4.7 Article

Acquisition of FLT3 or N-ras mutations is frequently associated with progression of myelodysplastic syndrome to acute myeloid leukemia

期刊

LEUKEMIA
卷 18, 期 3, 页码 466-475

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/sj.leu.2403274

关键词

FLT3/ITD; FLT3/TKD; N-ras mutation; myelodysplastic syndrome; AML transformation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The role of internal tandem duplication of fms-like tyrosine kinase 3 (FLT3/ITD), mutations at tyrosine kinase domain (FLT3/ TKD) and N-ras mutations in the transformation of myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) to AML was investigated in 82 MDS patients who later progressed to AML; 70 of them had paired marrow samples at diagnosis of MDS and AML available for comparative analysis. Five of the 82 patients had FLT3/ITD at presentation. Of the 70 paired samples, seven patients acquired FLT3/ITD during AML evolution. The incidence of FLT3/ITD at diagnosis of MDS was significantly lower than that at AML transformation (3/70 vs 10/70, P<0.001). FLT3/ITD(+) patients progressed to AML more rapidly than FLT3/ ITD(-) patients (2.5 +/- 0.5 vs 11.9 +/- 1.5 months, P = 0.114). FLT3/ ITD(+) patients had a significantly shorter survival than FLT3/ ITD(-) patients (5.6 +/- 1.3 vs 18.0 +/- 1.7 months, P = 0.0008). After AML transformation, FLT3/ ITD was also associated with an adverse prognosis. One patient had FLT3/ TKD mutation (D835Y) at both MDS and AML stages. Additional three acquired FLT3/ TKD ( one each with D835 H, D835F and I836S) at AML transformation. Five of the 70 matched samples had N-ras mutation at diagnosis of MDS compared to 15 at AML transformation (P<0.001), one lost and 11 gained N-ras mutations at AML progression. Coexistence of FLT3/ TKD and N-ras mutations was found in two AML samples. N-ras mutations had no prognostic impact either at the MDS or AML stage. Our results show that one-third of MDS patients acquire activating mutations of FLT3 or N-ras gene during AML evolution and FLT3/ ITD predicts a poor outcome in MDS.

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