Figure 3.
Specific metabolic profile of AML patients according to the mutational status of FLT3-ITD. (A) Score plot of the OPLS-DA model comparing FLT3 wild-type patients (n = 32) vs FLT3-ITD patients (n = 13). The model is very robust and predictive (R2Y = 0,913; Q2 = 0,713). The separation between FLT3-ITD patients and FLT3 wild-type patients is clear. (B) Levels of Gln, PCr/Cr, scyllo-I, Ala, Cho, PE, and τ in FLT3 wild-type patients compared with FLT3-ITD patients. Mean value ± SEM. Student t test, *P < .05, ***P < .001.

Specific metabolic profile of AML patients according to the mutational status of FLT3-ITD. (A) Score plot of the OPLS-DA model comparing FLT3 wild-type patients (n = 32) vs FLT3-ITD patients (n = 13). The model is very robust and predictive (R2Y = 0,913; Q2 = 0,713). The separation between FLT3-ITD patients and FLT3 wild-type patients is clear. (B) Levels of Gln, PCr/Cr, scyllo-I, Ala, Cho, PE, and τ in FLT3 wild-type patients compared with FLT3-ITD patients. Mean value ± SEM. Student t test, *P < .05, ***P < .001.

Close Modal

or Create an Account

Close Modal
Close Modal