Advertisement
Journal of Clinical Oncology  
Search for:
Limit by:
  Browse by Subject or Issue
Home Search or Browse JCO My JCO Subscriptions Customer Service Site Map

Originally published as JCO Early Release 10.1200/JCO.2008.16.0259 on August 11 2008

Journal of Clinical Oncology, Vol 26, No 29 (October 10), 2008: pp. 4791-4797
© 2008 American Society of Clinical Oncology.

This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Purchase Article
Right arrow View Shopping Cart
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a colleague
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Save to my personal folders
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRights & Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Breems, D. A.
Right arrow Articles by Löwenberg, B.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Breems, D. A.
Right arrow Articles by Löwenberg, B.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Facebook   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Monosomal Karyotype in Acute Myeloid Leukemia: A Better Indicator of Poor Prognosis Than a Complex Karyotype

Dimitri A. Breems, Wim L.J. Van Putten, Georgine E. De Greef, Shama L. Van Zelderen-Bhola, Klasien B.J. Gerssen-Schoorl, Clemens H.M. Mellink, Aggie Nieuwint, Martine Jotterand, Anne Hagemeijer, H. Berna Beverloo, Bob Löwenberg

From the Department of Hematology, Hospital Network Antwerp, Campus Stuivenberg, Antwerp; Center for Human Genetics, University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium; Dutch-Belgian Hemato-Oncology Cooperative Group Data Center; Departments of Trials and Statistics, Hematology, and Clinical Genetics, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam; Department of Clinical Genetics, Free University Medical Center; Department of Clinical Genetics, Institute for Human Genetics, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam; Department of Genetics, University Medical Center, Groningen, the Netherlands; and Unit of Cancer Cytogenetics, Department of Medical Genetics, University Hospital Center Vaudois, Lausanne, Switzerland

Corresponding author: Bob Löwenberg, MD, PhD, Department of Hematology, Erasmus University Medical Center, PO Box 2040, 3000 CA Rotterdam, the Netherlands; e-mail: b.lowenberg{at}erasmusmc.nl

Purpose To investigate the prognostic value of various cytogenetic components of a complex karyotype in acute myeloid leukemia (AML).

Patients and Methods Cytogenetics and overall survival (OS) were analyzed in 1,975 AML patients age 15 to 60 years.

Results Besides AML with normal cytogenetics (CN) and core binding factor (CBF) abnormalities, we distinguished 733 patients with cytogenetic abnormalities. Among the latter subgroup, loss of a single chromosome (n = 109) conferred negative prognostic impact (4-year OS, 12%; poor outcome). Loss of chromosome 7 was most common, but outcome of AML patients with single monosomy –7 (n = 63; 4-year OS, 13%) and other single autosomal monosomies (n = 46; 4-year OS, 12%) did not differ. Structural chromosomal abnormalities influenced prognosis only in association with a single autosomal monosomy (4-year OS, 4% for very poor v 24% for poor). We derived a monosomal karyotype (MK) as a predictor for very poor prognosis of AML that refers to two or more distinct autosomal chromosome monosomies (n = 116; 4-year OS, 3%) or one single autosomal monosomy in the presence of structural abnormalities (n = 68; 4-year OS, 4%). In direct comparisons, MK provides significantly better prognostic prediction than the traditionally defined complex karyotype, which considers any three or more or five or more clonal cytogenetic abnormalities, and also than various individual specific cytogenetic abnormalities (eg, del[5q], inv[3]/t[3;3]) associated with very poor outcome.

Conclusion MK enables (in addition to CN and CBF) the prognostic classification of two new aggregates of cytogenetically abnormal AML, the unfavorable risk MK-negative category (4-year OS, 26% ± 2%) and the highly unfavorable risk MK-positive category (4-year OS, 4% ± 1%).

published online ahead of print at www.jco.org on August 11, 2008

Authors’ disclosures of potential conflicts of interest and author contributions are found at the end of this article.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Facebook Facebook   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
NEJMHome page
B. Lowenberg, G. J. Ossenkoppele, W. van Putten, H. C. Schouten, C. Graux, A. Ferrant, P. Sonneveld, J. Maertens, M. Jongen-Lavrencic, M. von Lilienfeld-Toal, et al.
High-Dose Daunorubicin in Older Patients with Acute Myeloid Leukemia
N. Engl. J. Med., September 24, 2009; 361(13): 1235 - 1248.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
haematolHome page
E. H. Estey
Treatment of acute myeloid leukemia
Haematologica, January 1, 2009; 94(1): 10 - 16.
[Full Text] [PDF]



About
JCO
 Editorial
Roster
 Advertising
Information
 Librarians &
Institutions
 Rights &
Permissions
 PDA Services

Copyright © 2008 by the American Society of Clinical Oncology, Online ISSN: 1527-7755. Print ISSN: 0732-183X
Terms and Conditions of Use
  HighWire Press HighWire Press™ assists in the publication of JCO Online