4.7 Article

Impact of additional cytogenetic aberrations at diagnosis on prognosis of CML: long-term observation of 1151 patients from the randomized CML Study IV

期刊

BLOOD
卷 118, 期 26, 页码 6760-6768

出版社

AMER SOC HEMATOLOGY
DOI: 10.1182/blood-2011-08-373902

关键词

-

资金

  1. Deutsche Krebshilfe [106642]
  2. Novartis (Nurnberg, Germany)
  3. Kompetenznetz fur Akute and Chronische Leukamien [BMBF 01GI0270]
  4. Jose-Carreras Leukamiestiftung [DJCLS H09/01f, H06/04v, H03/01]
  5. European LeukemiaNet [LSHC-CT-2004-503216]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The prognostic relevance of additional cytogenetic findings at diagnosis of chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) is unclear. The impact of additional cytogenetic findings at diagnosis on time to complete cytogenetic (CCR) and major molecular remission (MMR) and progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) was analyzed using data from 1151 Philadelphia chromosome-positive (Ph(+)) CMLpatients randomized to the German CML Study IV. At diagnosis, 1003 of 1151 patients (87%) had standard t(9;22)(q34;q11) only, 69 patients (6.0%) had variant t(v; 22), and 79 (6.9%) additional cytogenetic aberrations (ACAs). Of these, 38 patients (3.3%) lacked the Y chromosome (-Y) and 41 patients (3.6%) had ACAs except -Y; 16 of these (1.4%) were major route (second Philadelphia [Ph] chromosome, trisomy 8, isochromosome 17q, or trisomy 19) and 25 minor route (all other) ACAs. After a median observation time of 5.3 years for patients with t(9; 22), t(v; 22), -Y, minor- and major-route ACAs, the 5-year PFS was 90%, 81%, 88%, 96%, and 50%, and the 5-year OS was 92%, 87%, 91%, 96%, and 53%, respectively. In patients with major-route ACAs, the times to CCR and MMR were longer and PFS and OS were shorter (P < .001) than in patients with standard t(9; 22). We conclude that major-route ACAs at diagnosis are associated with a negative impact on survival and signify progression to the accelerated phase and blast crisis. (Blood.2011;118(26):6760-6768)

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