Characteristics and clinical outcomes of patients with acute myeloid leukemia with inv(3)(q21q26.2) or t(3;3)(q21;q26.2)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Acute myeloid leukemia (AML) with inv(3)(q21q26.2)/t(3;3)(q21;q26.2) has a very poor prognosis. Determinants of clinical outcomes and optimal treatment remain uncertain. We retrospectively reviewed 108 cases of AML with inv(3)/t(3;3) and evaluated clinicopathological characteristics and clinical outcomes: 53 newly diagnosed (ND) AML and 55 relapsed/refractory (R/R) AML. Median age was 55 years. White blood cell (WBC) count ≥20x109/L and platelet count ≥140x109/L was observed in 25% and 32% of ND patients, respectively. Anomalies involving chromosome 7 were identified in 56% of patients. The most frequently mutated genes were SF3B1, PTPN11, NRAS, KRAS and ASXL1. In ND patients, the composite complete remission (CRc) rate was 46% overall; 46% with high-intensity treatments and 47% with lowintensity treatments. The 30-day mortality was 14% and 0%, with high- and low-intensity treatment, respectively. In R/R patients, the CRc rate was 14%. Venetoclax based-regimens were associated with a CRc rate of 33%. The 3-year overall survival (OS) was 8.8% and 7.1% in ND and R/R patients, respectively. The 3-year cumulative incidence of relapse was 81.7% overall. Older age, high WBC, high peripheral blast count, secondary AML and KRAS, ASXL1, DNMT3A mutations were associated with worse OS in univariable analyses. The 5-year OS rates were 44% and 6% with or without hematopoietic stem cell transplantation in CR1, respectively. AML with inv(3)/t(3;3) is associated with low CR rates, very high risk of relapse and dismal long-term survival. Intensive chemotherapy and hy pomethylating agents provide similar rates of remission and patients achieving CR benefit from hematopoietic stem cell transplantation in first CR.
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) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".