4.7 Article

Presence of the P2RY8-CRLF2 rearrangement is associated with a poor prognosis in non-high-risk precursor B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia in children treated according to the ALL-BFM 2000 protocol

Journal

BLOOD
Volume 115, Issue 26, Pages 5393-5397

Publisher

AMER SOC HEMATOLOGY
DOI: 10.1182/blood-2009-11-256131

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. Deutsche Krebshilfe
  2. Kinderkrebsinitiative Buchholz/Holm-Seppensen
  3. Madeleine-Schickedanz-Kinderkrebsstiftung
  4. Medical Research Council [MC_U132670597] Funding Source: researchfish
  5. MRC [MC_U132670597] Funding Source: UKRI

Ask authors/readers for more resources

High-level expression of the cytokine receptor-like factor 2 gene, CRLF2, in precursor B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia (pB-ALL) was shown to be caused by a translocation involving the IGH@ locus or a deletion juxtaposing CRLF2 with the P2RY8 promoter. To assess its possible prognostic value, CRLF2 expression was analyzed in 555 childhood pB-ALL patients treated according to the Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia Berlin-Frankfurt-Munster 2000 (ALL-BFM 2000) protocol. Besides CRLF2 rearrangements, high-level CRLF2 expression was seen in cases with supernumerary copies of the CRLF2 locus. On the basis of the detection of CRLF2 rearrangements, a CRLF2 high-expression group (n = 49) was defined. This group had a 6-year relapse incidence of 31% plus or minus 8% compared with 11% plus or minus 1% in the CRLF2 low-expression group (P = .006). This difference was mainly attributable to an extremely high incidence of relapse (71% +/- 19%) in non-high-risk patients with P2RY8-CRLF2 rearrangement. The assessment of CRLF2 aberrations may therefore serve as new stratification tool in Berlin-Frankfurt-Munster-based protocols by identifying additional high-risk patients who may benefit from an intensified and/or targeted treatment. (Blood. 2010; 115(26):5393-5397)

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