PURPOSE: Acute myeloid leukemia (AML) with inv(3)(q21q26.2)/t(3;3)(q21;q26.2) [inv(3)/t(3;3)] is recognized as a distinctive entity in the WHO classification. Risk assignment and clinical and genetic characterization of AML with chromosome 3q abnormalities other than inv(3)/t(3;3) remain largely unresolved. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Cytogenetics, molecular genetics, therapy response, and outcome analysis were performed in 6,515 newly diagnosed adult AML patients. Patients were treated on Dutch-Belgian Hemato-Oncology Cooperative Group/Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research (HOVON/SAKK; n = 3,501) and German-Austrian Acute Myeloid Leukemia Study Group (AMLSG; n = 3,014) protocols. EVI1 and MDS1/EVI1 expression was determined by real-time quantitative polymerase chain reaction. RESULTS: 3q abnormalities were detected in 4.4% of AML patients (288 of 6,515). Four distinct groups were defined: A: inv(3)/t(3;3), 32%; B: balanced t(3q26), 18%; C: balanced t(3q21), 7%; and D: other 3q abnormalities, 43%. Monosomy 7 was the most common additional aberration in groups (A), 66%; (B), 31%; and (D), 37%. N-RAS mutations and dissociate EVI1 versus MDS1/EVI1 overexpression were associated with inv(3)/t(3;3). Patients with inv(3)/t(3;3) and balanced t(3q21) at diagnosis presented with higher WBC and platelet counts. In multivariable analysis, only inv(3)/t(3;3), but not t(3q26) and t(3q21), predicted reduced relapse-free survival (hazard ratio [HR], 1.99; P < .001) and overall survival (HR, 1.4; P = .006). This adverse prognostic impact of inv(3)/t(3;3) was enhanced by additional monosomy 7. Group D 3q aberrant AML also had a poor outcome related to the coexistence of complex and/or monosomal karyotypes and cryptic inv(3)/t(3;3). CONCLUSION: Various categories of 3q abnormalities in AML can be distinguished according to their clinical, hematologic, and genetic features. AML with inv(3)/t(3;3) represents a distinctive subgroup with unfavorable prognosis.
PURPOSE:Acute myeloid leukemia (AML) with inv(3)(q21q26.2)/t(3;3)(q21;q26.2) [inv(3)/t(3;3)] is recognized as a distinctive entity in the WHO classification. Risk assignment and clinical and genetic characterization of AML with chromosome 3q abnormalities other than inv(3)/t(3;3) remain largely unresolved. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Cytogenetics, molecular genetics, therapy response, and outcome analysis were performed in 6,515 newly diagnosed adult AMLpatients. Patients were treated on Dutch-Belgian Hemato-Oncology Cooperative Group/Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research (HOVON/SAKK; n = 3,501) and German-Austrian Acute Myeloid Leukemia Study Group (AMLSG; n = 3,014) protocols. EVI1 and MDS1/EVI1 expression was determined by real-time quantitative polymerase chain reaction. RESULTS: 3q abnormalities were detected in 4.4% of AMLpatients (288 of 6,515). Four distinct groups were defined: A: inv(3)/t(3;3), 32%; B: balanced t(3q26), 18%; C: balanced t(3q21), 7%; and D: other 3q abnormalities, 43%. Monosomy 7 was the most common additional aberration in groups (A), 66%; (B), 31%; and (D), 37%. N-RAS mutations and dissociate EVI1 versus MDS1/EVI1 overexpression were associated with inv(3)/t(3;3). Patients with inv(3)/t(3;3) and balanced t(3q21) at diagnosis presented with higher WBC and platelet counts. In multivariable analysis, only inv(3)/t(3;3), but not t(3q26) and t(3q21), predicted reduced relapse-free survival (hazard ratio [HR], 1.99; P < .001) and overall survival (HR, 1.4; P = .006). This adverse prognostic impact of inv(3)/t(3;3) was enhanced by additional monosomy 7. Group D 3q aberrant AML also had a poor outcome related to the coexistence of complex and/or monosomal karyotypes and cryptic inv(3)/t(3;3). CONCLUSION: Various categories of 3q abnormalities in AML can be distinguished according to their clinical, hematologic, and genetic features. AML with inv(3)/t(3;3) represents a distinctive subgroup with unfavorable prognosis.
Authors: Iria Vázquez; Miren Maicas; José Cervera; Xabier Agirre; Oskar Marin-Béjar; Nerea Marcotegui; Carmen Vicente; Idoya Lahortiga; Maria Gomez-Benito; Claudia Carranza; Ana Valencia; Salut Brunet; Eva Lumbreras; Felipe Prosper; María T Gómez-Casares; Jesús M Hernández-Rivas; María J Calasanz; Miguel A Sanz; Jorge Sierra; María D Odero Journal: Haematologica Date: 2011-07-12 Impact factor: 9.941
Authors: Nina Fenouille; Christopher F Bassil; Issam Ben-Sahra; Lina Benajiba; Gabriela Alexe; Azucena Ramos; Yana Pikman; Amy S Conway; Michael R Burgess; Qing Li; Frédéric Luciano; Patrick Auberger; Ilene Galinsky; Daniel J DeAngelo; Richard M Stone; Yi Zhang; Archibald S Perkins; Kevin Shannon; Michael T Hemann; Alexandre Puissant; Kimberly Stegmaier Journal: Nat Med Date: 2017-02-13 Impact factor: 53.440
Authors: Marion Eveillard; Jacques Delaunay; Steven Richebourg; Laurence Lodé; Richard Garand; Soraya Wuillème; François Duhoux; Hélène Antoine-Poirel; Catherine Godon; Marie C Béné Journal: Haematologica Date: 2015-03 Impact factor: 9.941
Authors: Justin Loke; Paulynn Suyin Chin; Peter Keane; Anna Pickin; Salam A Assi; Anetta Ptasinska; Maria Rosaria Imperato; Peter N Cockerill; Constanze Bonifer Journal: Blood Adv Date: 2018-02-13
Authors: Heesun J Rogers; James W Vardiman; John Anastasi; Gordana Raca; Natasha M Savage; Athena M Cherry; Daniel Arber; Erika Moore; Jennifer J D Morrissette; Adam Bagg; Yen-Chun Liu; Susan Mathew; Attilio Orazi; Pei Lin; Sa A Wang; Carlos E Bueso-Ramos; Kathryn Foucar; Robert P Hasserjian; Ramon V Tiu; Matthew Karafa; Eric D Hsi Journal: Haematologica Date: 2014-01-24 Impact factor: 9.941