Literature DB >> 9766745

Problems in the classification of CMML--dysplastic versus proliferative type.

U Germing1, N Gattermann, H Minning, A Heyll, C Aul.   

Abstract

The FAB group proposed to distinguish two subgroups of chronic myelomonocytic leukemia (CMML). Depending on the total leukocyte count, a myelodysplastic type (MDS-CMML) (< or = 13,000 microl(-1)) was separated from a myeloproliferative type (MPD-CMML) (> 13,000 microl(-1)). Based on retrospective analyses of 158 patients with CMML, we compared the presenting clinical and hematological features of both disorders and examined whether the refined classification is important in terms of prognosis. There were 81 patients with MDS-CMML and 77 patients with MPD-CMML. Median age of patients at diagnosis (70 versus 72 years) was not different. The sex ratio showed a preponderance of males in the MPD group (m:f; 2.1:1). Splenomegaly was more common in MPD-CMML (54 versus 30%; P = 0.002). With regard to laboratory findings, patients with MPD-CMML presented with significantly higher LDH values (medians 295 versus 231 U ml(-1); P = 0.008) and higher serum deoxythymidine kinase levels (medians 150 versus 41 U microl(-1); P = 0.0025). Except for white blood cell count (WBC), peripheral blood counts were not different. Median percentage of bone marrow blasts was 9% and cumulative survival rates were similar in both disorders. Two years after diagnosis, actuarial survival for patients with MPD-CMML was 33%, as compared to 50% for patients with MDS-CMML (P = 0.31). The probability of transformation to AML was higher in MDS-CMML (32 versus 17% after 5 years), but this difference also did not reach statistical significance. The survival of patients with MDS-CMML was similar to that of other MDS patients (RAEB) who had corresponding medullary blast counts. Using the Düsseldorf-score, we could define two risk groups within MDS-CMML with a median survial of 12 versus 40 months (P = 0.001). None of the known scoring systems could define risk groups within the MPD-CMML group. In summary, these data suggest that MDS-CMML and MPD-CMML are clinically distinguishing conditions, but the separation provides little prognostic information. Further studies are needed to clarify whether response to therapy is different in MDS-CMML and MPD-CMML.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9766745     DOI: 10.1016/s0145-2126(97)00192-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Leuk Res        ISSN: 0145-2126            Impact factor:   3.156


  14 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.  Chronic myelomonocytic leukemia prognostic classification and management: evidence base and current practice.

Authors:  Dorothée Selimoglu-Buet; Eric Solary
Journal:  Curr Hematol Malig Rep       Date:  2014-12       Impact factor: 3.952

3.  An international consortium proposal of uniform response criteria for myelodysplastic/myeloproliferative neoplasms (MDS/MPN) in adults.

Authors:  Michael R Savona; Luca Malcovati; Rami Komrokji; Ramon V Tiu; Tariq I Mughal; Attilio Orazi; Jean-Jacques Kiladjian; Eric Padron; Eric Solary; Raoul Tibes; Raphael Itzykson; Mario Cazzola; Ruben Mesa; Jaroslaw Maciejewski; Pierre Fenaux; Guillermo Garcia-Manero; Aaron Gerds; Guillermo Sanz; Charlotte M Niemeyer; Francisco Cervantes; Ulrich Germing; Nicholas C P Cross; Alan F List
Journal:  Blood       Date:  2015-01-26       Impact factor: 22.113

Review 4.  Recent Updates on Chronic Myelomonocytic Leukemia.

Authors:  Sanam Loghavi; Joseph D Khoury
Journal:  Curr Hematol Malig Rep       Date:  2018-12       Impact factor: 3.952

Review 5.  Myelodysplastic syndromes.

Authors:  Olatoyosi Odenike; John Anastasi; Michelle M Le Beau
Journal:  Clin Lab Med       Date:  2011-10-10       Impact factor: 1.935

Review 6.  Management recommendations for chronic myelomonocytic leukemia: consensus statements from the SIE, SIES, GITMO groups.

Authors:  Francesco Onida; Giovanni Barosi; Giuseppe Leone; Luca Malcovati; Enrica Morra; Valeria Santini; Giorgina Specchia; Sante Tura
Journal:  Haematologica       Date:  2013-09       Impact factor: 9.941

7.  The JAK2 V617F activating tyrosine kinase mutation is an infrequent event in both "atypical" myeloproliferative disorders and myelodysplastic syndromes.

Authors:  David P Steensma; Gordon W Dewald; Terra L Lasho; Heather L Powell; Rebecca F McClure; Ross L Levine; D Gary Gilliland; Ayalew Tefferi
Journal:  Blood       Date:  2005-04-28       Impact factor: 22.113

Review 8.  Chronic myelomonocytic leukemia: Forefront of the field in 2015.

Authors:  Christopher B Benton; Aziz Nazha; Naveen Pemmaraju; Guillermo Garcia-Manero
Journal:  Crit Rev Oncol Hematol       Date:  2015-03-14       Impact factor: 6.312

Review 9.  Chronic myelomonocytic leukemia: 2018 update on diagnosis, risk stratification and management.

Authors:  Mrinal M Patnaik; Ayalew Tefferi
Journal:  Am J Hematol       Date:  2018-06       Impact factor: 10.047

Review 10.  Therapy for Chronic Myelomonocytic Leukemia in a New Era.

Authors:  Tamara K Moyo; Michael R Savona
Journal:  Curr Hematol Malig Rep       Date:  2017-10       Impact factor: 3.952

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.