4.3 Article

Independent Prognostic Significance of Monosomy 17 and Impact of Karyotype Complexity in Monosomal Karyotype/Complex Karyotype Acute Myeloid Leukemia: Results from Four ECOG-ACRIN Prospective Therapeutic Trials

期刊

LEUKEMIA RESEARCH
卷 59, 期 -, 页码 55-64

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.leukres.2017.05.010

关键词

Myeloid Leukemia; Monosomal Karyotype; Complex Karyotype; Cytogenetics; Prognosis; Monosomy 17; Monosomy 5; Monosomy 7

资金

  1. Public Health Service [CA180794, CA180820, CA180847, CA180790, CA180816, CA180795, CA189863, CA180853, CA189859, CA18079]
  2. National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health
  3. Department of Health and Human Services

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The presence of a monosomal karyotype (MK+) and/or a complex karyotype (CK+) identifies subcategories of AML with poor prognosis. The prognostic significance of the most common monosomies (monosomy 5, monosomy 7, and monosomy 17) within MK+/CK+ AML is not well defined. We analyzed data from 1,592 AML patients age 17-93 years enrolled on ECOG-ACRIN therapeutic trials. The majority of MK+ patients (182/195; 93%) were MK+/CK+ with 87% (158/182) having >= 5 clonal abnormalities (CK >= 5). MK+ patients with karyotype complexity = 4 had a median overall survival (OS) of 0.4y compared to 1.0y for MK-with complexity <= 4 (p < 0.001), whereas no OS difference was seen in MK+ vs. MK- patients with CK >= 5 (p = 0.82). Monosomy 5 (93%; 50/54) typically occurred within a highly complex karyotype and had no impact on OS (0.4y; p = 0.95). Monosomy 7 demonstrated no impact on OS in patients with CK >= 5 (p = 0.39) or CK <= 4 (p = 0.44). Monosomy 17 appeared in 43% (68/158) of CK= 5 patients and demonstrated statistically significant worse OS (0.4y) compared to CK >= 5 patients without monosomy 17 (0.5y; p= 0.012). Our data suggest that the prognostic impact of MK+ is limited to those with less complex karyotypes and that monosomy 17 may independently predict for worse survival in patients with AML.

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

4.3
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