of background rates in normal populations, and discuss technical pitfalls that might affect interpretation. CONCLUSIONS: This document should both enable laboratories interested in beginning PNH testing to establish a valid procedure and allow experienced laboratories to improve their techniques.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.146
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.080
GPT teacher head0.399
Teacher spread0.318 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it