Table 2 Correlation between the... | American Society of Hematology

Table 2

Correlation between the expression of p16^INK4A with age at diagnosis in leukemic subgroups

AML subgroup	n	P	ρ
All patients	525	< .001	−0.202
Favorable risk	89	.749	0.034
Intermediate risk	331	< .001	−0.243
Unfavorable risk	85	< .001	−0.397
NPM1 mutation	159	.125	−0.122
NPM1 wild type	366	< .001	−0.227
FLT-3 with ITD	143	< .001	−0.328
FLT-3 without ITD	382	.003	−0.154
NPM1 mutation with FLT-3 ITD	82	.009	−0.289
NPM1 mutation without FLT-3 ITD	77	.529	0.073
NPM1 wild type with FLT-3 ITD	61	.009	−0.334
NPM1 wild type without FLT-3 ITD	305	< .001	−0.206

AML subgroup	n	P	ρ
All patients	525	< .001	−0.202
Favorable risk	89	.749	0.034
Intermediate risk	331	< .001	−0.243
Unfavorable risk	85	< .001	−0.397
NPM1 mutation	159	.125	−0.122
NPM1 wild type	366	< .001	−0.227
FLT-3 with ITD	143	< .001	−0.328
FLT-3 without ITD	382	.003	−0.154
NPM1 mutation with FLT-3 ITD	82	.009	−0.289
NPM1 mutation without FLT-3 ITD	77	.529	0.073
NPM1 wild type with FLT-3 ITD	61	.009	−0.334
NPM1 wild type without FLT-3 ITD	305	< .001	−0.206

Spearman rank correlation coefficients between the continuous variables age and the averaged p16^INK4A probe sets (n = 3) were calculated.