Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 28, 2025

Flow Cytometry to Estimate Leukemia Stem Cells in Primary Acute Myeloid Leukemia and in Patient-derived-xenografts, at Diagnosis and Follow Up
Published on: March 26, 2018
A lasso and random forest model using flow cytometry data identifies primary myelofibrosis
Feng Zhang1, Ya-Zhe Wang2, Yan Chang2
1Fujian Provincial Key Laboratory on Hematology, Fujian Medical Center of Hematology, Fujian Institute of Hematology, Clinical Research Center for Hematological Malignancies of Fujian Province, Fujian Medical University Union Hospital, Fuzhou, China.
Flow cytometry aids in diagnosing myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs). It accurately distinguishes primary myelofibrosis (PMF) from other MPNs and helps differentiate essential thrombocythemia (ET) from prefibrotic PMF, guiding treatment decisions.
Area of Science:
- Hematology
- Oncology
- Immunophenotyping
Background:
- Classical Philadelphia-negative myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs), including essential thrombocythemia (ET), polycythemia vera (PV), and primary myelofibrosis (PMF), are challenging to differentiate using morphology and molecular markers alone.
- Accurate diagnosis and differentiation are crucial for guiding appropriate treatment strategies in MPN patients.
Purpose of the Study:
- To clarify the application of flow cytometry in the diagnosis and differential diagnosis of classical Philadelphia-negative MPNs.
- To identify specific flow cytometry markers and models for distinguishing between ET, PV, and PMF subtypes.
Main Methods:
- Retrospective analysis of immunophenotypes, clinical characteristics, and laboratory findings from 211 Ph-negative MPN patients (ET, PV, pre-PMF, overt PMF) and 47 controls.
- Utilized lasso and random forest models to identify key variables for PMF diagnosis.
- Employed classification and regression tree models to differentiate between ET and pre-PMF.
Main Results:
- PMF showed distinct differences from ET and PV in white blood cells, hemoglobin, peripheral blood blast cells, abnormal karyotype, and WT1 gene expression.
- PMF differed from controls in CD34+ cells, granulocyte and monocyte phenotypes, plasma cell percentage, and dendritic cells, with a significantly lower plasma cell percentage.
- A five-variable flow cytometry panel identified PMF with 90% sensitivity and specificity. A model using CD34+CD38- cells and platelet counts distinguished ET from pre-PMF with 94.3% and 83.9% accuracy, respectively.
Conclusions:
- Flow immunophenotyping is a valuable tool for diagnosing PMF and differentiating it from ET and PV.
- Specific flow cytometry markers and models can effectively distinguish between ET and pre-PMF, aiding in treatment decisions.
- This approach enhances diagnostic accuracy for classical Ph-negative MPNs, improving patient management.
More Related Videos
09:44Flow Cytometric Analysis of Mitochondrial Reactive Oxygen Species in Murine Hematopoietic Stem and Progenitor Cells and MLL-AF9 Driven Leukemia
Published on: September 5, 2019
12:05Database-guided Flow-cytometry for Evaluation of Bone Marrow Myeloid Cell Maturation
Published on: November 3, 2018