Skip to main content
. 2022 Jun 30;14(13):3236. doi: 10.3390/cancers14133236

Table 2.

WHO category, molecular characteristics, and type of treatment of the study population.

Variable Total Cohort, n = 269 Younger Patients
(<60 y), n = 123
Older Patients (≥60 y), n = 146
WHO 2016 category, n (%) 269 123 (45.7) 146 (54.3)
AML with genetic abnormalities
 t(8;21) 6 (2.2) 5 (4.1) 1 (0.7)
 inv16 11 (4.1) 6 (4.9) 5 (3.4)
KMT2A rearranged
  t(9;11) 3 (1.1) 2 (1.6) 1 (0.7)
  t(11;19) 1 (0.4) 1 (0.8) 0
 t(6;9) 2 (0.7) 2 (1.6) 0
 inv3 0 0 0
 mutated NPM1 68 (25.3) 33 (26.8) 35 (24.0)
AML with Myelodysplasia-related changes 54 (20.1) 15 (12.2) 39 (26.7)
Therapy related 27 (10.0) 16 (13.0) 11 (7.5)
AML, NOS 95 (35.3) 43 (35.0) 52 (35.6)
Myeloid sarcoma 2 (0.7) 0 2 (1.4)
ELN 2017 Risk stratification, n (%)
 Favorable 57 (21.2) 31 (25.2) 26 (17.8)
 Intermediate 50 (18.6) 29 (23.6) 21 (14.4)
 Adverse 98 (36.4) 30 (24.4) 68 (46.6)
 Favorable/Intermediate 26 (9.7) 14 (11.4) 12 (8.2)
 Intermediate/Adverse 11 (4.1) 7 (5.7) 4 (2.7)
 Indeterminate 27 (10.0) 12 (9.8) 15 (10.3)
Mutated gene, n (%)
FLT3 * 57 (21.2) 31 (25.2) 26 (17.8)
  FLT3-ITD 44 (16.4) 25 (20.3) 19 (13.0)
  FLT3-TKD 15 (5.6) 6 (4.9) 9 (6.2)
NPM1 76 (28.3) 37 (30.1) 39 (26.7)
DNMT3A 67 (24.9) 28 (22.8) 39 (26.7)
RUNX1 25(9.3) 4 (3.3) 21 (14.4)
ASXL1 37 (13.8) 10 (8.1) 27 (18.5)
TP53 27 (10.0) 5 (4.1) 22 (15.1)
IDH1 28 (10.4) 11 (8.9) 17 (11.6)
IDH2 36 (13.4) 16 (13.0) 20 (13.7)
BCOR 15 (5.6) 7 (5.7) 8 (5.5)
SETBP1 3 (1.1) 0 3 (2.1)
ZRSR2 6 (2.2) 0 6 (4.1)
WT1 12 (4.5) 9 (7.3) 3 (2.1)
Treatment, n (%)
 Intensive chemotherapy 179 (66.5) 114 (92.7) 65 (44.5)
 Low-intensive chemotherapy (AZA/LDAC) 38 (14.1) 1 (0.8) 37 (25.3)
 Best supportive care 32 (11.9) 2 (1.6) 30 (20.5)
 Died before treatment 9 (3.3) 3 (2.4) 6 (4.1)
 Not available 11 (4.1) 3 (2.4) 8 (5.5)
 HSCT 35 (13.0) 31 (25.2) 4 (2.7)

NOS: not otherwise specified; ELN: European LeukemiaNet; AZA: azacytidine; LDAC: low-dose cytarabine; HSCT: hematopoietic stem cell transplant. * The asterisk highlights that in the indicated group, two patients (≥60 years) had concomitant FLT3-ITD and FLT3-TKD mutations. Because the FLT3-ITD allelic burden [8] was not available, patients containing both FLT3-ITD and NPM1 mutations were considered favorable|intermediate risk, whereas patients containing FLT3-ITD but no NPM1 mutation were considered intermediate|adverse risk.