期刊文献+

原发骨髓增生异常综合征患者IPSS及染色体核型的临床分析

Clinical study on IPSS and karytype in the patients with primary myelodysplastic syndrome
下载PDF
导出
摘要 目的:比较原发性骨髓增生异常综合征(MDS)患者WHO(2001)分型与FAB分型的IPSS染色体核型分析及预后的相关性分析。方法:经FAB标准确诊的原发MDS的患者重新按WHO标准分型,对2种结果的IPSS及染色体异常与各亚型的关系进行分析。结果:按FAB分型各亚型的IPSS及染色体异常无显著性差异,按WHO分型的难治性细胞减少伴多系增生异常(RCMD)与难治性贫血(RA)患者染色体异常率有统计学意义(66.6%,41.7%,P<0.01),RAEB-2高危组比例明显高于RAEB-1组(25%,0%,P<0.01)。结论:原发MDS的WHO分型与FAB分型相比,前者与预后的相关性更好。 Objective:Compare the relationship among IPSS, karytype of two classifications (FAB and WHO) and prognosis of primary MDS. Method:The patients diagnosed as primary MDS according to the FAB classification were reclassified following the WHO criteria. We compared the relationship between two kinds of IPSS, karyotype aberration and subtypes. Result:According to the FAB classification, there had no significant difference in IPSS and karyotype aberration between the two subtypes. According to the WHO classification, there had significant difference in karyotype aberration between patients with RCMD and RA (66.6 % and 41.7%, respectively, P〈0. 01). The number of RAEB-2 in high-risk group were higher than that of RAEB-1 (25% and 0%, ,respectively,P〈0. 001). Conclusion:Comparing to the FAB classification of primary MDS, the WHO classification had a better correlation to the prognosis.
出处 《临床血液学杂志》 CAS 2007年第6期336-338,共3页 Journal of Clinical Hematology
关键词 骨髓增生异常综合征 FAB分型 WHO分型 染色体核型 Primary myelodysplastic syndrome FAB classification WHO classification Karyotype
  • 相关文献

参考文献8

  • 1HARRIS N L,JAFFE E S, DIEBOLD T,et al. World Health Organization classification of neoplastic diseases of the hematopoietic and lymphoid tissues: report of the Clinical Advisory Committee meeting-Airlie House [J]. J Clin Oncol, 1999,17 : 3838- 3849.
  • 2VARDIMAN J W, HARRIS N L, BRUNNING R D. TheWorld Health Organization (WHO) classification of themyeloid neoplasms[J]. Blood, 2002,100: 2292 - 2302.
  • 3STRUPP C, GATTERMANN N, GIAGOUNIDIS A, et al. Refractory anemia with excess of blasts in transformation: analysis of reclassification according to the WHO proposals[J]. Leuk Res, 2003,27: 397- 404.
  • 4GREENBERG P,COX C, LEBEAU M M,et al. International scoring system for evaluating prognosis in myelodysplastic syndromes [J]. Blood, 1997,89: 2079 -2088.
  • 5BAIN B. The WHO classification of the myelodysplastic syndromes[J]. Exp Oncol, 2004, 26: 166- 169.
  • 6BRECCIA M, CARMOSINO I, BIONDO F, et al. Usefulness and prognostic impact on survival of WHO reclassification in FAB low risk myelodyplastic syndromes[J]. Leuk Res, 2005.
  • 7KOMROKJI R S, BENNETT J M. The clinical implications of the World Health Organization's classification of myelodysplastic syndromes[J]. Curr Hematol Rep, 2005,4:175-181.
  • 8LEE J H, LEE J H, SHIN Y R,et al. Application of different prognostic scoring systems and comparison of the FAB and WHO classifications in Korean patients with myelodysplastic syndrome [J]. Leukemia, 2003,17:305-313.

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部