4.4 Article

ATM mutation rather than BIRC3 deletion and/or mutation predicts reduced survival in 11q-deleted chronic lymphocytic leukemia: data from the UK LRF CLL4 trial

期刊

HAEMATOLOGICA
卷 99, 期 4, 页码 736-742

出版社

FERRATA STORTI FOUNDATION
DOI: 10.3324/haematol.2013.098574

关键词

-

资金

  1. Leukaemia and Lymphoma Research
  2. Kay Kendall Leukaemia Fund
  3. Wessex Medical Research
  4. MRC [G8223452]
  5. Cancer Research UK
  6. Arbib Foundation
  7. Schering Healthcare UK
  8. Schering AG, Germany
  9. MRC [G8223452] Funding Source: UKRI
  10. Medical Research Council [G8223452] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

ATM mutation and BIRC3 deletion and/or mutation have independently been shown to have prognostic significance in chronic lymphocytic leukemia. However, the relative clinical importance of these abnormalities in patients with a deletion of 11q encompassing the ATM gene has not been established. We screened a cohort of 166 patients enriched for 11q-deletions for ATM mutations and BIRC3 deletion and mutation and determined the overall and progression-free survival among the 133 of these cases treated within the UK LRF CLL4 trial. SNP6.0 profiling demonstrated that BIRC3 deletion occurred in 83% of 11q-deleted cases and always co-existed with ATM deletion. For the first time we have demonstrated that 40% of BIRC3-deleted cases have concomitant deletion and mutation of ATM. While BIRC3 mutations were rare, they exclusively occurred with BIRC3 deletion and a wildtype residual ATM allele. In 11q-deleted cases, we confirmed that ATM mutation was associated with a reduced overall and progression-free survival comparable to that seen with TP53 abnormalities, whereas BIRC3 deletion and/or mutation had no impact on overall and progression-free survival. In conclusion, in 11q-deleted patients treated with first-line chemotherapy, ATM mutation rather than BIRC3 deletion and/or mutation identifies a subgroup with a poorer outcome.

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

4.4
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