Premium
A study to determine whether trisomy 8, deleted 9q and trisomy 22 are markers of cryptic rearrangements of PML/RARα , AML1/ETO and CBFB/MYH11 respectively in acute myeloid leukaemia
Author(s) -
Stephen E. Langabeer,
David Grimwade,
Helen M. Walker,
Joanne Rogers,
Alan Kenneth Burnett,
Anthony H. Goldstone,
David C. Linch
Publication year - 1998
Publication title -
british journal of haematology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.907
H-Index - 186
eISSN - 1365-2141
pISSN - 0007-1048
DOI - 10.1046/j.1365-2141.1998.00686.x
Subject(s) - chromosomal translocation , cytogenetics , trisomy , biology , trisomy 8 , fusion gene , gene rearrangement , karyotype , chromosome , genetics , gene
Acute myeloid leukaemia (AML) patients with either a t(15;17), t(8;21) or inv(16) at diagnosis have ‘good‐risk’ disease with a favourable response to therapy and improved survival. Detection of cryptic fusion genes created by these translocations has been reported where there is no cytogenetic evidence of the corresponding abnormality. It is likely that these cases share the same favourable prognosis. Secondary cytogenetic changes commonly associated with these rearrangements are +8 with t(15;17), del(9q) with t(8;21) and +22 with inv(16). These secondary abnormalities are also observed alone, raising the possibility that they may be markers of underlying cryptic rearrangements. In order to determine the frequency of these rearrangements in AML cases with +8, del(9q) or +22 we have performed an analysis of 63 such patients in whom there was no evidence of a t(15;17), t(8;21) or inv(16) by cytogenetics. No disease‐related fusion transcripts were identified, indicating that the secondary changes are rarely markers for cryptic rearrangements.