4.7 Article

DNMT3A mutations in acute myeloid leukemia: stability during disease evolution and clinical implications

期刊

BLOOD
卷 119, 期 2, 页码 559-568

出版社

AMER SOC HEMATOLOGY
DOI: 10.1182/blood-2011-07-369934

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Science Council (NSC) [97-2314-B002-015-MY3, 99-2314-B-002-143, 100-2325-B-002-032, 100-2628-B-002-003-MY3]
  2. Department of Health, Taiwan, Republic of China [DOH100-TD-C-111-001]
  3. Department of Medical Research, National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan [NTUH.99P14, 100P07]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

DNMT3A mutations are associated with poor prognosis in acute myeloid leukemia (AML), but the stability of this mutation during the clinical course remains unclear. In the present study of 500 patients with de novo AML, DNMT3A mutations were identified in 14% of total patients and in 22.9% of AML patients with normal karyotype. DNMT3A mutations were positively associated with older age, higher WBC and platelet counts, intermediate-risk and normal cytogenetics, FLT3 internal tandem duplication, and NPM1, PTPN11, and IDH2 mutations, but were negatively associated with CEBPA mutations. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that the DNMT3A mutation was an independent poor prognostic factor for overall survival and relapse-free survival in total patients and also in normokaryotype group. A scoring system incorporating the DNMT3A mutation and 8 other prognostic factors, including age, WBC count, cytogenetics, and gene mutations, into survival analysis was very useful in stratifying AML patients into different prognostic groups (P < .001). Sequential study of 138 patients during the clinical course showed that DNMT3A mutations were stable during AML evolution. In conclusion, DNMT3A mutations are associated with distinct clinical and biologic features and poor prognosis in de novo AML patients. Furthermore, the DNMT3A mutation may be a potential biomarker for monitoring of minimal residual disease. (Blood. 2012; 119(2): 559-568)

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