Clinical Impact of Additional Cytogenetic Aberrations, <i>cKIT</i> and <i>RAS</i> Mutations, and Treatment Elements in Pediatric t(8;21)-AML: Results From an International Retrospective Study by the International Berlin-Frankfurt-Münster Study Group
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: This retrospective cohort study aimed to determine the predictive relevance of clinical characteristics, additional cytogenetic aberrations, and cKIT and RAS mutations, as well as to evaluate whether specific treatment elements were associated with outcomes in pediatric t(8;21)-positive patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Karyotypes of 916 pediatric patients with t(8;21)-AML were reviewed for the presence of additional cytogenetic aberrations, and 228 samples were screened for presence of cKIT and RAS mutations. Multivariable regression models were used to assess the relevance of anthracyclines, cytarabine, and etoposide during induction and overall treatment. End points were the probability of achieving complete remission, cumulative incidence of relapse (CIR), probability of event-free survival, and probability of overall survival. RESULTS: Of 838 patients included in final analyses, 92% achieved complete remission. The 5-year overall survival, event-free survival, and CIR were 74%, 58%, and 26%, respectively. cKIT mutations and RAS mutations were not significantly associated with outcome. Patients with deletions of chromosome arm 9q [del(9q); n = 104] had a lower probability of complete remission (P = .01). Gain of chromosome 4 (+4; n = 21) was associated with inferior CIR and survival (P < .01). Anthracycline doses greater than 150 mg/m(2) and etoposide doses greater than 500 mg/m(2) in the first induction course and high-dose cytarabine 3 g/m(2) during induction were associated with better outcomes on various end points. Cumulative doses of cytarabine greater than 30 g/m(2) and etoposide greater than 1,500 mg/m(2) were associated with lower CIR rates and better probability of event-free survival. CONCLUSION: Pediatric patients with t(8;21)-AML and additional del(9q) or additional +4 might not be considered at good risk. Patients with t(8;21)-AML likely benefit from protocols that have high doses of anthracyclines, etoposide, and cytarabine during induction, as well as from protocols comprising cumulative high doses of cytarabine and etoposide.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".