Skip to main content
. 2018 Mar 7;13(3):e0193249. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0193249

Table 1. Subtype classification according to BAGS for CLL sample cohorts.

Cohort n BAGS Subtypes n (%)
Pre-BI Pre-BII Immature Naive Memory Plasma cell Unclassified
DUKE 68 12 (17.6) 1 (1.5) 5 (7.4) 13 (19.1) 23 (33.8) 3 (4.4) 11 (16.2)
IDFCI 124 15 (12.1) 4 (3.2) 13 (10.5) 21 (16.9) 49 (39.5) 3 (2.4) 19 (15.3)
IIDFCI 83 11 (13.3) 0 (0) 6 (7.2) 12 (14.5) 38 (45.8) 3 (3.6) 13 (15.7)
MUNICH 127 18 (14.2) 5 (3.9) 5 (3.9) 30 (23.6) 43 (33.9) 7 (5.5) 19 (15.0)
PADOVA 112 14 (12.5) 4 (3.6) 7 (6.2) 17 (15.2) 51 (45.5) 2 (1.8) 17 (15.2)
ROCHE 318 58 (18.2) 10 (3.1) 16 (5.0) 93 (29.2) 78 (24.5) 15 (4.7) 48 (15.1)
SAPIENZA 62 8 (12.9) 2 (3.2) 0 (0.0) 20 (32.3) 20 (32.3) 2 (3.2) 10 (16.1)
UCSD 130 13 (10.0) 8 (6.2) 8 (6.2) 33 (25.4) 42 (32.3) 6 (4.6) 20 (15.4)
Totala 1024 149 (14.6) 34 (3.3) 60 (5.9) 239 (23.3) 344 (33.6) 41 (4.0) 157 (15.3)
Rangeb 62–318 10.0–18.2 0.0–6.2 0.0–10.5 14.5–32.3 24.5–45.8 1.8–5.5 15.1–16.2

aThe total number and

bfrequency range for each subtype is listed. Tests for significantly different distributions across data sets were calculated using Fisher’s exact test (P = 0.02).