Fig. 4: Differences in survival times between clusters. | Communications Medicine

Fig. 4: Differences in survival times between clusters.

From: Unsupervised meta-clustering identifies risk clusters in acute myeloid leukemia based on clinical and genetic profiles

Fig. 4: Differences in survival times between clusters.The alternative text for this image may have been generated using AI.

Survival times with regard to event-free (EFS), relapse-free (RFS) and overall survival (OS) were compared using the Kaplan-Meier-method and log-rank test. Results for the original cohort are shown in panels A–C. These differed significantly between the four clusters: While cluster D showed relatively favorable outcomes followed by cluster C, contrastingly, B was characterized by poor long-term survival followed by cluster A. This is most evident regarding EFS (panel A) and OS (panel C) while in RFS (panel B), both clusters A and B as well as C and D were largely overlapping. For the external validation cohort, no information regarding EFS were available. With respect to RFS (panel D) and OS (panel E), clusters again showed significantly different outcomes with cluster D bearing the most favorable and cluster B bearing the least favorable outcome. Numbers at risk are shown for the respective time points (0, 50, 100, 150 months). Colored bands represent 95%-confidence intervals. nCluster A = 424 patients, nCluster B = 256 patients, nCluster C = 536 patients, nCluster D = 167 patients.

Back to article page