34
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Gene mutation patterns and their prognostic impact in a cohort of 1185 patients with acute myeloid leukemia.

      Blood
      Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Cohort Studies, DNA (Cytosine-5-)-Methyltransferase, genetics, DNA Methylation, Drug Resistance, Neoplasm, Female, Gene Expression Profiling, Gene Expression Regulation, Leukemic, Genetic Markers, Genetic Testing, Humans, Leukemia, Myeloid, Acute, mortality, therapy, Male, Middle Aged, Neoplasm Proteins, Oncogene Proteins, Fusion, Predictive Value of Tests, Prognosis, Young Adult

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          To evaluate the prognostic value of genetic mutations for acute myeloid leukemia (AML) patients, we examined the gene status for both fusion products such as AML1 (CBFα)-ETO, CBFβ-MYH11, PML-RARα, and MLL rearrangement as a result of chromosomal translocations and mutations in genes including FLT3, C-KIT, N-RAS, NPM1, CEBPA, WT1, ASXL1, DNMT3A, MLL, IDH1, IDH2, and TET2 in 1185 AML patients. Clinical analysis was mainly carried out among 605 cases without recognizable karyotype abnormalities except for 11q23. Of these 605 patients, 452 (74.7%) were found to have at least 1 mutation, and the relationship of gene mutations with clinical outcome was investigated. We revealed a correlation pattern among NPM1, DNMT3A, FLT3, IDH1, IDH2, CEBPA, and TET2 mutations. Multivariate analysis identified DNMT3A and MLL mutations as independent factors predicting inferior overall survival (OS) and event-free survival (EFS), whereas biallelic CEBPA mutations or NPM1 mutations without DNMT3A mutations conferred a better OS and EFS in both the whole group and among younger patients < 60 years of age. The use of molecular markers allowed us to subdivide the series of 605 patients into distinct prognostic groups with potential clinical relevance.

          Related collections

          Author and article information

          Comments

          Comment on this article