Myeloproliferative neoplasms: Morphology and clinical practice

Tiziano Barbui; Jürgen Thiele; Alessandro M. Vannucchi; Ayalew Tefferi

doi:10.1002/ajh.24288

Myeloproliferative neoplasms: Morphology and clinical practice

Tiziano Barbui, Jürgen Thiele, Alessandro M. Vannucchi, Ayalew Tefferi

Hematology

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

28 Scopus citations

Abstract

In myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs), controversy persists regarding the usefulness and reproducibility of bone marrow (BM) features. Disagreements concerning the WHO classification are mainly focused on the discrimination between essential thrombocythemia (ET) and prefibrotic/early primary myelofibrosis (prePMF) and prodromal polycythemia vera (PV). Criticism mostly refers to lack of standardization of distinctive BM features precluding correct morphological pattern recognition. The distinction between WHO-defined ET and prePMF is not trivial because outcome is significantly worse in prePMF. Morphology was generally considered to be non-specific for the diagnosis of PV. Recent studies have revealed under-diagnosis of morphologically and biologically consistent PV. Am. J. Hematol. 91:430-433, 2016.

Original language	English (US)
Pages (from-to)	430-433
Number of pages	4
Journal	American journal of hematology
Volume	91
Issue number	4
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1002/ajh.24288
State	Published - Apr 1 2016

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Hematology

Access to Document

10.1002/ajh.24288

Cite this

@article{efa63bf0c5f7460e89fc26f0463c12ac,

title = "Myeloproliferative neoplasms: Morphology and clinical practice",

abstract = "In myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs), controversy persists regarding the usefulness and reproducibility of bone marrow (BM) features. Disagreements concerning the WHO classification are mainly focused on the discrimination between essential thrombocythemia (ET) and prefibrotic/early primary myelofibrosis (prePMF) and prodromal polycythemia vera (PV). Criticism mostly refers to lack of standardization of distinctive BM features precluding correct morphological pattern recognition. The distinction between WHO-defined ET and prePMF is not trivial because outcome is significantly worse in prePMF. Morphology was generally considered to be non-specific for the diagnosis of PV. Recent studies have revealed under-diagnosis of morphologically and biologically consistent PV. Am. J. Hematol. 91:430-433, 2016.",

author = "Tiziano Barbui and J{\"u}rgen Thiele and Vannucchi, {Alessandro M.} and Ayalew Tefferi",

note = "Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.",

year = "2016",

month = apr,

day = "1",

doi = "10.1002/ajh.24288",

language = "English (US)",

volume = "91",

pages = "430--433",

journal = "American journal of hematology",

issn = "0361-8609",

publisher = "Wiley-Liss Inc.",

number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Myeloproliferative neoplasms

T2 - Morphology and clinical practice

AU - Barbui, Tiziano

AU - Thiele, Jürgen

AU - Vannucchi, Alessandro M.

AU - Tefferi, Ayalew

PY - 2016/4/1

Y1 - 2016/4/1

N2 - In myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs), controversy persists regarding the usefulness and reproducibility of bone marrow (BM) features. Disagreements concerning the WHO classification are mainly focused on the discrimination between essential thrombocythemia (ET) and prefibrotic/early primary myelofibrosis (prePMF) and prodromal polycythemia vera (PV). Criticism mostly refers to lack of standardization of distinctive BM features precluding correct morphological pattern recognition. The distinction between WHO-defined ET and prePMF is not trivial because outcome is significantly worse in prePMF. Morphology was generally considered to be non-specific for the diagnosis of PV. Recent studies have revealed under-diagnosis of morphologically and biologically consistent PV. Am. J. Hematol. 91:430-433, 2016.

AB - In myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs), controversy persists regarding the usefulness and reproducibility of bone marrow (BM) features. Disagreements concerning the WHO classification are mainly focused on the discrimination between essential thrombocythemia (ET) and prefibrotic/early primary myelofibrosis (prePMF) and prodromal polycythemia vera (PV). Criticism mostly refers to lack of standardization of distinctive BM features precluding correct morphological pattern recognition. The distinction between WHO-defined ET and prePMF is not trivial because outcome is significantly worse in prePMF. Morphology was generally considered to be non-specific for the diagnosis of PV. Recent studies have revealed under-diagnosis of morphologically and biologically consistent PV. Am. J. Hematol. 91:430-433, 2016.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84961262640&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84961262640&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1002/ajh.24288

DO - 10.1002/ajh.24288

M3 - Article

C2 - 26718907

AN - SCOPUS:84961262640

SN - 0361-8609

VL - 91

SP - 430

EP - 433

JO - American journal of hematology

JF - American journal of hematology

IS - 4

ER -

Myeloproliferative neoplasms: Morphology and clinical practice

Abstract

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this