Go to The Journal of Clinical Investigation
  • About
  • Editors
  • Consulting Editors
  • For authors
  • Publication ethics
  • Transfers
  • Advertising
  • Job board
  • Contact
  • Current issue
  • Past issues
  • By specialty
    • COVID-19
    • Cardiology
    • Immunology
    • Metabolism
    • Nephrology
    • Oncology
    • Pulmonology
    • All ...
  • Videos
  • Collections
    • Resource and Technical Advances
    • Clinical Medicine
    • Reviews
    • Editorials
    • Perspectives
    • Top read articles
  • JCI This Month
    • Current issue
    • Past issues

  • Current issue
  • Past issues
  • Specialties
  • In-Press Preview
  • Concise Communication
  • Editorials
  • Viewpoint
  • Top read articles
  • About
  • Editors
  • Consulting Editors
  • For authors
  • Publication ethics
  • Transfers
  • Advertising
  • Job board
  • Contact

Usage Information

A clinical measure of DNA methylation predicts outcome in de novo acute myeloid leukemia
Marlise R. Luskin, … , Stephen R. Master, Gerald B.W. Wertheim
Marlise R. Luskin, … , Stephen R. Master, Gerald B.W. Wertheim
Published June 16, 2016
Citation Information: JCI Insight. 2016;1(9):e87323. https://doi.org/10.1172/jci.insight.87323.
View: Text | PDF
Clinical Medicine Hematology Oncology

A clinical measure of DNA methylation predicts outcome in de novo acute myeloid leukemia

  • Text
  • PDF
Abstract

BACKGROUND. Variable response to chemotherapy in acute myeloid leukemia (AML) represents a major treatment challenge. Clinical and genetic features incompletely predict outcome. The value of clinical epigenetic assays for risk classification has not been extensively explored. We assess the prognostic implications of a clinical assay for multilocus DNA methylation on adult patients with de novo AML.

METHODS. We performed multilocus DNA methylation assessment using xMELP on samples and calculated a methylation statistic (M-score) for 166 patients from UPENN with de novo AML who received induction chemotherapy. The association of M-score with complete remission (CR) and overall survival (OS) was evaluated. The optimal M-score cut-point for identifying groups with differing survival was used to define a binary M-score classifier. This classifier was validated in an independent cohort of 383 patients from the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Trial 1900 (E1900; NCT00049517).

RESULTS. A higher mean M-score was associated with death and failure to achieve CR. Multivariable analysis confirmed that a higher M-score was associated with death (P = 0.011) and failure to achieve CR (P = 0.034). Median survival was 26.6 months versus 10.6 months for low and high M-score groups. The ability of the M-score to perform as a classifier was confirmed in patients ≤ 60 years with intermediate cytogenetics and patients who achieved CR, as well as in the E1900 validation cohort.

CONCLUSION. The M-score represents a valid binary prognostic classifier for patients with de novo AML. The xMELP assay and associated M-score can be used for prognosis and should be further investigated for clinical decision making in AML patients.

Authors

Marlise R. Luskin, Phyllis A. Gimotty, Catherine Smith, Alison W. Loren, Maria E. Figueroa, Jenna Harrison, Zhuoxin Sun, Martin S. Tallman, Elisabeth M. Paietta, Mark R. Litzow, Ari M. Melnick, Ross L. Levine, Hugo F. Fernandez, Selina M. Luger, Martin Carroll, Stephen R. Master, Gerald B.W. Wertheim

×

Usage data is cumulative from January 2022 through January 2023.

Usage JCI PMC
Text version 449 95
PDF 81 14
Figure 78 0
Table 52 0
Supplemental data 15 3
Citation downloads 25 0
Totals 700 112
Total Views 812
(Click and drag on plot area to zoom in. Click legend items above to toggle)

Usage information is collected from two different sources: this site (JCI) and Pubmed Central (PMC). JCI information (compiled daily) shows human readership based on methods we employ to screen out robotic usage. PMC information (aggregated monthly) is also similarly screened of robotic usage.

Various methods are used to distinguish robotic usage. For example, Google automatically scans articles to add to its search index and identifies itself as robotic; other services might not clearly identify themselves as robotic, or they are new or unknown as robotic. Because this activity can be misinterpreted as human readership, data may be re-processed periodically to reflect an improved understanding of robotic activity. Because of these factors, readers should consider usage information illustrative but subject to change.

Advertisement

Copyright © 2023 American Society for Clinical Investigation
ISSN 2379-3708

Sign up for email alerts