MicroRNA‑181b‑5p insufficiency predicts treatment response failure risk and unfavorable event‑free survival as well as overall survival in acute myeloid leukemia patients
- Authors:
- Published online on: August 5, 2022 https://doi.org/10.3892/ol.2022.13450
- Article Number: 330
-
Copyright: © Lu et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of Creative Commons Attribution License.
Abstract
Introduction
Acute myeloid leukemia (AML) is a malignancy of the hematopoietic stem cells characterized by the uncontrolled growth of immature myeloid cells in the bone marrow, which interferes with normal hematopoietic function (1,2). Currently, it is the most common acute leukemia among adults, with an occurrence of more than 20,000 cases every year in the US (3). Furthermore, its prognosis is relative unfavorable among all types of leukemia, including the high probability of relapse and low survival rate (2,4–6). Considering that AML is still a malignancy with unsatisfied outcomes dependent on various factors (2), the exploration of novel biomarker for predicting the treatment response of induction therapy and indicating long-term prognosis in AML patients is crucial.
MicroRNAs (miRNAs) participate in various biological processes, including hematopoietic differentiation, proliferation and leukemogenesis (7). Among them, it has been indicated that miR-181b is able to regulate drug sensitivity in AML through targeting high mobility group protein (HMGB1) and myeloid cell leukemia-1 (Mcl-1) (8). Moreover, it also has been illustrated that miR-181b is abnormally expressed in AML compared to the normal populations, as well as it correlates with the treatment response of AML (8–12). Based on the above-mentioned information, we hypothesized that miR-181b-5p expression could be a potential prognostic marker in AML patients who undergo induction therapy. However, such information is obscure.
Therefore, the aim of this study was to explore the correlation of miR-181b-5p with the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) risk classification, treatment response and long-term prognosis of AML.
Patients and methods
Subjects
Between January 2016 and December 2019, following approval by the Ethics Committee of Tongji Hospital, School of Medicine, Tongji University (Shanghai, China), 84 de novo AML patients and 30 healthy donors were consecutively recruited in this study. All eligible patients were confirmed as AML rather than acute promyelocytic leukemia, with an age above 18 years, and had no history of other malignancies. All health donors were enrolled after they agreed to donate bone marrow, and the necessary examinations were carried out for them to confirm the eligibility. Pregnant or breast-feeding subjects were excluded from the study. All subjects provided written informed consent.
Clinical data and sample collection
After recording the clinical features of the AML patients, collection of bone marrow sample was performed before they started the induction therapy. Bone marrow samples of 30 healthy donors (age range, 42–65 years; male-to-female ratio, 3:2) were collected during donation. Immediately after sample collection, human bone marrow monocyte separation solution (Beijing Biolabo Technology Co., Ltd.) was used for separation of the bone marrow mononuclear cells (BMMCs), followed by quantitative analysis of miR-181b-5p using reverse transcription-quantitative polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR) assay.
RT-qPCR assay
The RT-qPCR procedures were performed as described in a previous study (11), and the following kits were used: TRIzol™ Reagent (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Inc.) for extraction of total RNA; RT-PCR Quick Master Mix (Toyobo) for reverse transcription; SYBR® Premix DimerEraser™ (Takara Bio, Inc.) for qPCR. The expression of miR-181b-5p was normalized to the U6 gene, and the relative expression of miR-181b-5p was calculated by the 2−ΔΔCq method (13). The primer sequences for miR-181b-5p were as follows (14): Forward, 5′-GCGGATCATTCATTGCTGTCG-3′ and reverse, 5′-ATCTGGTGGCTCTCGGAGTAA-3′. For U6, the forward sequence was 5′-CGCTTCGGCAGCACATATACTA-3′ and the reverse sequence was 5′-ATGGAACGCTTCACGAATTTGC-3′.
The expression of miR-181b-5p was classified according to 4 quantiles in survival analyses: quantile 1, miR-181b-5p expression in the interval of 0–25% of total AML patients; quantile 2, miR-181b-5p expression in the interval of 26–50% of total AML patients; quantile 3, miR-181b-5p expression in the interval of 51–75% of total AML patients; quantile 4, miR-181b-5p expression in the interval of 76–100% of total AML patients. In particular, miR-181b-5p expression in the interval of 0–25% of total AML patients was defined as miR-181b-5p insufficiency.
Response data and survival data collection
All patients received standard induction therapy with 3 days of an anthracycline (e.g., daunorubicin, at least 60 mg/m2, idarubicin, 10–12 mg/m2, or anthracenedione mitoxantrone, 10–12 mg/m2) and 7 days of cytarabine (100–200 mg/m2 cont. i.v.). Complete remission (CR) patients after induction therapy were recorded for the study analysis. Follow-up was conducted every 3 months for the first 2 years, and then surveillance continued every 6 months for the following 2–3 years. The final follow-up date for study was December 31, 2020. Event-free survival (EFS) and overall survival (OS) were calculated based on the recorded date of defined events in the AML guideline (15).
Statistical analysis
Data analysis and figure plotting were performed using SPSS 20.0 (IBM Corp.) and GraphPad Prism 6.01 (GraphPad Software Inc.). Distribution characteristics of miR-181b-5p in the different subjects were displayed using a Box plot. Comparison of the expression difference of miR-181b-5p among the different subjects was determined by Kruskal-Wallis test or Mann-Whitney U test. Correlation analysis between miR-181b-5p expression and NCCN risk classification was determined by Spearman rank correlation test. The receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curve and area under the curve (AUC) were used for estimating profiles of miR-181b-5p in distinguishing different subjects. Survival data were described using the Kaplan-Meier method. The multiple comparisons of survival data were examined by log-rank test and corrected by Benjamini-Hochberg (B-H) method. Cox proportional hazards regression with forward stepwise method was applied for analysis of the prognostic factors. P-value <0.05 was considered indicative of a statistical significant difference.
Results
Baseline characteristics
For the 84 AML patients, the mean age was 58.4±12.8 years. There were 42 (50.0%) patients >60 years and 42 (50.0%) patients ≤60 years. Moreover, there were 51 (60.7%) males in these AML patients. As for FAB classification, there were 5 (6.0%) patients with M1, 28 (33.3%) patients with M2, 22 (26.2%) patients with M4 and 29 (34.5%) patients with M5. In terms of cytogenetic abnormities, there were 41 (48.8%) patients with a normal karyotype, 9 (10.7%) patients with complex karyotype and 4 (4.8%) patients with a monosomal karyotype. Regarding genetic mutations, there were 25 (29.8%) patients with NPM1 mutation, 20 (23.8%) patients with FLT3-ITD mutation, 10 (11.9%) patients with WT1 mutation and 7 (8.3%) patients with CEBPA mutation. Furthermore, according to risk classification, there were 15 (17.9%) patients with better-risk, 44 (52.4%) patients with intermediate-risk and 25 (29.8%) patients with poor-risk. The detailed characteristics of the AML patients are shown in Table I.
Comparison of miR-181b-5p expression between AML patients and healthy donors
miR-181b-5p expression was reduced in the AML patients [median value, 0.312 (0.170-0.571)] compared to the healthy donors [median value, 0.990 (0.784-1.455)] (P<0.001) (Fig. 1A). Meanwhile, the ROC curve showed that miR-181b-5p had excellent potential in discriminating AML patients from healthy donors with AUC of 0.922 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.873-0.971]. In addition, miR-181b-5p expression was 0.735 at the best cut-off point (the point with maximum value of the sum of sensitivity and specificity); the sensitivity and specificity were 0.881 and 0.833 at the best cut-off point, respectively (Fig. 1B).
Comparison of miR-181b-5p expression among patients with diverse characteristics
miR-181b-5p expression in patients stratified based on various features is compared in Fig. 2. miR-181b-5p expression was decreased in the patients with FLT3-ITD mutation compared to those without FLT3-ITD mutation (P=0.032) (Fig. 2F). Moreover, miR-181b-5p expression was attenuated in patients with WT1 mutation compared to those without WT1 mutation (P=0.017) (Fig. 2G). In addition, miR-181b-5p expression was highest in patients with better-risk classification, followed by patients with intermediate-risk classification, and lowest in patients with poor-risk classification (P=0.036) (Fig. 2I). However, no difference in miR-181b-5p expression was found among patients with different FAB classification (M1, M2, M4 or M5) (P=0.578) (Fig. 2A). Furthermore, no difference was found in miR-181b-5p expression in patients with or without normal karyotype, complex karyotype, monosomal karyotype, NMP1 mutation or CEBPA mutation (all P>0.05) (Fig. 2B-E and H).
Comparison of miR-181b-5p expression between CR patients and non-CR patients
miR-181b-5p expression was increased in CR patients [median value: 0.339 (0.209-0.595)] compared to non-CR patients [median value: 0.199 (0.068-0.452)] (P=0.030) (Fig. 3A). Meanwhile, the ROC curve illustrated that miR-181b-5p had certain ability in discriminating CR patients from non-CR patients with AUC of 0.656 (95% CI: 0.511-0.802). In addition, miR-181b-5p expression was 0.142 at the best cut-off point; the sensitivity and specificity were 0.903 and 0.500 at the best cut-off point, respectively (Fig. 3B).
Association of miR-181b-5p expression with accumulating EFS
Higher miR-181b-5p expression was correlated with increased accumulating EFS (P<0.001). Meanwhile, adjusted multiple comparisons showed that accumulating EFS was attenuated in patients with AML with miR-181b-5p quantile 1 compared to those with miR-181b-5p quantile 3 (P=0.009) and miR-181b-5p quantile 4 (P<0.001). However, no difference in accumulating EFS was found in patients with AML with miR-181b-5p quantile 1 vs. miR-181b-5p quantile 2 (P=0.076), miR-181b-5p quantile 2 vs. miR-181b-5p quantile 3 (P=0.475), miR-181b-5p quantile 2 vs. miR-181b-5p quantile 4 (P=0.251) or miR-181b-5p quantile 3 vs. miR-181b-5p quantile 4 (P=0.588) (Fig. 4). In addition, forward stepwise multivariate Cox regression analysis showed that higher miR-181b-5p expression (HR: 0.698, P=0.012) was independently associated with better EFS (Table II). These above-mentioned data imply that miR-181b-5p insufficiency is correlated with worse EFS.
Association of miR-181b-5p expression with accumulating OS
Higher miR-181b-5p expression was found to be associated with enhanced accumulating OS (P=0.037). Furthermore, adjusted multiple comparisons showed that no difference in accumulating OS was found in patients with AML with miR-181b-5p quantile 1 vs. miR-181b-5p quantile 2 (P=0.280), miR-181b-5p quantile 1 vs. miR-181b-5p quantile 3 (P=0.096), miR-181b-5p quantile 1 vs. miR-181b-5p quantile 4 (P=0.126), miR-181b-5p quantile 2 vs. miR-181b-5p quantile 3 (P=0.456), miR-181b-5p quantile 2 vs. miR-181b-5p quantile 4 (P=0.738), or miR-181b-5p quantile 3 vs. miR-181b-5p quantile 4 (P=0.680) (Fig. 5). In addition, forward stepwise multivariate Cox regression analysis illustrated that higher miR-181b-5p expression was not independently associated with accumulating OS (Table III).
Discussion
In the present study, it was found that: i) miR-181b-5p had excellent potential in discriminating AML patients from non-AML populations; ii) miR-181b-5p insufficiency was correlated with FLT3-ITD mutation, WT1 mutation and poor NCCN risk classification; iii) miR-181b-5p insufficiency was associated with treatment response failure and unfavorable long-term prognosis of AML. Previous research indicated that miR-181a-5p is a prognostic marker for AML (10). To date, only one study has proposed a correlation of miR-181b with treatment response (11), while the correlation of miR-181b-5p with survival in AML remains obscured. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study to explore the clinical role of miR-181b-5p as a biomarker of both treatment response and survival in AML.
Regarding miR-181b expression in AML patients, it has been demonstrated that miR-181b is abnormally expressed in AML patients compared to healthy populations (11,16). In addition, it also has been illustrated that miR-181b expression is decreased in relapsed/refractory AML patients (17). In this study, we discovered that miR-181b-5p expression was attenuated in AML patients. A possible reason might be that miR-181b-5p could regulate several leukemogenic signaling pathways, including Wnt, protein kinase B and Notch 1 pathways, which are correlated with the pathogenesis of AML (18–23). Therefore, its expression was attenuated in the AML patients.
In terms of the correlation between miR-181b expression and AML clinical features, it has been found that miR-181b expression is correlated with genetic mutations in AML, such as DNA methyltransferase 3 α (DNMT3a), tet methylcytosine dioxygenase 2 (TET2) and isocitrate dehydrogenase 1/2 (IDH1/2) (17). In the present study, it was demonstrated that miR-181b-5p expression was correlated with the FLT3-ITD and WT1 mutation, respectively. This finding was partially consistent with a previous study (17). In addition, insufficient expression of miR-181b-5p was correlated with poor NCCN risk classification of AML. A possible reason might be that FLT3-ITD and WTI mutations are two important factors involved in NCCN risk classification of AML (24–27). Furthermore, miR-181b-5p expression is associated with the FLT3-ITD mutation or WT1 mutation (as mentioned above). Therefore, miR-181b-5p insufficiency is correlated with poor NCCN risk classification of AML.
As for the association between miR-181b expression and prognosis of AML, it was demonstrated that reduced miR-181b expression is correlated with a lower complete remission (CR) rate in AML patients (17). Another study also illustrated that miR-181b expression is attenuated in AML patients with unfavorable overall survival (OS) (9). In the present study, we discovered that insufficient expression of miR-181b-5p was correlated with lower CR, unfavorable event-free survival (EFS) and OS. Possible explanations may be that: i) decreased expression of miR-181b-5p reduces drug sensitivity via promotion of HMGB1 and Mcl-1 expression (8). Furthermore, miR-181b-5p insufficiency was correlated with poor NCCN risk classification of AML (mentioned above), which could result in the treatment response failure of AML (28). Therefore, miR-181b-5p insufficiency is associated with poor treatment response. ii) Reduced expression of miR-181b-5p might have the capability of inhibiting apoptosis, as well as accelerating the proliferation of AML cells, which may indirectly lead to a worse long-term prognosis of AML patients (9,17,29). Thus, insufficient expression of miR-181b-5p is correlated with the unfavorable survival profile of AML.
In this study, there were several limitations: i) the sample size was not large enough and might have led to reduced strong statistical power in the analyses; ii) the follow-up period was not long enough, thus the association between miR-181b-5p expression and long-term EFS or OS of AML could be investigated in the future; iii) more comprehensive and in-depth understanding of the underlying mechanisms of miR-181b-5p in AML need to be investigated in the future, which may facilitate the development of miR-181b-5p-based treatments; iv) the correlation of miR-181b-5p with other genetic mutations in AML could be explored in the future, such as DNMT3a, TET2 and IDH1/2; and v) the correlation of miR-181b-5p with extramedullary diseases could be explored in further study.
In conclusion, miR-181b-5p insufficiency was found to be associated with high disease risk, poor induction therapy response and unfavorable survival of AML, indicating that miR-181b-5p may serve as a potential biomarker in AML and consequently improve the management of AML.
Acknowledgements
Not applicable.
Funding
Funding: Not applicable.
Availability of data and materials
The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.
Authors' contributions
AL and WZ were responsible for the conception of the present study. HL acquired the clinical data. YDi and YDo analyzed and interpreted the data. XL was responsible for statistical analysis. XW and BX made substantial contributions to analysis and interpretation of data, drafted the work and revised it critically for important intellectual content. All authors have read and approved the final manuscript. AL, WZ and HL confirm the authenticity of all the raw data. All authors read and approved the manuscript and agree to be accountable for all aspects of the research in ensuring that the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.
Ethics approval and consent to participate
This study was approved by the Ethics Committee of Tongji Hospital, School of Medicine, Tongji University (Shanghai, China) with approval number 279 on 15th April 2019. All subjects provided written informed consent.
Patient consent for publication
Not applicable.
Competing interests
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
Glossary
Abbreviations
Abbreviations:
|
AML |
acute myeloid leukemia |
|
miRNAs |
microRNAs |
|
HMGB1 |
high mobility group protein |
|
Mcl-1 |
myeloid cell leukemia-1 |
|
BMMCs |
bone marrow mononuclear cells |
|
RT-qPCR |
reverse transcription-quantitative polymerase chain reaction |
|
CR |
complete remission |
|
EFS |
event-free survival |
|
OS |
overall survival |
|
ROC |
receiver operating characteristic |
|
AUC |
area under the curve |
|
CI |
confidence interval |
References
|
Aquino VM: Acute myelogenous leukemia. Curr Probl Pediatr Adolesc Health Care. 32:50–58. 2002. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI | |
|
Shipley JL and Butera JN: Acute myelogenous leukemia. Exp Hematol. 37:649–658. 2009. View Article : Google Scholar | |
|
De Kouchkovsky I and Abdul-Hay M: ‘Acute myeloid leukemia: A comprehensive review and 2016 update’. Blood Cancer J. 6:e4412016. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI | |
|
Malfuson JV, Konopacki J, Thepenier C, Eddou H, Foissaud V and de Revel T: Fractionated doses of gemtuzumab ozogamicin combined with 3 + 7 induction chemotherapy as salvage treatment for young patients with acute myeloid leukemia in first relapse. Ann Hematol. 91:1871–1877. 2012. View Article : Google Scholar | |
|
Mika T, Ladigan S, Schork K, Turewicz M, Eisenacher M, Schmiegel W, Schroers R and Baraniskin A: Monocytes–neutrophils-ratio as predictive marker for failure of first induction therapy in AML. Blood Cells Mol Dis. 77:103–108. 2019. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI | |
|
Papaemmanuil E, Gerstung M, Bullinger L, Gaidzik VI, Paschka P, Roberts ND, Potter NE, Heuser M, Thol F, Bolli N, et al: Genomic classification and prognosis in acute myeloid leukemia. N Engl J Med. 374:2209–2221. 2016. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI | |
|
Yendamuri S and Calin GA: The role of microRNA in human leukemia: A review. Leukemia. 23:1257–1263. 2009. View Article : Google Scholar | |
|
Lu F, Zhang J, Ji M, Li P, Du Y, Wang H, Zang S, Ma D, Sun X and Ji C: miR-181b increases drug sensitivity in acute myeloid leukemia via targeting HMGB1 and Mcl-1. Int J Oncol. 45:383–392. 2014. View Article : Google Scholar | |
|
Li Z, Huang H, Li Y, Jiang X, Chen P, Arnovitz S, Radmacher MD, Maharry K, Elkahloun A, Yang X, et al: Up-regulation of a HOXA-PBX3 homeobox-gene signature following down-regulation of miR-181 is associated with adverse prognosis in patients with cytogenetically abnormal AML. Blood. 119:2314–2324. 2012. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI | |
|
Seipel K, Messerli C, Wiedemann G, Bacher U and Pabst T: MN1, FOXP1 and hsa-miR-181a-5p as prognostic markers in acute myeloid leukemia patients treated with intensive induction chemotherapy and autologous stem cell transplantation. Leuk Res. 89:1062962020. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI | |
|
Saadi MI, Arandi N, Yaghobi R, Azarpira N, Geramizadeh B and Ramzi M: Aberrant expression of the miR-181b/miR-222 after hematopoietic stem cell transplantation in patients with acute myeloid leukemia. Indian J Hematol Blood Transfus. 35:446–450. 2019. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI | |
|
Xiang L, Li M, Liu Y, Cen J, Chen Z, Zhen X, Xie X, Cao X and Gu W: The clinical characteristics and prognostic significance of MN1 gene and MN1-associated microRNA expression in adult patients with de novo acute myeloid leukemia. Ann Hematol. 92:1063–1069. 2013. View Article : Google Scholar | |
|
Livak KJ and Schmittgen TD: Analysis of relative gene expression data using real-time quantitative PCR and the 2(−Delta Delta C(T)) method. Methods. 25:402–408. 2001. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI | |
|
Liu B, Guo Z and Gao W: miR-181b-5p promotes proliferation and inhibits apoptosis of hypertrophic scar fibroblasts through regulating the MEK/ERK/p21 pathway. Exp Ther Med. 17:1537–1544. 2019.PubMed/NCBI | |
|
Dohner H, Estey EH, Amadori S, Appelbaum FR, Büchner T, Burnett AK, Dombret H, Fenaux P, Grimwade D, Larson RA, et al: Diagnosis and management of acute myeloid leukemia in adults: Recommendations from an international expert panel, on behalf of the European LeukemiaNet. Blood. 115:453–474. 2010. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI | |
|
Su R, Lin HS, Zhang XH, Yin XL, Ning HM, Liu B, Zhai PF, Gong JN, Shen C, Song L, et al: MiR-181 family: Regulators of myeloid differentiation and acute myeloid leukemia as well as potential therapeutic targets. Oncogene. 34:3226–3239. 2015. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI | |
|
Weng H, Lal K, Yang FF and Chen J: The pathological role and prognostic impact of miR-181 in acute myeloid leukemia. Cancer Genet. 208:225–229. 2015. View Article : Google Scholar | |
|
Soares-Lima SC, Pombo-de-Oliveira MS and Carneiro FRG: The multiple ways Wnt signaling contributes to acute leukemia pathogenesis. J Leukoc Biol. 108:1081–1099. 2020. View Article : Google Scholar | |
|
Ruan Z, Lu L, Zhang L and Dong M: Bone marrow stromal cells-derived microRNA-181-containing extracellular vesicles inhibit ovarian cancer cell chemoresistance by downregulating MEST via the Wnt/beta-catenin signaling pathway. Cancer Gene Ther. 28:785–798. 2021. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI | |
|
Strotbek M, Schmid S, Sanchez-Gonzalez I, Boerries M, Busch H and Olayioye MA: miR-181 elevates Akt signaling by co-targeting PHLPP2 and INPP4B phosphatases in luminal breast cancer. Int J Cancer. 140:2310–2320. 2017. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI | |
|
Fragoso R, Mao T, Wang S, Schaffert S, Gong X, Yue S, Luong R, Min H, Yashiro-Ohtani Y, Davis M, et al: Modulating the strength and threshold of NOTCH oncogenic signals by mir-181a-1/b-1. PLoS Genet. 8:e10028552012. View Article : Google Scholar | |
|
Nepstad I, Hatfield KJ, Gronningsaeter IS and Reikvam H: The PI3K-Akt-mTOR signaling pathway in human acute myeloid leukemia (AML) cells. Int J Mol Sci. 21:29072020. View Article : Google Scholar | |
|
Liu Q, Li W, Zhou Y, Jian J, Han S, Liu C, Li W, Zhu X, Ma D, Ji M and Ji C: PRKD2 promotes progression and chemoresistance of AML via regulating notch1 pathway. Onco Targets Ther. 12:10931–10941. 2019. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI | |
|
Abu-Duhier FM, Goodeve AC, Wilson GA, Gari MA, Peake IR, Rees DC, Vandenberghe EA, Winship PR and Reilly JT: FLT3 internal tandem duplication mutations in adult acute myeloid leukaemia define a high-risk group. Br J Haematol. 111:190–195. 2000. View Article : Google Scholar | |
|
Niktoreh N, Walter C, Zimmermann M, von Neuhoff C, von Neuhoff N, Rasche M, Waack K, Creutzig U, Hanenberg H and Reinhardt D: Mutated WT1, FLT3-ITD, and NUP98-NSD1 fusion in various combinations define a poor prognostic group in pediatric acute myeloid leukemia. J Oncol. 2019:16091282019. View Article : Google Scholar | |
|
Larson RA: Micro-RNAs and copy number changes: New levels of gene regulation in acute myeloid leukemia. Chem Biol Interact. 184:21–25. 2010. View Article : Google Scholar | |
|
Marcucci G, Radmacher MD, Maharry K, Mrózek K, Ruppert AS, Paschka P, Vukosavljevic T, Whitman SP, Baldus CD, Langer C, et al: MicroRNA expression in cytogenetically normal acute myeloid leukemia. N Engl J Med. 358:1919–1928. 2008. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI | |
|
Pollyea DA, Bixby D, Perl A, Bhatt VR, Altman JK, Appelbaum FR, de Lima M, Fathi AT, Foran JM, Gojo I, et al: NCCN guidelines insights: Acute myeloid leukemia, version 2.2021. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 19:16–27. 2021. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI | |
|
Chen CZ, Li L, Lodish HF and Bartel DP: MicroRNAs modulate hematopoietic lineage differentiation. Science. 303:83–86. 2004. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI |
