Figure 1.
Figure 1. Hierarchic clustering supervised by PAM analysis of FLT3-WT versus FLT3-ITD and FLT3-ALM, and FLT3-ITD versus FLT3-ALM samples. (A) The hierarchic clustering defined by PAM analysis of FLT3-WT versus FLT3-ITD samples; overall misclassification error is 11%. The difference in EFS between these 2 branches is 48% versus 24% (P = 0.1). (B) The differential gene expression between FLT3-WT and FLT3-ALM samples had a higher overall classification error rate, and was unable to differentiate FLT3-ALM samples from all FLT3-WT samples. (C) We show hierarchic clustering of FLT3-ITD versus FLT3-ALM samples. Overall misclassification rate is 19% and differences in gene expression may be related to their different clinical behavior, and to differences in mean age and mean WBC at presentation.

Hierarchic clustering supervised by PAM analysis of FLT3-WT versus FLT3-ITD and FLT3-ALM, and FLT3-ITD versus FLT3-ALM samples. (A) The hierarchic clustering defined by PAM analysis of FLT3-WT versus FLT3-ITD samples; overall misclassification error is 11%. The difference in EFS between these 2 branches is 48% versus 24% (P = 0.1). (B) The differential gene expression between FLT3-WT and FLT3-ALM samples had a higher overall classification error rate, and was unable to differentiate FLT3-ALM samples from all FLT3-WT samples. (C) We show hierarchic clustering of FLT3-ITD versus FLT3-ALM samples. Overall misclassification rate is 19% and differences in gene expression may be related to their different clinical behavior, and to differences in mean age and mean WBC at presentation.

Close Modal

or Create an Account

Close Modal
Close Modal