Literature DB >> 11698274

Myelodysplastic syndromes, from French-American-British to World Health Organization: comparison of classifications on 431 unselected patients from a single institution.

T Nösslinger1, R Reisner, E Koller, H Grüner, H Tüchler, H Nowotny, E Pittermann, M Pfeilstöcker.   

Abstract

In 1999 a working group of the World Health Organization (WHO) published a revised classification for myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS): RA, RARS, refractory cytopenia with multilineage dysplasia (RC+Dys), RAEB I and II, del (5q) syndrome, and MDS unclassifiable. Chronic myelomonocytic leukemia (CMML) and RAEB-t were excluded. Standard French-American-British (FAB) and new WHO classifications have been compared in a series of patients (n = 431) from a single center, analyzing morphologic, clinical, and cytogenetic data. According to the WHO findings, dysgranulocytopoiesis or dysmegakaryocytopoiesis only were found in 26% of patients with less than 5% medullary blasts. These patients are thus unclassified and should remain in the subgroups RA and RARS. Splitting of heterogeneous RAEB into 2 subgroups according to blast count was supported by a trend to a statistically significant difference in the single-center study population. Patients with CMML whose white blood cell counts are above 13 000/microL may be excluded from the MDS classification, as warranted by WHO, but a redistribution of patients with dysplastic CMML according to medullary blast count leads to more heterogeneity in other WHO subgroups. Although the natural courses of RAEB-T and acute myeloid leukemia (AML) with dysplasia are different, comparable median survival durations after treatment in patients with RAEB-T and AML were in favor of the proposed 20% medullary blast threshold for AML. The homogeneity of subgroups was studied by evaluating prognostic scores. A significant shift into lower IPSS risk groups was evident in the new classification. These data cannot provide evidence for the new WHO proposal, which should not be adopted for routine clinical use at present. Some of its aspects can provide a starting point for further studies involving refined cytogenetics and clinical results.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11698274     DOI: 10.1182/blood.v98.10.2935

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Blood        ISSN: 0006-4971            Impact factor:   22.113


  12 in total

1.  Prognosis in myelodysplastic syndromes: are the new classifications useful?

Authors:  Naomi Galili; Azra Raza
Journal:  Curr Hematol Malig Rep       Date:  2008-01       Impact factor: 3.952

Review 2.  Impact of growth factors in the regulation of apoptosis in low-risk myelodysplastic syndromes.

Authors:  R Tehranchi
Journal:  Med Oncol       Date:  2006       Impact factor: 3.064

3.  NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology: myelodysplastic syndromes.

Authors:  Peter L Greenberg; Eyal Attar; John M Bennett; Clara D Bloomfield; Carlos M De Castro; H Joachim Deeg; James M Foran; Karin Gaensler; Guillermo Garcia-Manero; Steven D Gore; David Head; Rami Komrokji; Lori J Maness; Michael Millenson; Stephen D Nimer; Margaret R O'Donnell; Mark A Schroeder; Paul J Shami; Richard M Stone; James E Thompson; Peter Westervelt
Journal:  J Natl Compr Canc Netw       Date:  2011-01       Impact factor: 11.908

Review 4.  Who is WHO in myelodysplastic syndromes? Clinical implications of the WHO classification.

Authors:  Rami S Komrokji; John M Bennett
Journal:  Curr Hematol Malig Rep       Date:  2006-03       Impact factor: 3.952

5.  Expression of the proliferation-associated nuclear protein MIB-1 and its relationship with microvascular density in bone marrow biopsies of patients with myelodysplastic syndromes.

Authors:  Michael G Alexandrakis; Freda H Passam; Despina S Kyriakou; Constantina Dambaki; George Katrinakis; George Tsirakis; John Konsolas; Efstathios N Stathopoulos
Journal:  J Mol Histol       Date:  2004-11       Impact factor: 2.611

6.  Apoptotic rate in patients with myelodisplastic syndrome treated with modulatory compounds of pro-apoptotic cytokines.

Authors:  Elena Moldoveanu; Andreea Moicean; Cristina Vidulescu; Daciana Marta; Adriana Colita
Journal:  J Cell Mol Med       Date:  2003 Jul-Sep       Impact factor: 5.310

7.  Reproducibility of the World Health Organization 2008 criteria for myelodysplastic syndromes.

Authors:  Leonor Senent; Leonor Arenillas; Elisa Luño; Juan C Ruiz; Guillermo Sanz; Lourdes Florensa
Journal:  Haematologica       Date:  2012-10-12       Impact factor: 9.941

8.  Models of granulocyte DNA structure are highly predictive of myelodysplastic syndrome.

Authors:  Donald C Malins; Katie M Anderson; Nayak L Polissar; Gary K Ostrander; Edward T Knobbe; Virginia M Green; Naomi K Gilman; Jerry L Spivak
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2004-03-29       Impact factor: 11.205

Review 9.  Pathogenesis, classification, and treatment of myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS).

Authors:  Peter Valent; Friedrich Wimazal; Ilse Schwarzinger; Wolfgang R Sperr; Klaus Geissler
Journal:  Wien Klin Wochenschr       Date:  2003-08-14       Impact factor: 1.704

10.  Progressive chromatin repression and promoter methylation of CTNNA1 associated with advanced myeloid malignancies.

Authors:  Ying Ye; Michael A McDevitt; Mingzhou Guo; Wei Zhang; Oliver Galm; Steven D Gore; Judith E Karp; Jaroslaw P Maciejewski; Jeanne Kowalski; Hua-Ling Tsai; Lukasz P Gondek; Hsing-Chen Tsai; Xiaofei Wang; Craig Hooker; B Douglas Smith; Hetty E Carraway; James G Herman
Journal:  Cancer Res       Date:  2009-10-13       Impact factor: 12.701

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.