Clinical Relevance of Cytogenetics Abnormalities in Adult Patients with Acquired Aplastic Anaemia.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The clinical relevance of cytogenetics abnormalities in aplastic anaemia (AA) patients at time of diagnosis is unclear. We evaluated the clinical course of 81 AA patients with successful cytogenetics at diagnosis and treated with immunosuppressive therapy (IST) from January 1993 to March 2004. A cytogenetic study was considered to be successful if there were a minimum of 15 evaluable metaphases in the absence of a clonal abnormality. Response to IST, survival and later clonal complications in patients with an abnormal karyotype (n=10) was compared to those with a normal karyotype (n=71). The cytogenetic abnormalities at diagnosis consisted of trisomy 6 (n=2), trisomy 8 (n=2), trisomy 15 (n=2), monosomy 7 (n=1), add(10) (n=1), t(3;11) (n=1) and t(4;6) (n=1). Four out of five evaluable patients with a trisomy responded to a first or subsequent course of IST. One patient with monosomy 7 achieved a complete response and later developed haemolytic PNH but with no recurrence of the monosomy 7. None of the patients with a non-numerical karyotypic abnormality responded to IST. No significant differences in 4-year event-free survival (EFS) (54% vs. 30%, p=0.15), overall survival (OS) (84% vs. 80%, p=0.33) or later clonal disorders (PNH, MDS and AML) were observed between the patients with a normal karyotype and those with an abnormal karyotype. Advanced age (≥60 years) was the only independent poor prognostic factor for survival in a multivariate analysis. Among the patients with a normal karyotype (n=71), 6 patients later developed a clonal cytogenetic abnormality with a cumulative risk of 10% at 4 years. These abnormalities were trisomy 15 (n=2), trisomy 6(n=1), monosomy 7 (n=2) and t(13;15) (n=1). None of the three patients who acquired trisomies developed any clinically significant problem, while acquisition of monosomy 7 was associated with a transformation to MDS/AML. Our data show that AA patients with a trisomy cytogenetic clone at diagnosis show a similar response to IST, evolution to later clonal abnormalities and survival, compared to those AA patients with a normal karyotype.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".