Prognostic impact of chromosomal translocations in myelodysplastic syndromes and chronic myelomonocytic leukemia patients. A study by the spanish group of myelodysplastic syndromes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Chromosomal translocations are rare in the myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) and chronic myelomonocytic leukemia (CMML). With the exception of t(3q), translocations are not explicitly considered in the cytogenetic classification of the IPSS-R and their impact on disease progression and patient survival is unknown. The present study was aimed at determining the prognostic impact of translocations in the context of the cytogenetic classification of the IPSS-R. We evaluated 1,653 patients from the Spanish Registry of MDS diagnosed with MDS or CMML and an abnormal karyotype by conventional cytogenetic analysis. Translocations were identified in 168 patients (T group). Compared with the 1,485 patients with abnormal karyotype without translocations (non-T group), the T group had a larger proportion of patients with refractory anemia with excess of blasts and higher scores in both the cytogenetic and global IPSS-R. Translocations were associated with a significantly shorter survival and higher incidence of transformation into AML at univariate analysis but both features disappeared after multivariate adjustment for the IPSS-R cytogenetic category. Patients with single or double translocations other than t(3q) had an outcome similar to those in the non-T group in the intermediate cytogenetic risk category of the IPSS-R. In conclusion, the presence of translocations identifies a subgroup of MDS/CMML patients with a more aggressive clinical presentation that can be explained by a higher incidence of complex karyotypes. Single or double translocations other than t(3q) should be explicitly considered into the intermediate risk category of cytogenetic IPSS-R classification.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".