Adverse prognostic impact of CD36 and CD2 expression in adult de novo acute myeloid leukemia patients

Perea, Granada; Domingo, Alícia; Villamor, Neus; Palacios, Carlos Adolfo; Juncà, Jordi; Torres, Pio; Llorente, A.; Fernández, Carlos García-Gutiérrez; Tormo, Mar; Llano, Maria Paz Queipo De; Bargay, Joan; Gallart, M.; Florensa, Lourdes; Vivancos, P; Martı́, Josep; Font, Ll.; Berlanga, Juan José; Esteve, Jordi; Bueno, Javier; Ribera, Josep‐Marǐa; Brunet, Salut; Sierra, Jordi; Jf, Nomdedéu

doi:10.1016/j.leukres.2005.02.015

Cited by 46 publications

(40 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Expression of CD117 was seen in 72.4% of non-APL AML cases and in 80.8% of APL cases. Similar findings were reported by previous studies [18][19][20]. So, MPO and CD117 are not reliable markers for differentiation between APL and non-APL AML.…”

Section: Leukemia Subtypessupporting

confidence: 89%

Flowcytometric Immunophenotypic Profile of Acute Leukemia: Mansoura Experience

Salem

El-Aziz

2011

Indian J Hematol Blood Transfus

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Acute leukemia (AL) displays characteristic patterns of antigen expression, which facilitate their identification and proper classification. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the diagnostic usefulness of commonly used immune-markers for immunophenotyping of AL and to define the best immune-markers to be used for proper diagnosis and classification of AL. Besides, to recognize the frequency of different AL subtypes and the antigen expression profile in our Egyptian patients. We retrospectively analyzed the immunophenotypic data of 164 de novo AL patients from our institution during 2009 and 2010. Among these patients, 68.9% were classified as acute myeloblastic leukemia (AML) while 31.1% classified as acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL). The commonest FAB subtype in AML group was AML-M4/5 (34.5%) which may differ from most published data. As regard ALL, there were 74.5% with B-ALL and 25.5% with T-ALL. It was found that combined use of HLADR and CD34 was much more helpful in distinguishing APL from non-APL AML than either of these antigens alone. It was found that cCD79a and CD19 were the most sensitive marker for B-ALL while cCD3, CD7 and CD5 were the most sensitive antigens for T-ALL. Our analysis of AL phenotypes proved that employed antibody panels are adequate for proper diagnosis and classification of AL. Flowcytometry was found to be especially useful in the identification of AML-M0 and differentiation of APL from non-APL AML. Immunophenotyping results and FAB classification of our AL patients were comparable to internationally published studies apart from predominance of AML-M4/5 and more frequent APL.

show abstract

Section: Leukemia Subtypessupporting

confidence: 89%

Flowcytometric Immunophenotypic Profile of Acute Leukemia: Mansoura Experience

Salem

El-Aziz

2011

Indian J Hematol Blood Transfus

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…AML is a heterogeneous group of leukemias in which myeloid maturation is blocked at different differentiation stages, resulting in single-or mixedcell lineage leukemic blasts. Thus, almost all AML cells express CD13, CD33, and CD117 [37], of which most co-express CD36 [34]. Furthermore, the expression of CD36 antigen on AML cells is related to a higher risk of relapse and a lower leukemia-free survival, and has been suggested as a key marker for an adverse prognosis irrespective of genetic abnormalities [37].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Thus, almost all AML cells express CD13, CD33, and CD117 [37], of which most co-express CD36 [34]. Furthermore, the expression of CD36 antigen on AML cells is related to a higher risk of relapse and a lower leukemia-free survival, and has been suggested as a key marker for an adverse prognosis irrespective of genetic abnormalities [37]. MDS are also heterogeneous diseases of bone marrow cell precursors, with five categories including RAEB (refractory anemia with excess of blasts) [38].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Identification of CD13+CD36+ cells as a common progenitor for erythroid and myeloid lineages in human bone marrow

Chen

Gao

Zhu

et al. 2007

Experimental Hematology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective-To identify bi-potential precursor cells of erythroid and myeloid development in human bone marrow.Materials and Methods-Cells co-expressing CD13 and CD36 (CD13 + CD36 + ) were investigated by analyzing cell surface marker expression during erythroid development (induced with a combination of cytokines plus erythropoietin [EPO]), or myeloid development (induced with the same cocktail of cytokines plus granulocyte-colony stimulating factor [G-CSF]) of bone marrow derived CD133 cells in liquid cultures. CD13 + CD36 + subsets were also isolated on the 14 th day of cultures and further evaluated for their hematopoietic clonogenic capacity in methylcellulose.Results-Colony-forming analysis of sorted CD13 + CD36 + cells of committed erythroid and myeloid lineages demonstrated that these cells were able to generate erythroid, granulocyte, and mixed erythroid -granulocyte colonies. In contrast, CD13 + CD36 − or CD13 − CD36 + cells exclusively committed to granulocyte/monocyte or erythroid colonies, respectively, but failed to form mixed erythroid -granulocyte colonies; no colonies were detected in CD13 − CD36 − cells with lineagesupporting cytokines. In addition, our data confirmed that EPO induced both erythroid and myeloid commitment, while G-CSF only supported the differentiation of the myeloid lineage.Conclusions-The present data identify some CD13 + CD36 + cells as bi-potential precursors of erythroid and myeloid commitment in normal hematopoiesis. They provide a physiological explanation for the cell identification of myeloid and erythroid lineages observed in hematopoietic diseases. This unique fraction of CD13 + CD36 + cells may be useful for further studies on regulating erythroid and myeloid differentiation during normal and malignant hematopoiesis.

show abstract

“…In fact, only two larger studies specifically focusing on immunophenotypic findings in AMLs with trisomy 8 have been reported to date; to the best of our knowledge no such investigations have been performed on MDS with +8. Casasnovas et al [68] showed that trisomy 8-positive AMLs often express CD13 and CD33 and that this karyotypic subset differs from other cytogenetically abnormal AMLs by having a lower frequency of CD34 expression, being similar to AMLs with a normal karyotype, and it has been reported that +8 is significantly associated with expression of CD36, a monocytic marker [69]. Further studies are definitely needed in order to confirm and extend these findings.…”

Section: Morphologic Immunophenotypic and Prognostic Featuresmentioning

confidence: 95%