MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4281570801 · doi:10.1111/ijlh.13877

Validation of a single tube 3‐colour immature red blood cell screening assay for the detection and enumeration of small, medium and large paroxysmal nocturnal haemoglobinuria clones by flow cytometry

2022· article· en· W4281570801 on OpenAlexaff
Iuri Marinov, Stephen J. Richards, Adam Pešek, Andrea Illingworth, D. Robert Sutherland

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Laboratory Hematology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicComplement system in diseases
Canadian institutionsToronto General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFlow cytometryCoefficient of variationclone (Java method)CytometryCorrelation coefficientEnumerationImmunologyBiologyMedicinePathologyMolecular biologyChemistryGeneticsChromatographyMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction The reliable diagnosis of paroxysmal nocturnal haemoglobinuria (PNH) by flow cytometry is based on mandatory analysis of the erythroid, neutrophilic and monocytic lineages. In this study, we have evaluated the performance characteristics of a recently published immature red blood cell (iRBC) assay as a potential screening test for PNH by flow cytometry. Methods Intra‐ and inter‐assay imprecision were determined in five replicates of small, medium and large PNH iRBC clones. Analytical and functional sensitivity was assessed by performing spiking tests for five replicates. Thirty healthy donors and 441 PNH patients were tested for evaluation of clinical specificity, sensitivity, positive and negative predictive values. Results Coefficients of variation (CV) for intra‐/inter‐assay imprecision analyses were 1.31/1.50, 3.19/2.61 and 3.99/1.58 for the big, medium and small clone sizes, respectively. Absolute values (100%) were found for both clinical specificity and sensitivity as well as for both positive and negative predictive values. The CV from 5 replicate results for 10 clustered events was 15.7%. The coefficient of determination ( r 2 ), Pearson's correlation coefficient ( r ) and Bland–Altman mean bias were 0.9436/0.9234/1.7 for PNH iRBC compared to PNH neutrophils and 0.9553/0.9387/2.1 for PNH iRBCs compared to PNH monocytes. Conclusion Our results confirm very good performance characteristics, high analytical and functional sensitivity, absolute clinical specificity and sensitivity as well as favourable correlation between PNH iRBCs and both PNH neutrophils and monocytes, suggesting that this cost‐effective 3‐colour iRBC assay can be used as a reliable screening test for evaluation of small, medium and large PNH clones by flow cytometry.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.413

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.235 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Laboratory HematologySame topicComplement system in diseasesFrench-language works237,207