4.6 Article

A novel class of ZNF384 aberrations in acute leukemia

期刊

BLOOD ADVANCES
卷 5, 期 21, 页码 4393-4397

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1182/bloodadvances.2021005318

关键词

-

资金

  1. Czech Health Research Council [NU20-07-00322]
  2. Charles University [UNCE 204012]
  3. Ministry of Health, Czech Republic [00064203]
  4. NCMG [LM2018132]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A novel class of genetic aberration affecting the ZNF384 gene has been identified in leukemia cases, mimicking the phenotype of those with canonical ZNF384 fusions. This finding suggests that some ZNF384r-like cases represent the same genetic subtype as leukemia with canonical ZNF384 fusions.
Fusion of the ZNF384 gene as the 3' partner to several different 5' partner genes occurs recurrently in B-cell precursor acute lymphoblastic and mixed phenotype B/myeloid leukemia. These canonical fusions (ZNF384r) contain the complete ZNF384 coding sequence and are associated with a specific gene expression signature. Cases with this signature, but without canonical ZNF384 fusions (ZNF384r-like cases), have been described previously. Although some have been shown to harbor ZNF362 fusions, the primary aberrations remain unknown in a major proportion. We studied 3 patients with the ZNF384r signature and unknown primary genetic background and identified a previously unknown class of genetic aberration affecting the last exon of ZNF384 and resulting in disruption of the C-terminal portion of the ZNF384 protein. Importantly, in 2 cases, the ZNF384 aberration, indel, was missed during the bioinformatic analysis but revealed by the manual, targeted reanalysis. Two cases with the novel aberrations had a mixed (B/myeloid) immunophenotype commonly associated with canonical ZNF384 fusions. In conclusion, we present leukemia cases with a novel class of ZNF384 aberrations that phenocopy leukemia with ZNF384r. Therefore, we show that part of the so-called ZNF384r-like cases represent the same genetic subtype as leukemia with canonical ZNF384 fusions.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据