4.7 Article

RAS mutation in acute myeloid leukemia is associated with distinct cytogenetic subgroups but does not influence outcome in patients younger than 60 years

Journal

BLOOD
Volume 106, Issue 6, Pages 2113-2119

Publisher

AMER SOC HEMATOLOGY
DOI: 10.1182/blood-2005-03-0867

Keywords

-

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The pathogenesis of acute myeloid leukemia (AML) involves the cooperation of mutations promoting proliferation/survival and those impairing differentiation. The RAS pathway has been implicated as a key component of the proliferative drive in AML. We have screened AML patients, predominantly younger than 60 years and treated within 2 clinical trials, for NRAS (n = 1106), KRAS (n = 739), and HRAS (n = 200) hot-spot mutations using denaturing high-performance liquid chromatography or restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) analysis. NRAS mutations were confirmed in 11% of patients (126/1106) and KRAS mutations in 5% (39/739). No HRAS mutations were detected in 200 randomly selected samples. Codons most frequently mutated were N12 (43%), N13 (21%), and K12 (21%). KRAS mutations were relatively overrepresented in French-American-British (FAB) type M4 (P <.001). NRAS mutation was overrepresented in the t(3;5)(q2l similar to 25;q31 similar to q35) subgroup (P <.001) and underrepresented in t(15;17)(q22;q21) (P<.001). KRAS mutation was overrepresented in inv(16)(p13q22) (P =.004). Twenty-three percent of KRAS mutations were within the inv(16) subgroup. RAS mutation and FLT3 ITD were rarely coexistent (14/768; P <.001). Median percentage of RAS mutant allele assayed by quantitative RFLP analysis was 28% (N12), 19% (N13), 25% (N61), and 21% (K12). RAS mutation did not influence clinical outcome (overall/ disease-free survival, complete remission, relapse rate) either for the entire cohort or within cytogenetic risk groups.

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