Whole-transcriptome analysis in acute lymphoblastic leukemia: a report from the DFCI ALL Consortium Protocol 16-001
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The molecular hallmark of childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) is characterized by recurrent, prognostic genetic alterations, many of which are cryptic by conventional cytogenetics. RNA sequencing (RNA-seq) is a powerful next-generation sequencing technology that can simultaneously identify cryptic gene rearrangements, sequence mutations and gene expression profiles in a single assay. We examined the feasibility and utility of incorporating RNA-seq into a prospective multicenter phase 3 clinical trial for children with newly diagnosed ALL. The Dana-Farber Cancer Institute ALL Consortium Protocol 16-001 enrolled 173 patients with ALL who consented to optional studies and had samples available for RNA-seq. RNA-seq identified at least 1 alteration in 157 patients (91%). Fusion detection was 100% concordant with results obtained from conventional cytogenetic analyses. An additional 56 gene fusions were identified by RNA-seq, many of which confer prognostic or therapeutic significance. Gene expression profiling enabled further molecular classification into the following B-cell ALL (B-ALL) subgroups: high hyperdiploid (n = 36), ETV6-RUNX1/-like (n = 31), TCF3-PBX1 (n = 7), KMT2A-rearranged (KMT2A-R; n = 5), intrachromosomal amplification of chromosome 21 (iAMP21) (n = 1), hypodiploid (n = 1), Philadelphia chromosome (Ph)-positive/Ph-like (n = 16), DUX4-R (n = 11), PAX5 alterations (PAX5 alt; n = 11), PAX5 P80R (n = 1), ZNF384-R (n = 4), NUTM1-R (n = 1), MEF2D-R (n = 1), and others (n = 10). RNA-seq identified 141 nonsynonymous mutations in 93 patients (54%); the most frequent were RAS-MAPK pathway mutations. Among 79 patients with both low-density array and RNA-seq data for the Philadelphia chromosome-like gene signature prediction, results were concordant in 74 patients (94%). In conclusion, RNA-seq identified several clinically relevant genetic alterations not detected by conventional methods, which supports the integration of this technology into front-line pediatric ALL trials. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT03020030.
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 | 0.016 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
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".