↓ Skip to main content

Post-induction Measurable Residual Disease Using Multicolor Flow Cytometry Is Strongly Predictive of Inferior Clinical Outcome in the Real-Life Management of Childhood T-Cell Acute Lymphoblastic…

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in oncology, April 2020
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (74th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
10 X users

Readers on

mendeley
30 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Post-induction Measurable Residual Disease Using Multicolor Flow Cytometry Is Strongly Predictive of Inferior Clinical Outcome in the Real-Life Management of Childhood T-Cell Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia: A Study of 256 Patients
Published in
Frontiers in oncology, April 2020
DOI 10.3389/fonc.2020.00577
Pubmed ID
Authors

Prashant R. Tembhare, Gaurav Narula, Twinkle Khanka, Sitaram Ghogale, Gaurav Chatterjee, Nikhil V. Patkar, Maya Prasad, Yajamanam Badrinath, Nilesh Deshpande, Pratyusha Gudapati, Shefali Verma, Mahima Sanyal, Florence Kunjachan, Gunit Mangang, Sumeet Gujral, Shripad Banavali, Papagudi G. Subramanian

Abstract

Background: Measurable/minimal residual disease (MRD) status is suggested as a powerful indicator of clinical-outcome in T-cell lymphoblastic leukemia/lymphoma (T-ALL). Contrary to B-cell ALL, reports on T-ALL MRD are limited and mostly based on molecular methods, mainly from developed countries. Multicolor flow cytometry (MFC)-based T-ALL studies are very few. Clinically relevant cut-off levels and ideal time-point for MRD assessment are still inconclusive. In view of lack of T-ALL MRD data from the developing world, we evaluated the prognostic value of MFC-based post-induction (PI)-MRD assessment in T-ALL in the context of standard practice. Methods: We included 256 childhood-T-ALL patients (age < 15 years) treated with a modified-MCP841 protocol, which uses high-dose cytarabine during consolidation, as a part of standard hospital practice. MRD was studied using 10-color 11-antibody MFC with any level of detectable disease being considered positive. Post-induction (PI)-MRD was available in all patients, and post-consolidation (PC) MRD was available mostly in PI-MRD-positive patients (n = 88). Results: Three years cumulative-incidence-of-relapse (3years-CIR) in PI-MRD-positive patients was inferior to negative patients (46.3% vs. 18.4%). The median relapse-free-survival (RFS), event-free-survival (EFS) and overall-survival (OS) with hazard ratio (HR) of PI-MRD-positive patients were 21.4 months vs not reached (p < 0.0001, HR-4.7), 21.6 months vs. not-reached (p = 0.0003, HR-2.01) and 37.3 months vs. not reached (p = 0.026, HR-1.64) respectively. RFS, EFS and OS of patients with PI-MRD<0.01% (n = 17) were as inferior as PI-MRD ≥ 0.01% in comparison with MRD-negative patients with HR of 4.7 (p < 0.0001), 2.45 (p = 0.0003), and 2.5 (p = 0.029), respectively. Three-years-CIR of patients with hyperleukocytosis (≥100 × 109/L) was also higher (50.5 vs. 27.6%) with inferior RFS, EFS, and OS. Among PI-MRD-positive patients, 3years-CIR, RFS, EFS, and OS of PC-MRD-positive were also inferior to that of negative patients. On multivariate analysis any-level detectable PI-MRD and hyperleukocytosis remained independently associated with inferior RFS, EFS, and OS. A combination of PI-MRD-positive status and hyperleukocytosis identified the patients with the worst clinical outcomes. Conclusion: Detectable PI-MRD using MFC was found to be the strong predictive factor of inferior clinical outcome in T-ALL patients. The combination of PI-MRD status and hyperleukocytosis provides the most influential tool for the management of T-ALL in resource constrained settings from developing world.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 30 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 30 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 4 13%
Other 3 10%
Student > Master 3 10%
Student > Bachelor 2 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 7%
Other 3 10%
Unknown 13 43%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 6 20%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 3%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 3%
Other 4 13%
Unknown 15 50%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 24 August 2020.
All research outputs
#4,900,790
of 26,587,745 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in oncology
#1,691
of 23,330 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#105,830
of 409,893 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in oncology
#52
of 470 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,587,745 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 23,330 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 409,893 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 470 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.