Prognostic impact of acute myeloid leukemia classification: Importance of detection of recurring cytogenetic abnormalities and multilineage dysplasia on survival
American Journal of Clinical Pathology, ISSN: 0002-9173, Vol: 119, Issue: 5, Page: 672-680
2003
- 122Citations
- 81Captures
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations122
- Citation Indexes119
- 119
- CrossRef42
- Policy Citations2
- Policy Citation2
- Clinical Citations1
- PubMed Guidelines1
- Captures81
- Readers81
- 56
- 14
- 11
Article Description
To evaluate the prognostic impact of acute myeloid leukemia (AML) classifications, specimens from 300 patients with 20% or more bone marrow myeloblast cells were studied. Specimens were classified according to the French-American-British Cooperative Group (FAB), the World Health Organization (WHO), the Realistic Pathologic Classification, and a cytogenetic risk group scheme. Cases with fewer than 30% blast cells did not have a 5-year survival significantly different from cases with 30% or more blast cells, and survival was similar for the low blast cell count group and cases with multilineage dysplasia and 30% or more blasts. Categories of AML with recurrent cytogenetic abnormalities of t(15;17), t(8;21), inv(16)/t(16;16), and 11q23 showed significant differences in 5-year survival. No significant difference was identified between AMLs arising from myelodysplasia and de novo AMLs with multilineage dysplasia, but all cases with multilineage dysplasia had a worse survival than all other AMLs and other AMLs without favorable cytogenetics. FAB types MO, M3, and M4Eo showed differences in survival compared with all other FAB types, with MO showing a significant association with high-risk cytogenetics and 11q23 abnormalities. Other FAB groups and WHO AML, not otherwise categorized subgroups did not show survival differences. These findings suggest that the detection of recurring cytogenetic abnormalities and multilineage dysplasia are the most significant features of current AML classification.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85047688311&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1309/em7kcqr4glmhrcx4; http://dx.doi.org/10.1309/em7k-cqr4-glmh-rcx4; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12760285; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14608891; https://academic.oup.com/ajcp/article-lookup/doi/10.1309/EM7KCQR4GLMHRCX4; http://academic.oup.com/ajcp/article-pdf/119/5/672/4985480/ajcpath119-0672.pdf; http://ajcp.metapress.com/index/10.1309/EM7KCQR4GLMHRCX4; http://ajcp.metapress.com/openurl.asp?genre=article&id=doi:10.1309/EM7K-CQR4-GLMH-RCX4; https://dx.doi.org/10.1309/em7k-cqr4-glmh-rcx4; https://academic.oup.com/ajcp/article-abstract/119/5/672/1758741?redirectedFrom=fulltext; https://dx.doi.org/10.1309/em7kcqr4glmhrcx4
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know