Table 4:
Agreement between participants on sample adequacy before and after adopting consensus cut-offsa.
| Sample Number | Agreeability of Participants on the Outcome, % | |
|---|---|---|
|
|
||
| Beforeb | Afterc | |
|
| ||
| #1 | 88.2 | 100.0 |
| #2 | 64.7 | 94.1 |
| #3 | 64.7 | 100.0 |
| #4 | 88.2 | 100.0 |
| #5 | 94.1 | 100.0 |
| #6 | 88.2 | 100.0 |
| #7 | 52.9 | 100.0 |
| #8 | 76.5 | 82.4 |
| #9 | 58.8 | 100.0 |
| #10 | 47.1 | 94.1 |
|
| ||
| Mean | 72.4 | 97.1 |
| SD | 16.9 | 5.7 |
a
All samples were truly adequate except for Sample #8, which most of the participants agreed was hemodiluted.
b
No standardized cut-offs applied
c
Standardized cut-offs applied; cut-offs were determined based on ROC analysis (Figure 6). Sample was defined as adequate if mast cells were ≥0.002% and one other cell population was present above cut-off. I.e., Hematogones ≥0.025%, myeloid precursors ≥0.146%, or erythroid precursors ≥0.754%. If mast cells were present <0.002%, the sample was considered inadequate regardless of the presence of other BM cells or residual disease.