Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
addClaim

[Comparison of IPSS-R and IPSS-M in newly diagnosed myelodysplastic neoplasms: a single-center study].

Authors: Shunsuke, Otsuki; Seiichiro, Katagiri; Yuya, Arai; Shohei, Wakamatsu; Mituru, Moriyama; Akiko, Yamada; Tamiko, Suguro; +12 Authors

[Comparison of IPSS-R and IPSS-M in newly diagnosed myelodysplastic neoplasms: a single-center study].

Abstract

We compared the International Prognostic Scoring System-Revised (IPSS-R) to the International Prognostic Scoring System-Molecular (IPSS-M) in 30 patients with myelodysplastic neoplasms (MDS) newly diagnosed at our institution from January 2021 to February 2023. Molecular analysis was performed by myeloid panel. The median age was 66 years (range: 35-80), and classifications were MDS-LB (n=18), MDS IB-1 (n=1), MDS IB-2 (n=2), MDS-SF3B1 (n=2), MDS-biTP53 (n=1), and MN-pCT (n=6). Each patient had 0 to 8 (median 1) mutations. The most frequently detected mutation was the TET2 mutation, and others detected in>5 patients were U2AF1, TP53, and RUNX1 mutations. IPSS-R classification indicated that 2, 14, 5, 3, and 6 patients were very low, low, intermediate (Int), high, and very high risk, respectively, whereas the IPSS-M classification indicated that 3, 9, 7, 2, 4, and 5 cases were very low, low, moderate-low (ML), moderate-high (MH), high, and very high risk, respectively. Considering IPSS-M ML and MH as the equivalent to IPSS-R Int, 13 (43%) patients had a different risk level in the IPSS-M compared to the IPSS-R. One patient was rated low-risk by IPSS-R, but reclassified as high risk by IPSS-M. It is important to be mindful of this potential for significant discrepancies between risk assessments using IPSS-R and IPSS-M in some cases when making treatment decisions.

Keywords

Aged, 80 and over, Male, Adult, Myelodysplastic Syndromes, Mutation, Humans, Female, Middle Aged, Prognosis, Aged

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    0
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Average
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
0
Average
Average
Average
Upload OA version
Are you the author of this publication? Upload your Open Access version to Zenodo!
It’s fast and easy, just two clicks!