2018PubMedRequires access

[Transformation from promyelocytic leukemia with t (15; 17) ( q22; q21) to acute monocytic leukemia with t (11; 17) (q23; q21) in a case].

Zheng Wang, Ye Li, Hui Dang, Yan Shi, Qi He, Feng Lin, Li Bao, Ya‐Zhen Qin, Yanrong Liu, Xiao‐Jun Huang, Yue‐Yun Lai

Open publisher page 3 citations

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To report on a case of therapy-related acute monocytic leukemia(t-AML) with t(11;17) (q23;q21)/MLL-AF17q after successful treatment for acute promyelocytic leukemia(APL) with t(15;17) (q22;q21)/PML-RARα. METHODS: A MICM method (bone marrow morphology(M), immunophenotype(I), cytogenetics(C), and molecular biology(M)) was used for the diagnosis and classification of the disease at the time of onset and transformation. RESULTS: The patient was initially identified with typical morphology and immunophenotype of APL. She has carried t(15;17)(q22;q21) and PML-RARα fusion gene but was without t(11;17)(q23;q21) or MLL gene abnormalities. After 13 months of successful treatment, she has transformed to AML with typical morphology and immunophenotype. t(11;17)(q23;q21) and MLL-AF17q fusion gene were detected in her bone marrow sample, while no PLZF-RARα fusion gene was detected by real-time quantitative reverse-transcription PCR(RQ-PCR) and fluorescence in situ hybridization(FISH). CONCLUSION: t-AML is a serious complication after successful treatment of APL. t(11;17)(q23;q21) is not specific for the diagnosis of variant APL and can also be detected in t-AML. RQ-PCR and FISH are essential for the diagnosis of such patients.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

OBJECTIVE: To report on a case of therapy-related acute monocytic leukemia(t-AML) with t(11;17) (q23;q21)/MLL-AF17q after successful treatment for acute promyelocytic leukemia(APL) with t(15;17) (q22;q21)/PML-RARα. METHODS: A MICM method (bone marrow morphology(M), immunophenotype(I), cytogenetics(C), and molecular biology(M)) was used for the diagnosis and classification of the disease at the time of onset and transformation. RESULTS: The patient was initially identified with typical morphology and immunophenotype of APL. She has carried t(15;17)(q22;q21) and PML-RARα fusion gene but was without t(11;17)(q23;q21) or MLL gene abnormalities. After 13 months of successful treatment, she has transformed to AML with typical morphology and immunophenotype. t(11;17)(q23;q21) and MLL-AF17q fusion gene were detected in her bone marrow sample, while no PLZF-RARα fusion gene was detected by real-time quantitative reverse-transcription PCR(RQ-PCR) and fluorescence in situ hybridization(FISH). CONCLUSION: t-AML is a serious complication after successful treatment of APL. t(11;17)(q23;q21) is not specific for the diagnosis of variant APL and can also be detected in t-AML. RQ-PCR and FISH are essential for the diagnosis of such patients.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 3 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

OBJECTIVE: To report on a case of therapy-related acute monocytic leukemia(t-AML) with t(11;17) (q23;q21)/MLL-AF17q after successful treatment for acute promyelocytic leukemia(APL) with t(15;17) (q22;q21)/PML-RARα. METHODS: A MICM method (bone marrow morphology(M), immunophenotype(I), cytogenetics(C), and molecular biology(M)) was used for the diagnosis and classification of the disease at the time of onset and transformation. RESULTS: The patient was initially identified with typical morphology and immunophenotype of APL. She has carried t(15;17)(q22;q21) and PML-RARα fusion gene but was without t(11;17)(q23;q21) or MLL gene abnormalities. After 13 months of successful treatment, she has transformed to AML with typical morphology and immunophenotype. t(11;17)(q23;q21) and MLL-AF17q fusion gene were detected in her bone marrow sample, while no PLZF-RARα fusion gene was detected by real-time quantitative reverse-transcription PCR(RQ-PCR) and fluorescence in situ hybridization(FISH). CONCLUSION: t-AML is a serious complication after successful treatment of APL. t(11;17)(q23;q21) is not specific for the diagnosis of variant APL and can also be detected in t-AML. RQ-PCR and FISH are essential for the diagnosis of such patients.

Key concepts: Acute promyelocytic leukemia, Immunophenotyping, Fluorescence in situ hybridization, Fusion gene, Leukemia, Bone marrow, Biology, Promyelocytic leukemia protein

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
[Transformation from promyelocytic leukemia with t (15; 17) ( q22; q21) to acute monocytic leukemia with t (11; 17) (q23; q21) in a case]. — Research Paper | ScholarLens