| Literature DB >> 29515676 |
Magnus Borssén1, Jessica Nordlund2, Zahra Haider1, Mattias Landfors1, Pär Larsson1, Jukka Kanerva3, Kjeld Schmiegelow4, Trond Flaegstad5, Ólafur Gísli Jónsson6, Britt-Marie Frost7, Josefine Palle7, Erik Forestier1, Mats Heyman8, Magnus Hultdin1, Gudmar Lönnerholm7, Sofie Degerman1.
Abstract
Background: Few biological markers are associated with survival after relapse of B-cell precursor acute lymphoblastic leukemia (BCP-ALL). In pediatric T-cell ALL, we have identified promoter-associated methylation alterations that correlate with prognosis. Here, the prognostic relevance of CpG island methylation phenotype (CIMP) classification was investigated in pediatric BCP-ALL patients.Entities:
Keywords: BCP-ALL; CIMP; DNA methylation; Prognosis; Relapse; Risk stratification
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29515676 PMCID: PMC5836434 DOI: 10.1186/s13148-018-0466-3
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Clin Epigenetics ISSN: 1868-7075 Impact factor: 6.551
Fig. 1Kaplan-Meier overall survival analysis based on CIMP subgroups in BCP-ALL. Overall survival analysis in a 601 diagnostic BCP-ALL samples CIMP classified at diagnosis. Follow-up time (months) from diagnosis to last follow-up. b–e One hundred and thirty-seven relapsed BCP-ALL samples CIMP classified at diagnosis and stratified for c initial risk-group at primary diagnosis (SR/IR and HR), based on age at diagnosis, immunophenotype, cytogenetic aberrations, WBC, and CNS involvement. d Hematopoietic stem cell transplantation after relapse (yes/no). e IntReALL (International Study for Treatment of Childhood Relapse ALL) risk class (SR/HR) at relapse, based on site of relapse and time from diagnosis to relapse. Follow–up time (months) from relapse to last follow up (b–e)
Clinical characteristics of 137 relapsed pediatric BCP-ALL patients that were CIMP classified at ALL diagnosis
| Relapsed BCP-ALL patients | CIMP− | CIMP+ | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sex male/female | 28/14 | 51/44 | ns |
| Age at primary diagnosis (months) | 48 | 70 | ns |
| (median, range) | (16–185) | (12–211) | |
| WBC × 109/l at primary diagnosis | 20,7 | 18,6 | ns |
| (median, range) | (2,2–269) | (1,3–274) | |
| Cytogenetics at primary diagnosis | 0.021 | ||
| Favorablea | 18 (43%) | 50 (53%) | |
| Unfavorableb | 11 (26%) | 8 (8%) | |
| Otherc | 13 (31%) | 37 (39%) | |
| Initial risk group at primary diagnosisd | ns | ||
| SR/IR | 23 (55%) | 64 (67%) | |
| HR | 19 (45%) | 31 (33%) | |
| Relapse sitee | 0.077 | ||
| Bone marrow isolated (iBM) | 31 (74%) | 50 (53%) | |
| Combined (iBM and iEM) | 6 (14%) | 24 (26%) | |
| Extramedullary (iEM) | 5 (12%) | 20 (21%) | |
| Time to relapse (median, months) | 29,5 | 35 | ns |
| (Range) | (5–124) | (1–172) | |
| Very early (VE) | 11 (26%) | 12 (13%) | |
| Early (E) | 16 (38%) | 38 (40%) | |
| Late (L) | 15 (36%) | 45 (47%) | |
| IntReALL risk class at relapse (relapse site/time to relapse) | 0.021 | ||
| Standard risk (L-iBM, iEM, Comb, E-iEM, Comb) | 21 (50%) | 67 (71%) | |
| High risk (VE-iBM, iEM, Comb, E-iBM) | 21 (50%) | 28 (29%) | |
| HSCT after relapse | ns | ||
| Yes | 15 (36%) | 43 (45%) | |
| No | 27 (64%) | 52 (55%) | |
| pOS5years | 0.33+/−0.08 | 0.65+/−0.05 | 0.001 |
ns not significant, WBC white blood cell count, SR/IR standard risk/intermediate risk, HR high risk, HSCT hematopoietic stem cell transplantation
aFavorable: t(12;21)(p12;q22), high hyperdiploidy (modal chromosome number ≥ 50)
bUnfavorable: t(9;22)(q34;q11), t(1;19), MLL rearrangements (11q23), hypodiploidy (modal chromosome number < 45)
cOther: non-stratifying or nonspecific cytogenetic aberrations
dDescribed in ref. [12]
eOne patient data missing
Cox’s proportional hazard regression analysis of risk factors for overall survival in relapse patients
| Risk factor | N | Reference group | HR |
|---|---|---|---|
| CIMP (−/+) | (42/95) | CIMP+ | 1.81 (1.04–3.16) (* |
| Sex (male/female) | (79/58) | Sex = female | 0.95 (0.56–1.60) |
| Age at primary diagnosis (years) | (137) | 1.04 (0.97–1.10) | |
| Initial risk group at primary diagnosis (SR/IR and HR) | (87/50) | Risk group = SR/IR | 0.96 (0.53–1.76) |
| HSCT after relapse (no/yes) | (79/58) | HSCT = no | 0.55 (0.32–0.97) (* |
| IntReALL risk class (relapse site/time to relapse (SR/HR)) | (88/49) | Risk group = SR | 3.79 (1.98–7.29) (* |
Fig. 2CIMP methylation in paired diagnosis-relapse samples from BCP-patients. a CIMP methylation percentage in 23 paired diagnostic and relapse samples from BCP-ALL patients. Mean values at diagnosis and relapse were compared by paired samples t test. b Scatter plot showing spearman’s rho correlation between CIMP methylation percentage at diagnosis and relapse in 23 BCP-ALL patients