Table 1.

Incidence and outcome of FLT3/ITD mutations in acute myeloid leukemia (AML) grouped according to AML subtype. Incidences are listed as percentages within a given subtype, with the actual patient numbers below in parentheses.

Study (No. Patients)Adult AMLM3 AMLNormal/Int Cytogenetics*8:21 or INV16Poor-risk Cytogenetics** AML†20Elderly AML‡Pediatric AMLSurvival
* Normal and/or intermediate cytogenetics. This included patients with normal cytogenetics (studies 3, 8, 15, 16, and 19) and those lacking 15:17, 8:21, INV16, and poor-risk features. 
** Poor-risk cytogenetics. This included patients with monosomy 5 or 7, 5q–, 3q–, or complex karyotype. 
† Secondary AML. This was defined as AML arising out of a myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) and AML with trilineage myelodysplasia. Three of the studies listed (studies 1, 4 and 7) also included treatment-related AML in this group. 
‡ Elderly AML patients were defined as being > 55 (study 6) or > 60 (study 4) years of age. 
§ All 3 patients with high mutant-to-wild-type ratio in this study died. 
1. Horiike et al (30)      14.7% (5/34)   ND 
2. Kiyoi et al (74)  20.3% (15/74)       Decreased 
3. Yamamoto et al (429) 8.9% (81/429)  28.0% (23/82) 11.8% (4/34) 18.2% (2/11)    Decreased 
4. Rombouts et al (75) 23.7% (14/59)  24.2% (16/66)  0.0% (0/6) 18.2% (2/11) 22.9% (8/35)  Decreased 
5. Abu-Duhier et al (106)  10.0% (1/10) 22.7% (10/44) 5.8% (3/52)     Decreased 
6. Stirewalt et al (140)       33.6% (47/140)  No Effect 
7. Kottaridis et al (854)  26.6% (227/854) 36.8% (49/133) 34.2% (96/281) 8.3% (9/109) 3.4% (5/147) 27.4% (17/62)  Decreased 
8. Whitman et al (82)   28.0% (23/82)      No Effect 
9. Iwai et al (94)        5.3% (5/94) Decreased 
10. Xu et al (87)        13.8% (12/87) Decreased 
11. Kondo et al (64)        10.9% (7/64) Decreased 
12. Meshinchi et al (91)        16.5% (15/91) Decreased 
13. Liang et al (80)        11.3% (9/80) No Effect§ 
14. Thiede et al (979) 22.2% (217/979) 33.3% (13/39) 29.7% (134/451) 4.5% (4/88) 1.7% (5/298) 8.8% (3/34)   Decreased 
15. Schnittger et al (1003) 23.3.% (234/1003) 35.8% 24/67) 39.3% (149/379) 5.4% (6/11) 2.7% (3/110) 15.6% (12/77)   No Effect 
16. Boissel et al (159) 25.2% (40/159)  35.4% (28/79) 0.0% (0/23)     No Effect 
17. Noguera et al (90)  36.7% (33/90)       No Effect 
18. Frohling et al (523) 22.8% (119/523) 39.2% (20/51) 31.7% (71/224) 5.7% (4/70) 2.2% (1/45) 9.2% (7/76)   Decreased 
19. Kainz et al (100)  38.1% (8/21) 30.2% (16/53) 7.7% (2/26)     Decreased 
20. Moreno et al (208) 17.3% (36/208)   0.0% (0.14)     Decreased 
21. Jilani et al (85) 21.2% (18/85)        Decreased 
22. Arrigoni et al (45)        22.2% (10/45) Decreased 
23. Zwaan et al (234)        11.5% (27/234) Decreased 
TOTAL (4613 adult, 695 pediatric) 22.9% (986/4299) 33.6% (163/485) 32.5% (566/1741) 6.1% (32/527) 2.6% (7/617) 15.6% (46/294) 31.4% (55/175) 12.2% (85/695)  
Study (No. Patients)Adult AMLM3 AMLNormal/Int Cytogenetics*8:21 or INV16Poor-risk Cytogenetics** AML†20Elderly AML‡Pediatric AMLSurvival
* Normal and/or intermediate cytogenetics. This included patients with normal cytogenetics (studies 3, 8, 15, 16, and 19) and those lacking 15:17, 8:21, INV16, and poor-risk features. 
** Poor-risk cytogenetics. This included patients with monosomy 5 or 7, 5q–, 3q–, or complex karyotype. 
† Secondary AML. This was defined as AML arising out of a myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) and AML with trilineage myelodysplasia. Three of the studies listed (studies 1, 4 and 7) also included treatment-related AML in this group. 
‡ Elderly AML patients were defined as being > 55 (study 6) or > 60 (study 4) years of age. 
§ All 3 patients with high mutant-to-wild-type ratio in this study died. 
1. Horiike et al (30)      14.7% (5/34)   ND 
2. Kiyoi et al (74)  20.3% (15/74)       Decreased 
3. Yamamoto et al (429) 8.9% (81/429)  28.0% (23/82) 11.8% (4/34) 18.2% (2/11)    Decreased 
4. Rombouts et al (75) 23.7% (14/59)  24.2% (16/66)  0.0% (0/6) 18.2% (2/11) 22.9% (8/35)  Decreased 
5. Abu-Duhier et al (106)  10.0% (1/10) 22.7% (10/44) 5.8% (3/52)     Decreased 
6. Stirewalt et al (140)       33.6% (47/140)  No Effect 
7. Kottaridis et al (854)  26.6% (227/854) 36.8% (49/133) 34.2% (96/281) 8.3% (9/109) 3.4% (5/147) 27.4% (17/62)  Decreased 
8. Whitman et al (82)   28.0% (23/82)      No Effect 
9. Iwai et al (94)        5.3% (5/94) Decreased 
10. Xu et al (87)        13.8% (12/87) Decreased 
11. Kondo et al (64)        10.9% (7/64) Decreased 
12. Meshinchi et al (91)        16.5% (15/91) Decreased 
13. Liang et al (80)        11.3% (9/80) No Effect§ 
14. Thiede et al (979) 22.2% (217/979) 33.3% (13/39) 29.7% (134/451) 4.5% (4/88) 1.7% (5/298) 8.8% (3/34)   Decreased 
15. Schnittger et al (1003) 23.3.% (234/1003) 35.8% 24/67) 39.3% (149/379) 5.4% (6/11) 2.7% (3/110) 15.6% (12/77)   No Effect 
16. Boissel et al (159) 25.2% (40/159)  35.4% (28/79) 0.0% (0/23)     No Effect 
17. Noguera et al (90)  36.7% (33/90)       No Effect 
18. Frohling et al (523) 22.8% (119/523) 39.2% (20/51) 31.7% (71/224) 5.7% (4/70) 2.2% (1/45) 9.2% (7/76)   Decreased 
19. Kainz et al (100)  38.1% (8/21) 30.2% (16/53) 7.7% (2/26)     Decreased 
20. Moreno et al (208) 17.3% (36/208)   0.0% (0.14)     Decreased 
21. Jilani et al (85) 21.2% (18/85)        Decreased 
22. Arrigoni et al (45)        22.2% (10/45) Decreased 
23. Zwaan et al (234)        11.5% (27/234) Decreased 
TOTAL (4613 adult, 695 pediatric) 22.9% (986/4299) 33.6% (163/485) 32.5% (566/1741) 6.1% (32/527) 2.6% (7/617) 15.6% (46/294) 31.4% (55/175) 12.2% (85/695)  

or Create an Account

Close Modal
Close Modal