BACKGROUND: In addition to the characteristic t(11;14) translocation, the genome of mantle cell lymphoma is distinguished by numerous secondary chromosomal aberrations and molecular genetic alterations. AIM: This study aimed to assess the mutational profile of mantle cell lymphoma, identify the most frequent genetic aberrations, and determine their impact on overall survival. METHODS: Twenty-four patients with classical stage III–IV mantle cell lymphoma were included. All patients underwent conventional cytogenetic analysis, fluorescence in situ hybridization, and next-generation sequencing. Karyotypes were interpreted in accordance with the International System for Human Cytogenomic Nomenclature (ISCN). Moreover, survival functions were estimated using the Kaplan–Meier method with the log-rank test. The relationship between survival time and independent variables was evaluated using univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses. RESULTS: Conventional cytogenetic analysis determined a normal karyotype in 19 (79.2%) patients. The t(11;14) translocation was detected in three patients, 17p deletion in two (8%), and a complex karyotype in two (8%). Fluorescence in situ hybridization analysis identified t(11;14) translocation in 16 (67%) patients, TP53/17p13 deletion in 4 (17%), and MYC/8q24 rearrangement in 3 (12.5%). TP53/17p13 deletion induced an independent negative effect on overall survival (p = 0.020). NGS revealed the most frequent mutations in ATM (36%), RYR1 (27%), BCR (27%), and KMT2D (23%) genes. Significant associations were observed between FAT1 and BCR (p = 0.013), MGA and KMT2D (p = 0.024), and DNMT3A and KMT2D (p = 0.043) mutations. Among the detected variants, the ATM mutation predicted poor overall survival; however, its statistical significance was lost after adjusting for TP53/17p13 deletion (p = 0.099). CONCLUSION: Analysis of the mutational profile revealed the most frequent aberrations—mutations in ATM, BCR, and KMT2D genes—in mantle cell lymphoma, which potentially contribute to the tumor’s pathogenesis.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Nemstsveridze et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: