Real-world validation study of the LSC17 score for risk prediction in patients with newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia

Acute myeloid leukemia (AML) patients exhibit diverse molecular and cytogenetic changes with heterogeneous outcomes. The functionally-derived LSC17 gene expression score has demonstrated strong prognostic significance in retrospective analyses of adult and pediatric AML cohorts, where above-median...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Tracy Murphy, Boyang Zhang, Tong Zhang, Ian King, Jose-Mario Capo-Chichi, Vikas Gupta, Dawn Maze, Caroline J. McNamara, Mark D. Minden, Aaron D. Schimmer, Andre C. Schuh, Hassan Sibai, Karen W.L. Yee, Andrea Arruda, Zhibin Lu, Dina Khalaf, Chantal Rockwell, Brian Leber, Mitchell Sabloff, Anne Tierens, Tracy L. Stockley, Steven M. Chan, Stanley W.K. Ng, Jean C.Y. Wang
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Ferrata Storti Foundation 2025-07-01
Series:Haematologica
Online Access:https://haematologica.org/article/view/12171
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Acute myeloid leukemia (AML) patients exhibit diverse molecular and cytogenetic changes with heterogeneous outcomes. The functionally-derived LSC17 gene expression score has demonstrated strong prognostic significance in retrospective analyses of adult and pediatric AML cohorts, where above-median scores are associated with worse outcomes compared to below-median scores in intensively-treated patients. Here we used a laboratory-developed clinically-validated NanoStringbased LSC17 assay to test the prognostic value of the LSC17 score in a prospective multicentre study of 276 newly-diagnosed AML patients. Each patient’s score was classified as high or low by comparison to a previously-established reference score. In the entire cohort, a high LSC17 score was associated with poor risk features, including advanced age and unfavorable genetic mutations. In the subset of 190 patients treated intensively, a high LSC17 score was associated with lower remission rates (63% vs 94% after induction, P
ISSN:0390-6078
1592-8721