Simultaneous Identification and Stratification of Low Molecular Risk AML Patients Using a Single LSC17-Based Nanostring Assay at Diagnosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Refractoriness to induction chemotherapy and relapse after achievement of remission are the main barriers to cure in acute myeloid leukemia (AML). Currently, most AML patients receive standard induction chemotherapy because risk stratification depends on cytogenetic and molecular tests that typically take weeks to return results. We recently reported a rapid 17-gene leukemia stem cell score (LSC17, Ng et al., Nature 2016) that can accurately determine risk within 24 to 48 hours of diagnosis. Patients with high LSC17 scores have poor outcomes with current treatments and could be enrolled in clinical trials evaluating novel upfront treatment strategies. A small subset of AML patients with normal cytogenetics, NPM1 mutation and no FLT3-ITD are classified as low molecular risk (LMR) and are considered to have better outcomes, but ~35% relapse within 2 years following conventional therapy. In our prior study, we derived an optimized, re-weighted sub-score for LMR patients in which only 3 of the 17 genes contribute to the calculated score (LSC3). A high LSC3 score identifies LMR patients who have worse outcomes following standard induction therapy, and who might benefit from novel frontline therapy. Currently however, the LSC3 score can only be employed for risk-adapted therapy decisions in the post-remission setting, as LMR patients are only identified following cytogenetic and molecular testing. Earlier identification of high-risk LMR patients will facilitate clinical trials of novel frontline therapy in this patient subset. To determine whether a subset of the LSC17 signature genes could be used to identify LMR cases at diagnosis, we applied sparse binomial regression to relate the expression of the 17 signature genes to LMR vs. non-LMR cases in a large training cohort comprising AML patients of all subtypes (GSE6891, n=495 patients including 48 [9%] LMR cases). The resulting 13-gene sub-score (LMR13) can accurately identify LMR patients in 6 large independent validation cohorts spanning n=1559 cytogenetically and molecularly diverse AML patients using gene expression data from several different platforms (Figure 1; microarray datasets: GSE37642, n=542, area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC)=0.88; GSE15434, n=251, AUROC=0.92; TCGA AML, n=183, AUROC=0.92; ALFA-0701, n=192, AUROC=0.89; RNA-Seq dataset: TCGA AML, n=169, AUROC=0.92; NanoString datasets: GSE76004, n=237, AUROC=0.96; PM AML, n=154, AUROC=0.86). Importantly, the LMR13 score for each patient can be calculated from the same NanoString assay used to determine the patient's LSC17 and LSC3 risk scores. The ability to identify LMR cases rapidly at diagnosis enhances the clinical utility of the LSC17 assay, as it will allow clinicians to use the most appropriate risk score (LSC3 vs LSC17) for all newly-diagnosed AML patients, and enable evaluation of novel upfront treatment strategies for higher-risk LMR cases. Furthermore, integration of our functionally defined stem cell gene list with patient survival data using statistical learning approaches provides a basis for ongoing characterization of the molecular pathways associated with clinical outcomes, irrespective of mutational profile. Download : Download high-res image (188KB) Download : Download full-size image Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".