4.3 Article Proceedings Paper

Myelodysplastic Syndromes

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PATHOLOGY
卷 132, 期 2, 页码 290-305

出版社

AMER SOC CLINICAL PATHOLOGY
DOI: 10.1309/AJCPRCXX4R0YHKWV

关键词

Myelodysplastic syndrome; Refractory cytopenia with unilineage dysplasia; Refractory anemia with ring sideroblasts; Refractory cytopenia with multilineage dysplasia; Refractory anemia with excess blasts; MDS associated with an isolated del(5q) chromosomal abnormality

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Session 4 of the 2007 Workshop of the Society for Hematopathology/European Association for Haematopathology was devoted to myelodysplastic syndromes (MDSs). Submitted cases highlighted important issues and difficulties in relation to the diagnosis and classification of MDS. Much of the discussion focused on the correlation, or lack of it, between morphologic examination and other diagnostic techniques, cytogenetics in particular. The cases included examples of isolated del(5q) chromosomal abnormality, including the classical 5q-syndrome and other myeloid neoplasms. Other cytogenetic abnormalities in AIDSs and the role of cytogenetics in diagnosing AIDSs were addressed Particularly challenging is the correct identification of fibrotic subtypes of MDSs and their separation from subsets of acute myeloid leukemia with myelofibrosis such as acute panmyelosis with myelofibrosis. The association and eventual relation of MDSs (hypoplastic in particular) with aplastic anemia, paroxysmal nocturnal hemoglobinuria, and other nonneoplastic disorders were illustrated. Novel cytogenetic and molecular genetic approaches are likely to revolutionize the classification of MDSs. However, it is unlikely that these new techniques will be capable, on their own, of adequately stratifying patients for treatment purposes. At least for the foreseeable future, the diagnosis of MDS requires integration of morphologic, immunophenotypic, and genetic features in the light of patient history and clinical manifestations.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据