Table 8

Comparative analysis of the predictive capacity of scoring systems for CMML patients by their concordance probability estimate and ability to segregate different risk groups for OS and evolution to AML in the validation cohort

Scoring system and risk groupsMedian OS (mo)Predictive capacity for OSAML evolution at 2 y (%)Predictive capacity for AML evolution
CPSS  CPE = 0.653 CPE = 0.668 
 Low 61 Low vs intermediate-1, P = .013; low vs intermediate-2, P < .001; low vs high, P < .001; intermediate-1 vs intermediate-2, P = .001; intermediate-1 vs high, P < .001; intermediate-2 vs high, P = .009 Low vs intermediate-1, P = .034; low vs intermediate-2, P < .001; low vs high, P < .001; intermediate-1 vs intermediate-2, P = .041; intermediate-1 vs high, P < .001; intermediate-2 vs high, P = .021 
 Intermediate-1 31 25 
 Intermediate-2 15 49 
 High 100 
Worsley et al10   CPE = 0.554 CPE = 0. 587 
 Low 35 Low vs high, P = .008 33 Low vs high, P = .003 
 High 20 44 
Germing et at  CPE = 0.558 CPE = 0.588 
 Low 12 Low vs intermediate, P = .239; low vs high, P = .583; intermediate-1 vs high, P < .001 26 Low vs intermediate, P = .731; low vs high, P = .351; intermediate-1 vs high, P = .002 
 Intermediate 31 27 
 High 15 50 
Gonzalez-Medina et al11   CPE = 0.559 CPE = 0.533 
 Low 31 Low vs high, P = .006. 29 Low vs high, P = .310. 
 High 16 41 
Greenberg et al (IPSS)  CPE = 0.636 CPE = 0.700 
 Low 40 Low vs intermediate-1, P = .063; low vs intermediate-2, P < .001; low vs high, P < .001; intermediate-1 vs. intermediate-2, P = .001; intermediate-1 vs high, P < .001; intermediate-2 vs high, P = .052 Low vs intermediate-1, P = .071; low vs intermediate-2, P < .001; low vs high, P < .001; intermediate-1 vs intermediate-2, P = .001; intermediate-1 vs high, P < .001; intermediate-2 vs high, P = .318 
 Intermediate-1 29 21 
 Intermediate-2 15 68 
 High 67 
Greenberg et al (IPPS-R)  CPE = 0.643 CPE = 0.698 
 Very low 52 Very low vs low, P = .075; very low vs intermediate, P = .046; very low vs high, P < .001; very low vs very high, P < .001; low vs intermediate, P < .989; low vs high, P = .001; low vs very high, P < .001; intermediate vs high, < .001; intermediate vs very high, P < .001; high vs very high, P = .022 Very low vs low, P = .262; very low vs intermediate, P = .027; very low vs high, P < .001; very low vs very high, P < .001; low vs intermediate, P < .040; low vs high, P < .001; low vs very high, P < .001; intermediate vs high, = .001; intermediate vs very high, P = .001; high vs very high, P = .475 
 Low 40 16 
 Intermediate 30 30 
 High 15 58 
 Very high 80 
Alternative CPSS  CPE = 0.664 CPE = 0.669 
 Low 62 Low vs intermediate-1, P = .023; low vs intermediate-2, P < .001; low vs high, P < .001; intermediate-1 vs intermediate-2, P = .001; intermediate-1 vs high, P < .001; intermediate-2 vs high, P = .043 Low vs intermediate-1, P = .074; low vs intermediate-2, P < .001; low vs high, P < .001; intermediate-1 vs intermediate-2, P = .010; intermediate-1 vs high, P < .001; intermediate-2 vs high, P = .081 
 Intermediate-1 36 23 
 Intermediate-2 15 52 
 High 10 82 
Scoring system and risk groupsMedian OS (mo)Predictive capacity for OSAML evolution at 2 y (%)Predictive capacity for AML evolution
CPSS  CPE = 0.653 CPE = 0.668 
 Low 61 Low vs intermediate-1, P = .013; low vs intermediate-2, P < .001; low vs high, P < .001; intermediate-1 vs intermediate-2, P = .001; intermediate-1 vs high, P < .001; intermediate-2 vs high, P = .009 Low vs intermediate-1, P = .034; low vs intermediate-2, P < .001; low vs high, P < .001; intermediate-1 vs intermediate-2, P = .041; intermediate-1 vs high, P < .001; intermediate-2 vs high, P = .021 
 Intermediate-1 31 25 
 Intermediate-2 15 49 
 High 100 
Worsley et al10   CPE = 0.554 CPE = 0. 587 
 Low 35 Low vs high, P = .008 33 Low vs high, P = .003 
 High 20 44 
Germing et at  CPE = 0.558 CPE = 0.588 
 Low 12 Low vs intermediate, P = .239; low vs high, P = .583; intermediate-1 vs high, P < .001 26 Low vs intermediate, P = .731; low vs high, P = .351; intermediate-1 vs high, P = .002 
 Intermediate 31 27 
 High 15 50 
Gonzalez-Medina et al11   CPE = 0.559 CPE = 0.533 
 Low 31 Low vs high, P = .006. 29 Low vs high, P = .310. 
 High 16 41 
Greenberg et al (IPSS)  CPE = 0.636 CPE = 0.700 
 Low 40 Low vs intermediate-1, P = .063; low vs intermediate-2, P < .001; low vs high, P < .001; intermediate-1 vs. intermediate-2, P = .001; intermediate-1 vs high, P < .001; intermediate-2 vs high, P = .052 Low vs intermediate-1, P = .071; low vs intermediate-2, P < .001; low vs high, P < .001; intermediate-1 vs intermediate-2, P = .001; intermediate-1 vs high, P < .001; intermediate-2 vs high, P = .318 
 Intermediate-1 29 21 
 Intermediate-2 15 68 
 High 67 
Greenberg et al (IPPS-R)  CPE = 0.643 CPE = 0.698 
 Very low 52 Very low vs low, P = .075; very low vs intermediate, P = .046; very low vs high, P < .001; very low vs very high, P < .001; low vs intermediate, P < .989; low vs high, P = .001; low vs very high, P < .001; intermediate vs high, < .001; intermediate vs very high, P < .001; high vs very high, P = .022 Very low vs low, P = .262; very low vs intermediate, P = .027; very low vs high, P < .001; very low vs very high, P < .001; low vs intermediate, P < .040; low vs high, P < .001; low vs very high, P < .001; intermediate vs high, = .001; intermediate vs very high, P = .001; high vs very high, P = .475 
 Low 40 16 
 Intermediate 30 30 
 High 15 58 
 Very high 80 
Alternative CPSS  CPE = 0.664 CPE = 0.669 
 Low 62 Low vs intermediate-1, P = .023; low vs intermediate-2, P < .001; low vs high, P < .001; intermediate-1 vs intermediate-2, P = .001; intermediate-1 vs high, P < .001; intermediate-2 vs high, P = .043 Low vs intermediate-1, P = .074; low vs intermediate-2, P < .001; low vs high, P < .001; intermediate-1 vs intermediate-2, P = .010; intermediate-1 vs high, P < .001; intermediate-2 vs high, P = .081 
 Intermediate-1 36 23 
 Intermediate-2 15 52 
 High 10 82 

CPE, concordance probability estimate.

or Create an Account

Close Modal
Close Modal