4.2 Article

Karyotype complements the International Prognostic Scoring System for primary myelofibrosis

期刊

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF HAEMATOLOGY
卷 82, 期 4, 页码 255-259

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0609.2009.01216.x

关键词

cytogenetics; prognosis; JAK2; myelofibrosis; myeloproliferative

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The International Prognostic Scoring System (IPSS) for primary myelofibrosis (PMF) is based on five independent predictors of inferior survival: age > 65 yr, hemoglobin < 10 g/dL, leukocyte count > 25 x 10(9)/L, circulating blasts >= 1%, and presence of constitutional symptoms. The presence of 0, 1, 2, and >= 3 adverse factors defines low, intermediate-1, intermediate-2, and high risk disease, respectively. We examined the additional prognostic relevance of karyotype. World Health Organization criteria were used for PMF diagnosis. Only patients with bone marrow cytogenetic studies at the time or within 1 yr of diagnosis and a minimum of 20 evaluable metaphases were considered. Cytogenetic findings were categorized as 'normal' vs. 'abnormal' or 'favorable' (normal or with sole abnormalities of 13q- or 20q-) vs. 'unfavorable' (all other abnormalities). A total of 109 patients were studied (median age 63 yr). Numbers of patients in the above-listed four IPSS risk groups were 26, 31, 28, and 24, respectively. Cytogenetic results were abnormal in 33% of the patients and unfavorable in 21%. At a median follow-up of 35 months, 45 (41%) deaths were recorded. 'Unfavorable' (P = 0.008) but not 'abnormal' (P = 0.19) karyotype predicted shortened survival and its significance remained on multivariable analysis that included the IPSS or other prognostic tools as covariates. JAK2V617F, detected in 63 (58%) patients, was inconsequential to survival. In PMF, specific cytogenetic abnormalities and not the mere presence of an abnormal karyotype provide important prognostic information that is not accounted for by the IPSS or other established risk factors.

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

4.2
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