Marked Variability in Reported Minimal Residual Disease Lower Level of Detection of 4 Hematolymphoid Neoplasms: A Survey of Participants in the College of American Pathologists Flow Cytometry Proficiency Testing Program
Flow cytometry is often applied to minimal residual disease (MRD) testing in hematolymphoid neoplasia. Because flow-based MRD tests are developed in the laboratory, testing methodologies and lower levels of detection (LODs) are laboratory dependent. To broadly survey flow cytometry laboratories abou...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine (1976) 2015-10, Vol.139 (10), p.1276-1280 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 1280 |
---|---|
container_issue | 10 |
container_start_page | 1276 |
container_title | Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine (1976) |
container_volume | 139 |
creator | Keeney, Michael Halley, Jaimie G Rhoads, Daniel D Ansari, M Qasim Kussick, Steven J Karlon, William J Mehta, Kumudini U Dorfman, David M Linden, Michael A |
description | Flow cytometry is often applied to minimal residual disease (MRD) testing in hematolymphoid neoplasia. Because flow-based MRD tests are developed in the laboratory, testing methodologies and lower levels of detection (LODs) are laboratory dependent.
To broadly survey flow cytometry laboratories about MRD testing in laboratories, if performed, including indications and reported LODs.
Voluntary supplemental questions were sent to the 549 laboratories participating in the College of American Pathologists (CAP) FL3-A Survey (Flow Cytometry-Immunophenotypic Characterization of Leukemia/Lymphoma) in the spring of 2014.
A total of 500 laboratories (91%) responded to the supplemental questions as part of the FL3-A Survey by April 2014; of those 500 laboratories, 167 (33%) currently perform MRD for lymphoblastic leukemia, 118 (24%) for myeloid leukemia, 99 (20%) for chronic lymphocytic leukemia, and 91 (18%) for plasma cell myeloma. Other indications include non-Hodgkin lymphoma, hairy cell leukemia, neuroblastoma, and myelodysplastic syndrome. Most responding laboratories that perform MRD for lymphoblastic leukemia reported an LOD of 0.01%. For myeloid leukemia, chronic lymphocytic leukemia, and plasma cell myeloma, most laboratories indicated an LOD of 0.1%. Less than 3% (15 of 500) of laboratories reported LODs of 0.001% for one or more MRD assays performed.
There is major heterogeneity in the reported LODs of MRD testing performed by laboratories subscribing to the CAP FL3-A Survey. To address that heterogeneity, changes to the Flow Cytometry Checklist for the CAP Laboratory Accreditation Program are suggested that will include new requirements that each laboratory (1) document how an MRD assay's LOD is measured, and (2) include the LOD or lower limit of enumeration for flow-based MRD assays in the final diagnostic report. |
doi_str_mv | 10.5858/arpa.2014-0543-CP |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>gale_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1718075294</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A510652648</galeid><sourcerecordid>A510652648</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c508t-b1fe4cc918011ad43c90146ba88750e8a012e14cd385aef3565028772f7c5c333</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNptkttu1DAQhiMEoqXwANwgS0iImyy2E-fA3SqlFGkLKyjcRl5nknVx7GA7rfKsvAy2Wg5FK1_YM_7-8Wj8J8lzglesYtUbbie-opjkKWZ5ljbbB8kxiSdKCvYwOcYYZ2ldV-woeeLcVQhrSsnj5IiyomZZTo-TnxfcfocOfeNW8p1U0i9IavQZJmN9yF9ILUeuQsLJbg6HU-mAO0AbcwMWbeAaFDI9OgUPwkujY5Cjcxi5N2oZp72RHfoIZlLcje4tWqMvs72GJXJbbr0UcuLau_iq3wNqjFIwQLxej2Cl4Dpwfm-UGaQL3JkyN6hZvBnB2wVtrelDDdBiQZfgvNRDzA2Wj0-TRz1XDp7d7SfJ17N3l815uvn0_kOz3qSC4cqnO9JDLkRNKkwI7_JM1GGkxY5XVckwVBwTCiQXXVYxDn3GCoZpVZa0LwUTWZadJK9v607W_JhDD-0onQCluAYzu5aUoXTJaJ0H9OV_6JWZrQ7dBYrhuiRlWf6lBq6glbo33nIRi7ZrRnDBaJFXgUoPUANosFwZDb0M6Xv86gAfVgejFAcFr_4R7IErv3dGzfGb3X2Q3ILCGucs9O1kg2vs0hLcRqe20altdGobndo226B5cTeJeTdC90fx25rZL7Af5Xc</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1750971777</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Marked Variability in Reported Minimal Residual Disease Lower Level of Detection of 4 Hematolymphoid Neoplasms: A Survey of Participants in the College of American Pathologists Flow Cytometry Proficiency Testing Program</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Allen Press Journals</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><creator>Keeney, Michael ; Halley, Jaimie G ; Rhoads, Daniel D ; Ansari, M Qasim ; Kussick, Steven J ; Karlon, William J ; Mehta, Kumudini U ; Dorfman, David M ; Linden, Michael A</creator><creatorcontrib>Keeney, Michael ; Halley, Jaimie G ; Rhoads, Daniel D ; Ansari, M Qasim ; Kussick, Steven J ; Karlon, William J ; Mehta, Kumudini U ; Dorfman, David M ; Linden, Michael A</creatorcontrib><description>Flow cytometry is often applied to minimal residual disease (MRD) testing in hematolymphoid neoplasia. Because flow-based MRD tests are developed in the laboratory, testing methodologies and lower levels of detection (LODs) are laboratory dependent.
To broadly survey flow cytometry laboratories about MRD testing in laboratories, if performed, including indications and reported LODs.
Voluntary supplemental questions were sent to the 549 laboratories participating in the College of American Pathologists (CAP) FL3-A Survey (Flow Cytometry-Immunophenotypic Characterization of Leukemia/Lymphoma) in the spring of 2014.
A total of 500 laboratories (91%) responded to the supplemental questions as part of the FL3-A Survey by April 2014; of those 500 laboratories, 167 (33%) currently perform MRD for lymphoblastic leukemia, 118 (24%) for myeloid leukemia, 99 (20%) for chronic lymphocytic leukemia, and 91 (18%) for plasma cell myeloma. Other indications include non-Hodgkin lymphoma, hairy cell leukemia, neuroblastoma, and myelodysplastic syndrome. Most responding laboratories that perform MRD for lymphoblastic leukemia reported an LOD of 0.01%. For myeloid leukemia, chronic lymphocytic leukemia, and plasma cell myeloma, most laboratories indicated an LOD of 0.1%. Less than 3% (15 of 500) of laboratories reported LODs of 0.001% for one or more MRD assays performed.
There is major heterogeneity in the reported LODs of MRD testing performed by laboratories subscribing to the CAP FL3-A Survey. To address that heterogeneity, changes to the Flow Cytometry Checklist for the CAP Laboratory Accreditation Program are suggested that will include new requirements that each laboratory (1) document how an MRD assay's LOD is measured, and (2) include the LOD or lower limit of enumeration for flow-based MRD assays in the final diagnostic report.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0003-9985</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 1543-2165</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1543-2165</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.5858/arpa.2014-0543-CP</identifier><identifier>PMID: 25695342</identifier><identifier>CODEN: APLMAS</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: College of American Pathologists</publisher><subject>Flow Cytometry - methods ; Flow Cytometry - standards ; Humans ; Laboratories - standards ; Laboratory Proficiency Testing - methods ; Laboratory Proficiency Testing - standards ; Leukemia ; Leukemia, Lymphocytic, Chronic, B-Cell - diagnosis ; Multiple Myeloma - diagnosis ; Neoplasm, Residual - diagnosis ; Non-Hodgkin's lymphomas ; Pathology, Clinical - methods ; Pathology, Clinical - standards ; Precursor Cell Lymphoblastic Leukemia-Lymphoma - diagnosis ; Reproducibility of Results ; Sensitivity and Specificity ; Societies, Medical ; Surveys ; Surveys and Questionnaires ; United States ; Universities and colleges</subject><ispartof>Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine (1976), 2015-10, Vol.139 (10), p.1276-1280</ispartof><rights>COPYRIGHT 2015 College of American Pathologists</rights><rights>Copyright College of American Pathologists Oct 2015</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c508t-b1fe4cc918011ad43c90146ba88750e8a012e14cd385aef3565028772f7c5c333</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c508t-b1fe4cc918011ad43c90146ba88750e8a012e14cd385aef3565028772f7c5c333</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27901,27902</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25695342$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Keeney, Michael</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Halley, Jaimie G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rhoads, Daniel D</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ansari, M Qasim</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kussick, Steven J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Karlon, William J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mehta, Kumudini U</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dorfman, David M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Linden, Michael A</creatorcontrib><title>Marked Variability in Reported Minimal Residual Disease Lower Level of Detection of 4 Hematolymphoid Neoplasms: A Survey of Participants in the College of American Pathologists Flow Cytometry Proficiency Testing Program</title><title>Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine (1976)</title><addtitle>Arch Pathol Lab Med</addtitle><description>Flow cytometry is often applied to minimal residual disease (MRD) testing in hematolymphoid neoplasia. Because flow-based MRD tests are developed in the laboratory, testing methodologies and lower levels of detection (LODs) are laboratory dependent.
To broadly survey flow cytometry laboratories about MRD testing in laboratories, if performed, including indications and reported LODs.
Voluntary supplemental questions were sent to the 549 laboratories participating in the College of American Pathologists (CAP) FL3-A Survey (Flow Cytometry-Immunophenotypic Characterization of Leukemia/Lymphoma) in the spring of 2014.
A total of 500 laboratories (91%) responded to the supplemental questions as part of the FL3-A Survey by April 2014; of those 500 laboratories, 167 (33%) currently perform MRD for lymphoblastic leukemia, 118 (24%) for myeloid leukemia, 99 (20%) for chronic lymphocytic leukemia, and 91 (18%) for plasma cell myeloma. Other indications include non-Hodgkin lymphoma, hairy cell leukemia, neuroblastoma, and myelodysplastic syndrome. Most responding laboratories that perform MRD for lymphoblastic leukemia reported an LOD of 0.01%. For myeloid leukemia, chronic lymphocytic leukemia, and plasma cell myeloma, most laboratories indicated an LOD of 0.1%. Less than 3% (15 of 500) of laboratories reported LODs of 0.001% for one or more MRD assays performed.
There is major heterogeneity in the reported LODs of MRD testing performed by laboratories subscribing to the CAP FL3-A Survey. To address that heterogeneity, changes to the Flow Cytometry Checklist for the CAP Laboratory Accreditation Program are suggested that will include new requirements that each laboratory (1) document how an MRD assay's LOD is measured, and (2) include the LOD or lower limit of enumeration for flow-based MRD assays in the final diagnostic report.</description><subject>Flow Cytometry - methods</subject><subject>Flow Cytometry - standards</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Laboratories - standards</subject><subject>Laboratory Proficiency Testing - methods</subject><subject>Laboratory Proficiency Testing - standards</subject><subject>Leukemia</subject><subject>Leukemia, Lymphocytic, Chronic, B-Cell - diagnosis</subject><subject>Multiple Myeloma - diagnosis</subject><subject>Neoplasm, Residual - diagnosis</subject><subject>Non-Hodgkin's lymphomas</subject><subject>Pathology, Clinical - methods</subject><subject>Pathology, Clinical - standards</subject><subject>Precursor Cell Lymphoblastic Leukemia-Lymphoma - diagnosis</subject><subject>Reproducibility of Results</subject><subject>Sensitivity and Specificity</subject><subject>Societies, Medical</subject><subject>Surveys</subject><subject>Surveys and Questionnaires</subject><subject>United States</subject><subject>Universities and colleges</subject><issn>0003-9985</issn><issn>1543-2165</issn><issn>1543-2165</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2015</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><recordid>eNptkttu1DAQhiMEoqXwANwgS0iImyy2E-fA3SqlFGkLKyjcRl5nknVx7GA7rfKsvAy2Wg5FK1_YM_7-8Wj8J8lzglesYtUbbie-opjkKWZ5ljbbB8kxiSdKCvYwOcYYZ2ldV-woeeLcVQhrSsnj5IiyomZZTo-TnxfcfocOfeNW8p1U0i9IavQZJmN9yF9ILUeuQsLJbg6HU-mAO0AbcwMWbeAaFDI9OgUPwkujY5Cjcxi5N2oZp72RHfoIZlLcje4tWqMvs72GJXJbbr0UcuLau_iq3wNqjFIwQLxej2Cl4Dpwfm-UGaQL3JkyN6hZvBnB2wVtrelDDdBiQZfgvNRDzA2Wj0-TRz1XDp7d7SfJ17N3l815uvn0_kOz3qSC4cqnO9JDLkRNKkwI7_JM1GGkxY5XVckwVBwTCiQXXVYxDn3GCoZpVZa0LwUTWZadJK9v607W_JhDD-0onQCluAYzu5aUoXTJaJ0H9OV_6JWZrQ7dBYrhuiRlWf6lBq6glbo33nIRi7ZrRnDBaJFXgUoPUANosFwZDb0M6Xv86gAfVgejFAcFr_4R7IErv3dGzfGb3X2Q3ILCGucs9O1kg2vs0hLcRqe20altdGobndo226B5cTeJeTdC90fx25rZL7Af5Xc</recordid><startdate>201510</startdate><enddate>201510</enddate><creator>Keeney, Michael</creator><creator>Halley, Jaimie G</creator><creator>Rhoads, Daniel D</creator><creator>Ansari, M Qasim</creator><creator>Kussick, Steven J</creator><creator>Karlon, William J</creator><creator>Mehta, Kumudini U</creator><creator>Dorfman, David M</creator><creator>Linden, Michael A</creator><general>College of American Pathologists</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>4T-</scope><scope>4U-</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>88I</scope><scope>8AF</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8C1</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2P</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201510</creationdate><title>Marked Variability in Reported Minimal Residual Disease Lower Level of Detection of 4 Hematolymphoid Neoplasms: A Survey of Participants in the College of American Pathologists Flow Cytometry Proficiency Testing Program</title><author>Keeney, Michael ; Halley, Jaimie G ; Rhoads, Daniel D ; Ansari, M Qasim ; Kussick, Steven J ; Karlon, William J ; Mehta, Kumudini U ; Dorfman, David M ; Linden, Michael A</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c508t-b1fe4cc918011ad43c90146ba88750e8a012e14cd385aef3565028772f7c5c333</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2015</creationdate><topic>Flow Cytometry - methods</topic><topic>Flow Cytometry - standards</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Laboratories - standards</topic><topic>Laboratory Proficiency Testing - methods</topic><topic>Laboratory Proficiency Testing - standards</topic><topic>Leukemia</topic><topic>Leukemia, Lymphocytic, Chronic, B-Cell - diagnosis</topic><topic>Multiple Myeloma - diagnosis</topic><topic>Neoplasm, Residual - diagnosis</topic><topic>Non-Hodgkin's lymphomas</topic><topic>Pathology, Clinical - methods</topic><topic>Pathology, Clinical - standards</topic><topic>Precursor Cell Lymphoblastic Leukemia-Lymphoma - diagnosis</topic><topic>Reproducibility of Results</topic><topic>Sensitivity and Specificity</topic><topic>Societies, Medical</topic><topic>Surveys</topic><topic>Surveys and Questionnaires</topic><topic>United States</topic><topic>Universities and colleges</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Keeney, Michael</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Halley, Jaimie G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rhoads, Daniel D</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ansari, M Qasim</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kussick, Steven J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Karlon, William J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mehta, Kumudini U</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dorfman, David M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Linden, Michael A</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Docstoc</collection><collection>University Readers</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>STEM Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Public Health Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Science Database</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine (1976)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Keeney, Michael</au><au>Halley, Jaimie G</au><au>Rhoads, Daniel D</au><au>Ansari, M Qasim</au><au>Kussick, Steven J</au><au>Karlon, William J</au><au>Mehta, Kumudini U</au><au>Dorfman, David M</au><au>Linden, Michael A</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Marked Variability in Reported Minimal Residual Disease Lower Level of Detection of 4 Hematolymphoid Neoplasms: A Survey of Participants in the College of American Pathologists Flow Cytometry Proficiency Testing Program</atitle><jtitle>Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine (1976)</jtitle><addtitle>Arch Pathol Lab Med</addtitle><date>2015-10</date><risdate>2015</risdate><volume>139</volume><issue>10</issue><spage>1276</spage><epage>1280</epage><pages>1276-1280</pages><issn>0003-9985</issn><issn>1543-2165</issn><eissn>1543-2165</eissn><coden>APLMAS</coden><abstract>Flow cytometry is often applied to minimal residual disease (MRD) testing in hematolymphoid neoplasia. Because flow-based MRD tests are developed in the laboratory, testing methodologies and lower levels of detection (LODs) are laboratory dependent.
To broadly survey flow cytometry laboratories about MRD testing in laboratories, if performed, including indications and reported LODs.
Voluntary supplemental questions were sent to the 549 laboratories participating in the College of American Pathologists (CAP) FL3-A Survey (Flow Cytometry-Immunophenotypic Characterization of Leukemia/Lymphoma) in the spring of 2014.
A total of 500 laboratories (91%) responded to the supplemental questions as part of the FL3-A Survey by April 2014; of those 500 laboratories, 167 (33%) currently perform MRD for lymphoblastic leukemia, 118 (24%) for myeloid leukemia, 99 (20%) for chronic lymphocytic leukemia, and 91 (18%) for plasma cell myeloma. Other indications include non-Hodgkin lymphoma, hairy cell leukemia, neuroblastoma, and myelodysplastic syndrome. Most responding laboratories that perform MRD for lymphoblastic leukemia reported an LOD of 0.01%. For myeloid leukemia, chronic lymphocytic leukemia, and plasma cell myeloma, most laboratories indicated an LOD of 0.1%. Less than 3% (15 of 500) of laboratories reported LODs of 0.001% for one or more MRD assays performed.
There is major heterogeneity in the reported LODs of MRD testing performed by laboratories subscribing to the CAP FL3-A Survey. To address that heterogeneity, changes to the Flow Cytometry Checklist for the CAP Laboratory Accreditation Program are suggested that will include new requirements that each laboratory (1) document how an MRD assay's LOD is measured, and (2) include the LOD or lower limit of enumeration for flow-based MRD assays in the final diagnostic report.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>College of American Pathologists</pub><pmid>25695342</pmid><doi>10.5858/arpa.2014-0543-CP</doi><tpages>5</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0003-9985 |
ispartof | Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine (1976), 2015-10, Vol.139 (10), p.1276-1280 |
issn | 0003-9985 1543-2165 1543-2165 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1718075294 |
source | MEDLINE; Allen Press Journals; Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals |
subjects | Flow Cytometry - methods Flow Cytometry - standards Humans Laboratories - standards Laboratory Proficiency Testing - methods Laboratory Proficiency Testing - standards Leukemia Leukemia, Lymphocytic, Chronic, B-Cell - diagnosis Multiple Myeloma - diagnosis Neoplasm, Residual - diagnosis Non-Hodgkin's lymphomas Pathology, Clinical - methods Pathology, Clinical - standards Precursor Cell Lymphoblastic Leukemia-Lymphoma - diagnosis Reproducibility of Results Sensitivity and Specificity Societies, Medical Surveys Surveys and Questionnaires United States Universities and colleges |
title | Marked Variability in Reported Minimal Residual Disease Lower Level of Detection of 4 Hematolymphoid Neoplasms: A Survey of Participants in the College of American Pathologists Flow Cytometry Proficiency Testing Program |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-11T00%3A30%3A29IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Marked%20Variability%20in%20Reported%20Minimal%20Residual%20Disease%20Lower%20Level%20of%20Detection%20of%204%20Hematolymphoid%20Neoplasms:%20A%20Survey%20of%20Participants%20in%20the%20College%20of%20American%20Pathologists%20Flow%20Cytometry%20Proficiency%20Testing%20Program&rft.jtitle=Archives%20of%20pathology%20&%20laboratory%20medicine%20(1976)&rft.au=Keeney,%20Michael&rft.date=2015-10&rft.volume=139&rft.issue=10&rft.spage=1276&rft.epage=1280&rft.pages=1276-1280&rft.issn=0003-9985&rft.eissn=1543-2165&rft.coden=APLMAS&rft_id=info:doi/10.5858/arpa.2014-0543-CP&rft_dat=%3Cgale_proqu%3EA510652648%3C/gale_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1750971777&rft_id=info:pmid/25695342&rft_galeid=A510652648&rfr_iscdi=true |