uu.seUppsala University Publications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Different impact of intermediate and unfavourable cytogenetics at the time of diagnosis on outcome of de novo AML after allo-SCT: a long-term retrospective analysis from a single institution
Show others and affiliations
2012 (English)In: Medical Oncology, ISSN 1357-0560, E-ISSN 1559-131X, Vol. 29, no 4, p. 2348-2358Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Karyotype of myeloblasts at the time of AML diagnosis has been shown to be prognostic significant for pre-remission outcome and outcome after allo-SCT, but the latter requires further studies. We conducted a retrospective analysis of the impact of intermediate and unfavourable cytogenetics at the time of primary diagnosis on outcome after allo-SCT in de novo AML. The study included 169 patients who underwent allo-SCT at Karolinska University Hospital between 1980 and 2010. Intermediate and unfavourable cytogenetics were found in 129 (76%) and 40 patients (24%), respectively. Myeloablative and reduced-intensity conditioning were given to 120 (71%) and 49 (29%) patients, respectively. Allo-SCT was performed in CR1 in 122 patients (72%). TRM was 16% in both cytogenetics groups. Relapse occurred in 29% patients with intermediate and in 45% patients with unfavourable cytogenetics (P=0.01). The probabilities of 5-year OS for patients with intermediate and unfavourable cytogenetics were 60 and 43%, respectively (P=0.02). Multivariate analysis revealed intermediate cytogenetics, chronic GVHD, and recipient CMV-negative serostatus as variables associated with favourable OS. Our study showed that outcome after allo-SCT in de novo AML differs depending on cytogenetic risk-group; however its position in post-remission therapy of eligible AML patients is not threatened.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2012. Vol. 29, no 4, p. 2348-2358
National Category
Clinical Medicine
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-233796DOI: 10.1007/s12032-011-0155-yPubMedID: 22234457OAI: oai:DiVA.org:uu-233796DiVA, id: diva2:754333
Available from: 2014-10-10 Created: 2014-10-10 Last updated: 2017-12-05Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMed
In the same journal
Medical Oncology
Clinical Medicine

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 366 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf