Cytogenetic heterogeneity negatively impacts outcomes in patients with acute myeloid leukemia

Haematologica

Volumn 100, Issue 3, 2015, Pages 331-335

  Medeiros, Bruno C ^a   Othus, Megan ^b,c   Fang, Min ^c,d   Appelbaum, Frederick R ^c,d   Erba, Harry P ^e  

^a STANFORD UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^b SOUTHWEST ONCOLOGY GROUP STATISTICAL CENTER   (United States)

^c Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON   (United States)

^e UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA AT BIRMINGHAM   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANTHRACYCLINE; CYTARABINE; ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENT;

ACUTE GRANULOCYTIC LEUKEMIA; ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGE; AGED; ARTICLE; BONE MARROW BIOPSY; CANCER PROGNOSIS; CELL HETEROGENEITY; CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); CYTOGENETICS; DISEASE ASSOCIATION; DRUG MEGADOSE; EVENT FREE SURVIVAL; FEMALE; HUMAN; INCIDENCE; KARYOTYPING; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; METAPHASE; MULTIPLE CYCLE TREATMENT; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; OVERALL SURVIVAL; RECURRENCE FREE SURVIVAL; SURVIVAL RATE; CELL CLONE; CHROMOSOME ABERRATION; DRUG EFFECTS; GENETIC HETEROGENEITY; GENETICS; LEUKEMIA, MYELOID, ACUTE; LYMPHOCYTE; METABOLISM; MIDDLE AGED; PATHOLOGY; PROGNOSIS; SURVIVAL ANALYSIS; VERY ELDERLY;

ABNORMAL KARYOTYPE; ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGE FACTORS; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENTS; CLONE CELLS; FEMALE; GENETIC HETEROGENEITY; HUMANS; KARYOTYPING; LEUKEMIA, MYELOID, ACUTE; LYMPHOCYTES; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PROGNOSIS; SURVIVAL ANALYSIS;

EID: 84924750052     PISSN: 03906078     EISSN: 15928721     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3324/haematol.2014.117267     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. Medeiros BC, Othus M, Fang M, Roulston D, Appelbaum FR. Prognostic impact of monosomal karyotype in young adult and elderly acute myeloid leukemia: the Southwest Oncology Group (SWOG) experience. Blood. 2010;116(13):2224-2228.
2. Grimwade D, Hills RK, Moorman AV et al. Refinement of cytogenetic classification in acute myeloid leukemia: determination of prognostic significance of rare recurring chromosomal abnormalities among 5876 younger adult patients treated in the United Kingdom Medical Research Council trials. Blood. 2010;116(3):354-365.
3. Greaves M, Maley CC. Clonal Evolution in Cancer. Nature. 2012; 481(7381): 306–313.
4. Nowell PC. The clonal evolution of tumor cell populations. Science. 1976;194(4260): 23-28.
5. Ding L, Ley TJ, Larson DE et al. Clonal evolution in relapsed acute myeloid leukaemia revealed by whole-genome sequencing. Nature. 2012;481(7382):506-510.
6. Cancer Genome Atlas Research Network. Genomic and epigenomic landscapes of adult de novo acute myeloid leukemia. N Engl J Med. 2013;368(22):2059-2074.
7. Welch JS, Ley TJ, Link DC et al. The origin and evolution of mutations in acute myeloid leukemia. Cell. 2012;150(2):264-278.
8. Garson OM, Hagemeijer A, Sakurai M et al. Cytogenetic studies of 103 patients with acute myelogenous leukemia in relapse. Cancer Genet Cytogenet. 1989;40(2):187-202.
9. Xie B, Othus M, Medeiros BC, Fang M, Appelbaum FR, Estey EH. Influence of residual normal metaphases in acute myeloid leukemia patients with monosomal karyotype. Haematologica. 2011; 96(4):631-632.
10. Medeiros BC, Othus M, Fang M, Appelbaum FR, Estey EH. Impact of residual normal metaphases in core binding factor acute myeloid leukemia. Cancer. 2012;118 (9):2420-2423.
11. Bochtler T, Stölzel F, Heilig CE et al. Clonal heterogeneity as detected by metaphase karyotyping is an indicator of poor prognosis in acute myeloid leukemia. J Clin Oncol. 2013;31(31):3898-3905.
12. ISCN; Shaffer LG, Slovak ML, Campbell LJ, editors. An international system for human cytogenetic nomenclature. Basel, Switzerland: S. Krager; 2009.
13. Slovak ML, Kopecky KJ, Cassileth PA et al. Karyotypic analysis predicts outcome of preremission and postremission therapy in adult acute myeloid leukemia: a Southwest Oncology Group/Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group study. Blood 2000; 96(13):4075-4083.
14. Breems DA, Van Putten WL, De Greef GE et al. Monosomal karyotype in acute myeloid leukemia: a better indicator of poor prognosis than a complex karyotype. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26(29):4791-4797
15. Döhner H, Estey EH, Amadori S et al. Diagnosis and management of acute myeloid leukemia in adults: recommendations from an international expert panel, on behalf of the European LeukemiaNet. Blood. 2010;115(3):453-474.
16. Mrózek K, Marcucci G, Nicolet D et al. Prognostic Significance of the European LeukemiaNet Standardized System for Reporting Cytogenetic and Molecular Alterations in Adults With Acute Myeloid Leukemia. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30(36):4515-4523.
17. Röllig C, Bornhäuser M, Thiede C et al. Long-term prognosis of acute myeloid leukemia according to the new genetic risk classification of the European LeukemiaNet recommendations: evaluation of the proposed reporting system. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29(20):2758-2765.
18. Allen C, Hills RK, Lamb K et al. The importance of relative mutant level for evaluating impact on outcome of KIT, FLT3 and CBL mutations in core-binding factor acute myeloid leukemia. Leukemia. 2013;27(9): 1891-1901
19. Rücker FG, Schlenk RF, Bullinger L et al. TP53 alterations in acute myeloid leukemia with complex karyotype correlate with specific copy number alterations, monosomal karyotype, and dismal outcome. Blood. 2012;119(9):2114-2121.
20. Rausch T, Jones DT, Zapatka M et al. Genome sequencing of pediatric medulloblastoma links catastrophic DNA rearrangements with TP53 mutations. Cell. 2012;148(1-2):59-71.
21. Klco JM, Spencer DH, Miller CA et al. Functional heterogeneity of genetically defined subclones in acute myeloid leukemia. Cancer Cell. 2014;25(3):379-392.
22. Löwenberg B, Pabst T, Vellenga E et al. Cytarabine dose for acute myeloid leukemia. N Engl J Med. 2011; 364(11):1027-1036.
23. Medeiros BC, Othus M, Appelbaum FR. Cytarabine dose for acute myeloid leukemia. N Engl J Med. 2011; 364(22):2167-2168.