↓ Skip to main content

BCR-ABL-positive acute myeloid leukemia: a new entity? Analysis of clinical and molecular features

Overview of attention for article published in Annals of Hematology, June 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
98 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
BCR-ABL-positive acute myeloid leukemia: a new entity? Analysis of clinical and molecular features
Published in
Annals of Hematology, June 2016
DOI 10.1007/s00277-016-2721-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nina Rosa Neuendorff, Thomas Burmeister, Bernd Dörken, Jörg Westermann

Abstract

BCR-ABL-positive acute myeloid leukemia (AML) is a rare subtype of AML that is now included as a provisional entity in the 2016 revised WHO classification of myeloid malignancies. Since a clear distinction between de novo BCR-ABL+ AML and chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) blast crisis is challenging in many cases, the existence of de novo BCR-ABL+ AML has been a matter of debate for a long time. However, there is increasing evidence suggesting that BCR-ABL+ AML is in fact a distinct subgroup of AML. In this study, we analyzed all published cases since 1975 as well as cases from our institution in order to present common clinical and molecular features of this rare disease. Our analysis shows that BCR-ABL predominantly occurs in AML-NOS, CBF leukemia, and AML with myelodysplasia-related changes. The most common BCR-ABL transcripts (p190 and p210) are nearly equally distributed. Based on the analysis of published data, we provide a clinical algorithm for the initial differential diagnosis of BCR-ABL+ AML. The prognosis of BCR-ABL+ AML seems to depend on the cytogenetic and/or molecular background rather than on BCR-ABL itself. A therapy with tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) such as imatinib, dasatinib, or nilotinib is reasonable, but-due to a lack of systematic clinical data-their use cannot be routinely recommended in first-line therapy. Beyond first-line treatment of AML, the use of TKI remains an individual decision, both in combination with intensive chemotherapy and/or as a bridge to allogeneic stem cell transplantation. In each single case, potential benefits have to be weighed against potential risks.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 98 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 1%
Unknown 97 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 18 18%
Student > Master 11 11%
Other 8 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 7%
Student > Bachelor 7 7%
Other 18 18%
Unknown 29 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 32 33%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 19 19%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 7%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 3%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 3%
Other 5 5%
Unknown 29 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 15 June 2016.
All research outputs
#21,293,845
of 23,923,788 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Hematology
#1,823
of 2,281 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#312,989
of 357,321 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Hematology
#17
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,923,788 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,281 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.2. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 357,321 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 23 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.