Literature DB >> 26043022

Monosomal karyotype predicts inferior survival independently of a complex karyotype in patients with myelodysplastic syndromes.

Zoe K McQuilten1, Vijaya Sundararajan2, Nick Andrianopoulos1, David J Curtis3, Erica M Wood1,3, Lynda J Campbell2,4, Meaghan Wall4.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Conflicting data exist about the impact of a monosomal karyotype (MK) on overall survival (OS) for patients with myelodysplastic syndromes (MDSs) and particularly for those with a complex karyotype (CK). This study was aimed at determining whether an MK is associated with OS independently of the number of cytogenetic abnormalities (CAs) in a population-based MDS cohort.
METHODS: Cancer registry data on incident MDS cases were linked with cytogenetic data and hospital administrative data from 2000 to 2010 for the Australian state of Victoria.
RESULTS: Between 2000 and 2010, 1404 incident MDS cases with cytogenetic results were identified. A CK, defined as 3 or more abnormalities, was present in 126 (9%). A very complex karyotype (vCK), defined as 5 or more abnormalities, was present in 95 (7%). An MK was associated with worse OS in the whole cohort (median 6 vs 39 months, P < 0.001) including those with a coexisting CK (6 vs 17 months, P < 0.001) or vCK (6 vs 9 months, P = 0.02). After adjustments for the number of CAs, an MK remained independently associated with OS, although its effect size decreased with increasing cytogenetic complexity (hazard ratio for an MK, 4.81; 95% confidence interval, 3.08-7.52; hazard ratio for the number of CAs, 1.22; 95% confidence interval, 1.15-1.30; and hazard ratio for the interaction between an MK and CAs, 0.83; 95% confidence interval, 0.77-0.89).
CONCLUSIONS: These results support the clinical utility of an MK as an independent predictor of adverse outcomes for MDS patients, even among CK and vCK groups, although its prognostic effect decreases with increasing cytogenetic complexity.
© 2015 American Cancer Society.

Entities:  

Keywords:  cytogenetics; monosomal karyotype; myelodysplastic syndromes; survival

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26043022     DOI: 10.1002/cncr.29396

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer        ISSN: 0008-543X            Impact factor:   6.860


  8 in total

1.  Patients of Myelodysplastic Syndrome with Mild/Moderate Myelofibrosis and a Monosomal Karyotype are Independently Associated with an Adverse Prognosis: Long-Term Follow-Up Data.

Authors:  Na Wang; Hongzhi Xu; Qing Li; Xiaosheng Fang; Jie Liu; Xiaohui Sui; Lingyan Zhang; Yujie Jiang; Xin Wang
Journal:  Cancer Manag Res       Date:  2020-07-16       Impact factor: 3.989

2.  Genotype-outcome correlations in pediatric AML: the impact of a monosomal karyotype in trial AML-BFM 2004.

Authors:  M Rasche; C von Neuhoff; M Dworzak; J-P Bourquin; J Bradtke; G Göhring; G Escherich; G Fleischhack; N Graf; B Gruhn; O A Haas; T Klingebiel; B Kremens; T Lehrnbecher; A von Stackelberg; J Tchinda; Z Zemanova; C Thiede; N von Neuhoff; M Zimmermann; U Creutzig; D Reinhardt
Journal:  Leukemia       Date:  2017-04-25       Impact factor: 11.528

3.  TP53 mutation status divides myelodysplastic syndromes with complex karyotypes into distinct prognostic subgroups.

Authors:  Detlef Haase; Kristen E Stevenson; Donna Neuberg; Jaroslaw P Maciejewski; Aziz Nazha; Mikkael A Sekeres; Benjamin L Ebert; Guillermo Garcia-Manero; Claudia Haferlach; Torsten Haferlach; Wolfgang Kern; Seishi Ogawa; Yasunobu Nagata; Kenichi Yoshida; Timothy A Graubert; Matthew J Walter; Alan F List; Rami S Komrokji; Eric Padron; David Sallman; Elli Papaemmanuil; Peter J Campbell; Michael R Savona; Adam Seegmiller; Lionel Adès; Pierre Fenaux; Lee-Yung Shih; David Bowen; Michael J Groves; Sudhir Tauro; Michaela Fontenay; Olivier Kosmider; Michal Bar-Natan; David Steensma; Richard Stone; Michael Heuser; Felicitas Thol; Mario Cazzola; Luca Malcovati; Aly Karsan; Christina Ganster; Eva Hellström-Lindberg; Jacqueline Boultwood; Andrea Pellagatti; Valeria Santini; Lynn Quek; Paresh Vyas; Heinz Tüchler; Peter L Greenberg; Rafael Bejar
Journal:  Leukemia       Date:  2019-01-11       Impact factor: 12.883

4.  Clinical significance of cytogenetic and molecular genetic abnormalities in 634 Chinese patients with myelodysplastic syndromes.

Authors:  Xuefen Yan; Lu Wang; Lingxu Jiang; Yingwan Luo; Peipei Lin; Wenli Yang; Yanling Ren; Liya Ma; Xinping Zhou; Chen Mei; Li Ye; Gaixiang Xu; Weilai Xu; Haiyang Yang; Chenxi Lu; Jie Jin; Hongyan Tong
Journal:  Cancer Med       Date:  2021-02-20       Impact factor: 4.452

5.  Myeloid malignancies in the real-world: Occurrence, progression and survival in the UK's population-based Haematological Malignancy Research Network 2004-15.

Authors:  Eve Roman; Alex Smith; Simon Appleton; Simon Crouch; Richard Kelly; Sally Kinsey; Catherine Cargo; Russell Patmore
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol       Date:  2016-04-16       Impact factor: 2.984

6.  Prognostic Impact of IPSS-R and Chromosomal Translocations in 751 Korean Patients with Primary Myelodysplastic Syndrome.

Authors:  Koung Jin Suh; June-Won Cheong; Inho Kim; Hyeoung-Joon Kim; Dong-Yeop Shin; Youngil Koh; Sung-Soo Yoon; Yoo Hong Min; Jae-Sook Ahn; Yeo-Kyeoung Kim; Yun-Gyoo Lee; Jeong-Ok Lee; Soo-Mee Bang; Yeung-Chul Mun; Chu-Myoung Seong; Yong Park; Byung-Soo Kim; Junshik Hong; Jinny Park; Jae Hoon Lee; Sung-Yong Kim; Hong Ghi Lee
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-11-08       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 7.  Techniques for detecting chromosomal aberrations in myelodysplastic syndromes.

Authors:  Qibin Song; Min Peng; Yuxin Chu; Shiang Huang
Journal:  Oncotarget       Date:  2017-05-09

Review 8.  TP53 in Myelodysplastic Syndromes: Recent Biological and Clinical Findings.

Authors:  Cosimo Cumbo; Giuseppina Tota; Luisa Anelli; Antonella Zagaria; Giorgina Specchia; Francesco Albano
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2020-05-13       Impact factor: 5.923

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.