TRANSLATE

The aml Hub website uses a third-party service provided by Google that dynamically translates web content. Translations are machine generated, so may not be an exact or complete translation, and the aml Hub cannot guarantee the accuracy of translated content. The aml and its employees will not be liable for any direct, indirect, or consequential damages (even if foreseeable) resulting from use of the Google Translate feature. For further support with Google Translate, visit Google Translate Help.

The AML Hub is an independent medical education platform, sponsored by Astellas, Daiichi Sankyo, Johnson & Johnson, Kura Oncology and Syndax, and has been supported through educational grants from Bristol Myers Squibb and the Hippocrate Conference Institute, an association of the Servier Group. The funders are allowed no direct influence on our content. The levels of sponsorship listed are reflective of the amount of funding given. View funders.

Now you can support HCPs in making informed decisions for their patients

Your contribution helps us continuously deliver expertly curated content to HCPs worldwide. You will also have the opportunity to make a content suggestion for consideration and receive updates on the impact contributions are making to our content.

Find out more

ESH 2019 | Is there a need to change AML risk stratification?

By Eytan Stein

Share:

Featured:

Eytan SteinEytan Stein

Nov 1, 2019


The AML Global Portal were delighted to speak to Eytan Stein, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, US, during the European School of Hematology (ESH) Translational Research Conference on AML. We asked Eytan Stein: Is there a need to change AML risk stratification?

Eytan Stein discusses the current use of risk stratification systems promulgated by the World Health Organization (WHO) and European Leukemia Net (ELN) of stratifying patients into favorable, intermediate and unfavorable risk groups, which is determined by cytogenetics and molecular genetics at the time of diagnosis. He also explains the need to redefine risk stratification, even more, to take into account co-occurrence of mutations, as well as the need to create a robost clinically validated dynamic system.

Is there a need to change AML risk stratification?

Your opinion matters

Approximately what proportion of your patients with FLT3-mutations also have NPM1 and DNMT3A co-mutations?