Figure 3
Figure 3. Kaplan-Meier survival curves for overall survival in patients with non-M3 AML (A) and in patients with CN-AML (B) in the original cohort, according to the scoring system (both P < .001). In the non-M3 AML group, patients were grouped by the scoring system based on BM LGALS3 expression and 8 other prognostic markers (age, karyotype, WBC counts, CEBPAdouble-mut, NPM1/FLT3-ITD, MLL-PTD, and mutations of WT1 and AML1/RUNX1). A score of -1 was assigned for each parameter associated with a favorable outcome (CEBPAdouble-mut and NPM1+/FLT3-ITD-), whereas a score of +1 for each factor was associated with an adverse outcome (older age, high WBC counts at diagnosis, higher BM LGALS3 expression, MLL-PTD, mutations of WT1 and AML1/RUNX1). The karyotypes were stratified into 3 groups (unfavorable, −1; intermediate, 0; and favorable, +1). Each patient had a final score by the algebraic summation of these scores. Eight patients without chromosome data were not included in the analysis. Furthermore, using 6 parameters (age, WBC counts, BM LGALS3 expression, NPM1/FLT3-ITD, CEBPAdouble-mut, and WT1 mutation) based on the scoring system mentioned earlier, patients in the CN-AML group could also easily be stratified into 4 groups with significant different prognosis (B).

Kaplan-Meier survival curves for overall survival in patients with non-M3 AML (A) and in patients with CN-AML (B) in the original cohort, according to the scoring system (both P < .001). In the non-M3 AML group, patients were grouped by the scoring system based on BM LGALS3 expression and 8 other prognostic markers (age, karyotype, WBC counts, CEBPAdouble-mut, NPM1/FLT3-ITD, MLL-PTD, and mutations of WT1 and AML1/RUNX1). A score of -1 was assigned for each parameter associated with a favorable outcome (CEBPAdouble-mut and NPM1+/FLT3-ITD-), whereas a score of +1 for each factor was associated with an adverse outcome (older age, high WBC counts at diagnosis, higher BM LGALS3 expression, MLL-PTD, mutations of WT1 and AML1/RUNX1). The karyotypes were stratified into 3 groups (unfavorable, −1; intermediate, 0; and favorable, +1). Each patient had a final score by the algebraic summation of these scores. Eight patients without chromosome data were not included in the analysis. Furthermore, using 6 parameters (age, WBC counts, BM LGALS3 expression, NPM1/FLT3-ITD, CEBPAdouble-mut, and WT1 mutation) based on the scoring system mentioned earlier, patients in the CN-AML group could also easily be stratified into 4 groups with significant different prognosis (B).

Close Modal

or Create an Account

Close Modal
Close Modal