4.7 Article

Loss in chromosome 11q identifies tumors with increased risk for metastatic relapses in localized and 4S neuroblastoma

Journal

CLINICAL CANCER RESEARCH
Volume 12, Issue 11, Pages 3368-3373

Publisher

AMER ASSOC CANCER RESEARCH
DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-05-2495

Keywords

-

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose: To improve risk prediction in neuroblastoma and to specify the type of a possible relapse, alterations in the long arm of chromosome 11 were analyzed. Experimental Design: A representative cohort of 611 neuroblastomas was investigated for deletion events in distal chromosome 11q using interphase fluorescence in situ hybridization. Results: Alterations in 11q were found in 159 of 611 tumors in the whole cohort (26%) and were associated with stage 4 disease (P < 0.001) and age at diagnosis of >2.5 years (P < 0.001). Event-free survival and overall survival were significantly poorer for patients with 11q loss in the whole cohort (event-free survival and overall survival, P < 0.001) and in different subsets: neuroblastoma without MYCN amplification (MNA) (event-free survival and overall survival, P < 0.001), with MNA (event-free survival, P = 0.03; overall survival, P = 0.02), and MYCN-nonamplified stage 1, 2, 3, and 4S tumors with and without del 1p (event-free survival and overall survival, P < 0.001). In stage 4, the 11q status did not discriminate outcome. By multivariate analysis, the 11q status proved prognostic for event-free survival in the whole cohort (P = 0.008; hazard ratio, 1.573) and in the subgroup of stages 1, 2, 3, and 4S without MNA (P < 0.001; hazard ratio, 3.534). Moreover, 11q alterations were strongly correlated with the occurrence of metastatic relapses (P < 0.001). Conclusion: In addition to the current risk stratification, the status of 11q enables the identification of patients with an increased risk for relapses in general and metastatic relapses in particular.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available