Literature DB >> 25428216

Coexistent hyperdiploidy does not abrogate poor prognosis in myeloma with adverse cytogenetics and may precede IGH translocations.

Charlotte Pawlyn1, Lorenzo Melchor1, Alex Murison1, Christopher P Wardell1, Annamaria Brioli2, Eileen M Boyle3, Martin F Kaiser1, Brian A Walker1, Dil B Begum1, Nasrin B Dahir1, Paula Proszek1, Walter M Gregory4, Mark T Drayson5, Graham H Jackson6, Fiona M Ross7, Faith E Davies1, Gareth J Morgan1.   

Abstract

The acquisition of the cytogenetic abnormalities hyperdiploidy or translocations into the immunoglobulin gene loci are considered as initiating events in the pathogenesis of myeloma and were often assumed to be mutually exclusive. These lesions have clinical significance; hyperdiploidy or the presence of the t(11;14) translocation is associated with a favorable outcome, whereas t(4;14), t(14;16), and t(14;20) are unfavorable. Poor outcomes are magnified when lesions occur in association with other high-risk features, del17p and +1q. Some patients have coexistence of both good and poor prognostic lesions, and there has been no consensus on their risk status. To address this, we have investigated their clinical impact using cases in the Myeloma IX study (ISRCTN68454111) and shown that the coexistence of hyperdiploidy or t(11;14) does not abrogate the poor prognosis associated with adverse molecular lesions, including translocations. We have also used single-cell analysis to study cases with coexistent translocations and hyperdiploidy to determine how these lesions cosegregate within the clonal substructure, and we have demonstrated that hyperdiploidy may precede IGH translocation in a proportion of patients. These findings have important clinical and biological implications, as we conclude patients with coexistence of adverse lesions and hyperdiploidy should be considered high risk and treated accordingly.
© 2015 by The American Society of Hematology.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25428216      PMCID: PMC4327151          DOI: 10.1182/blood-2014-07-584268

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Blood        ISSN: 0006-4971            Impact factor:   25.476


  47 in total

1.  Clinical implications of t(11;14)(q13;q32), t(4;14)(p16.3;q32), and -17p13 in myeloma patients treated with high-dose therapy.

Authors:  Morie A Gertz; Martha Q Lacy; Angela Dispenzieri; Philip R Greipp; Mark R Litzow; Kimberly J Henderson; Scott A Van Wier; Greg J Ahmann; Rafael Fonseca
Journal:  Blood       Date:  2005-06-23       Impact factor: 22.113

2.  A TC classification-based predictor for multiple myeloma using multiplexed real-time quantitative PCR.

Authors:  M F Kaiser; B A Walker; S L Hockley; D B Begum; C P Wardell; D Gonzalez; F M Ross; F E Davies; G J Morgan
Journal:  Leukemia       Date:  2013-01-15       Impact factor: 11.528

3.  Deletion of chromosome 13 detected by conventional cytogenetics is a critical prognostic factor in myeloma.

Authors:  L Chiecchio; R K M Protheroe; A H Ibrahim; K L Cheung; C Rudduck; G P Dagrada; E D Cabanas; T Parker; M Nightingale; A Wechalekar; K H Orchard; C J Harrison; N C P Cross; G J Morgan; F M Ross
Journal:  Leukemia       Date:  2006-07-06       Impact factor: 11.528

4.  Frequent gain of chromosome band 1q21 in plasma-cell dyscrasias detected by fluorescence in situ hybridization: incidence increases from MGUS to relapsed myeloma and is related to prognosis and disease progression following tandem stem-cell transplantation.

Authors:  Ichiro Hanamura; James P Stewart; Yongsheng Huang; Fenghuang Zhan; Madhumita Santra; Jeffrey R Sawyer; Klaus Hollmig; Maurizio Zangarri; Mauricio Pineda-Roman; Frits van Rhee; Federica Cavallo; Bart Burington; John Crowley; Guido Tricot; Bart Barlogie; John D Shaughnessy
Journal:  Blood       Date:  2006-05-16       Impact factor: 22.113

5.  Ploidy, as detected by fluorescence in situ hybridization, defines different subgroups in multiple myeloma.

Authors:  S Wuilleme; N Robillard; L Lodé; F Magrangeas; H Beris; J-L Harousseau; J Proffitt; S Minvielle; H Avet-Loiseau
Journal:  Leukemia       Date:  2005-02       Impact factor: 11.528

6.  Evidence for a single-step mechanism in the origin of hyperdiploid childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia.

Authors:  Kajsa Paulsson; Helena Mörse; Thoas Fioretos; Mikael Behrendtz; Bodil Strömbeck; Bertil Johansson
Journal:  Genes Chromosomes Cancer       Date:  2005-10       Impact factor: 5.006

7.  p53 gene deletion detected by fluorescence in situ hybridization is an adverse prognostic factor for patients with multiple myeloma following autologous stem cell transplantation.

Authors:  Hong Chang; Connie Qi; Qi-Long Yi; Donna Reece; A Keith Stewart
Journal:  Blood       Date:  2004-08-31       Impact factor: 22.113

8.  Statistical properties of the ordinary least-squares, generalized least-squares, and minimum-evolution methods of phylogenetic inference.

Authors:  A Rzhetsky; M Nei
Journal:  J Mol Evol       Date:  1992-10       Impact factor: 2.395

9.  Prognostic factors for hyperdiploid-myeloma: effects of chromosome 13 deletions and IgH translocations.

Authors:  W J Chng; R Santana-Dávila; S A Van Wier; G J Ahmann; S M Jalal; P L Bergsagel; M Chesi; M C Trendle; S Jacobus; E Blood; M M Oken; K Henderson; R A Kyle; M A Gertz; M Q Lacy; A Dispenzieri; P R Greipp; R Fonseca
Journal:  Leukemia       Date:  2006-05       Impact factor: 11.528

10.  The t(4;14) is associated with poor prognosis in myeloma patients undergoing autologous stem cell transplant.

Authors:  Hong Chang; Stephen Sloan; Dan Li; Lihua Zhuang; Qi-Long Yi; Christine I Chen; Donna Reece; Kathy Chun; A Keith Stewart
Journal:  Br J Haematol       Date:  2004-04       Impact factor: 6.998

View more
  25 in total

1.  Understanding the role of hyperdiploidy in myeloma prognosis: which trisomies really matter?

Authors:  Marie-Lorraine Chretien; Jill Corre; Valerie Lauwers-Cances; Florence Magrangeas; Alice Cleynen; Edwige Yon; Cyrille Hulin; Xavier Leleu; Frederique Orsini-Piocelle; Jean-Sebastien Blade; Claudine Sohn; Lionel Karlin; Xavier Delbrel; Benjamin Hebraud; Murielle Roussel; Gerald Marit; Laurent Garderet; Mohamad Mohty; Philippe Rodon; Laurent Voillat; Bruno Royer; Arnaud Jaccard; Karim Belhadj; Jean Fontan; Denis Caillot; Anne-Marie Stoppa; Michel Attal; Thierry Facon; Philippe Moreau; Stephane Minvielle; Hervé Avet-Loiseau
Journal:  Blood       Date:  2015-10-29       Impact factor: 22.113

Review 2.  Molecular basis of clonal evolution in multiple myeloma.

Authors:  Yusuke Furukawa; Jiro Kikuchi
Journal:  Int J Hematol       Date:  2020-02-06       Impact factor: 2.490

Review 3.  Toward personalized treatment in multiple myeloma based on molecular characteristics.

Authors:  Charlotte Pawlyn; Faith E Davies
Journal:  Blood       Date:  2018-12-26       Impact factor: 22.113

4.  Analysis of the genomic landscape of multiple myeloma highlights novel prognostic markers and disease subgroups.

Authors:  N Bolli; G Biancon; M Moarii; S Gimondi; Y Li; C de Philippis; F Maura; V Sathiaseelan; Y-T Tai; L Mudie; S O'Meara; K Raine; J W Teague; A P Butler; C Carniti; M Gerstung; T Bagratuni; E Kastritis; M Dimopoulos; P Corradini; K Anderson; P Moreau; S Minvielle; P J Campbell; E Papaemmanuil; H Avet-Loiseau; N C Munshi
Journal:  Leukemia       Date:  2017-12-06       Impact factor: 11.528

5.  Additional-structural-chromosomal aberrations are associated with inferior clinical outcome in patients with hyperdiploid multiple myeloma: a single-institution experience.

Authors:  Adrian A Carballo-Zarate; L Jeffrey Medeiros; Lianghua Fang; Jatin J Shah; Donna M Weber; Sheeba K Thomas; Elisabet E Manasanch; Suyang Hao; Qi Shen; Robert Z Orlowski; Pei Lin; Xinyan Lu
Journal:  Mod Pathol       Date:  2017-03-10       Impact factor: 7.842

Review 6.  Genomic complexity of multiple myeloma and its clinical implications.

Authors:  Salomon Manier; Karma Z Salem; Jihye Park; Dan A Landau; Gad Getz; Irene M Ghobrial
Journal:  Nat Rev Clin Oncol       Date:  2016-08-17       Impact factor: 66.675

7.  Interphase fluorescence in situ hybridization in untreated AL amyloidosis has an independent prognostic impact by abnormality type and treatment category.

Authors:  E Muchtar; A Dispenzieri; S K Kumar; R P Ketterling; D Dingli; M Q Lacy; F K Buadi; S R Hayman; P Kapoor; N Leung; R Chakraborty; W Gonsalves; R Warsame; T V Kourelis; S Russell; J A Lust; Y Lin; R S Go; S Zeldenrust; R A Kyle; S V Rajkumar; M A Gertz
Journal:  Leukemia       Date:  2016-12-01       Impact factor: 11.528

Review 8.  Risk Stratification in Multiple Myeloma.

Authors:  Melissa Gaik-Ming Ooi; Sanjay de Mel; Wee Joo Chng
Journal:  Curr Hematol Malig Rep       Date:  2016-04       Impact factor: 3.952

Review 9.  Multiple myeloma in the marrow: pathogenesis and treatments.

Authors:  Heather Fairfield; Carolyne Falank; Lindsey Avery; Michaela R Reagan
Journal:  Ann N Y Acad Sci       Date:  2016-01       Impact factor: 5.691

10.  Treatment of multiple myeloma with high-risk cytogenetics: a consensus of the International Myeloma Working Group.

Authors:  Pieter Sonneveld; Hervé Avet-Loiseau; Sagar Lonial; Saad Usmani; David Siegel; Kenneth C Anderson; Wee-Joo Chng; Philippe Moreau; Michel Attal; Robert A Kyle; Jo Caers; Jens Hillengass; Jesús San Miguel; Niels W C J van de Donk; Hermann Einsele; Joan Bladé; Brian G M Durie; Hartmut Goldschmidt; María-Victoria Mateos; Antonio Palumbo; Robert Orlowski
Journal:  Blood       Date:  2016-03-21       Impact factor: 22.113

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.