Use of a FLAER-Based WBC Assay in the Primary Screening of PNH Clones
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Diagnosis of paroxysmal nocturnal hemoglobinuria (PNH) with flow cytometry traditionally involves the analysis of CD55 and CD59 on RBCs and neutrophils. However, the ability to accurately detect PNH RBCs is compromised by prior hemolysis and/or transfused RBCs. Patients with aplastic anemia (AA) and myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) can also produce PNH clones. We recently described a multiparameter fluorescent aerolysin (FLAER)-based flow assay using CD45, CD33, and CD14 that accurately identified PNH monocyte and neutrophil clones in PNH, AA, and MDS. Here, we compared the efficiency of this WBC assay with a CD59-based assay on RBCs during a 3-year period. PNH clones were detected with the FLAER assay in 63 (11.8%) of 536 samples tested, whereas PNH RBCs were detected in only 33 (6.2%), and always with a smaller clone size. The FLAER assay on WBCs is a more sensitive and robust primary screening assay for detecting PNH clones in clinical samples.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".