Figure 4.
Specific metabolic profile of AML patients according to the mutational status of IDH. (A) Score plot of the OPLS-DA model comparing IDH wild-type patients (n = 36) vs IDH-mutated patients (n = 13). The model is robust and predictive (R2Y = 0,896; Q2 = 0,822), showing a clear separation between IDH-mutated and IDH wild-type patients. (B) 1D loading plot of IDH wild-type and IDH mutated patients, showing the main differences between the 2 groups. (C) Levels of Ala, Glu, GSH, PC, PE, 2-HG, and scyllo-I in IDH wild-type patients compared with IDH-mutated patients. Mean value ± SEM. Student t test, *P < .05, **P < .01, ***P < .001.

Specific metabolic profile of AML patients according to the mutational status of IDH. (A) Score plot of the OPLS-DA model comparing IDH wild-type patients (n = 36) vs IDH-mutated patients (n = 13). The model is robust and predictive (R2Y = 0,896; Q2 = 0,822), showing a clear separation between IDH-mutated and IDH wild-type patients. (B) 1D loading plot of IDH wild-type and IDH mutated patients, showing the main differences between the 2 groups. (C) Levels of Ala, Glu, GSH, PC, PE, 2-HG, and scyllo-I in IDH wild-type patients compared with IDH-mutated patients. Mean value ± SEM. Student t test, *P < .05, **P < .01, ***P < .001.

Close Modal

or Create an Account

Close Modal
Close Modal