4.7 Article

TEL deletion analysis supports a novel view of relapse in childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia

期刊

CLINICAL CANCER RESEARCH
卷 10, 期 16, 页码 5355-5360

出版社

AMER ASSOC CANCER RESEARCH
DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-04-0584

关键词

-

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose: TEL (ETV6)-AML1 (RUNX1) chimeric gene fusions are frequent genetic abnormalities in childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL). They often arise prenatally as early events or initiating events and are complemented by secondary postnatal genetic events of which deletion of the non-rearranged, second TEL allele is the most common. This consistent sequence of molecular pathogenesis facilitates an analysis of the clonal origins of relapse in this leukemia, which has some unusual clinical features. Experimental Design: We compared the boundaries, by microsatellite mapping, of TEL deletions at relapse versus diagnosis in 15 informative patients. Moreover, we compared the relatedness of diagnostic and relapse clones using immunoglobulin and T-cell receptor genes rearrangements and clonotypic TEL-AML1 genomic fusion. Results: Five patients retained the apparent same size TEL deletion, seven had larger deletions, and three had smaller deletions at relapse. In all of the cases evaluated, the clonal relatedness of diagnostic and relapse cells was confirmed by the retention of clonotypic TEL-AML1 genomic sequence and/or at least one identical immunoreceptor gene rearrangement. Conclusions: These data provide further evidence that TEL deletions are secondary to TEL-AML1 fusions in ALL. They are compatible with the novel idea that in at least some cases of childhood ALL, remission occurs with persistence of a preleukemic fetal clone, and subsequent relapse reflects the emergence of a new subclone from this reservoir after an independent second hit, i.e., independent TEL deletion. To our knowledge, the study is the most extensive and comprehensive analysis of the relationship between diagnostic and relapse clones in childhood ALL presented thus far.

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

4.7
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