Gene rearrangements in bone marrow cells of patients with acute myelogenous leukemia

At diagnosis, clonal gene rearrangement probes {[}retinoic acid receptor (RAR)-alpha, major breakpoint cluster region (M-bcr), immunoglobulin (Ig)-JH, T cell receptor (TcR)-beta, myeloid lymphoid leukemia (MLL) or cytokine genes (GM-CSF, G-CSF, IL-3)] were detected in bone marrow samples from 71 of 153 patients with acute myelogenous leukemia (AML) (46%): in 41 patients with primary AML (pAML) (58%) and in 30 patients with secondary AML (42%). In all cases with promyelocytic leukemia (AML-M3) RAR-alpha gene rearrangements were detected (n = 9). Gene rearrangements in the Ig-JH or the TcR-beta or GM-CSF or IL-3 or MLL gene were detected in 12, 10, 16 and 12% of the cases, respectively, whereas only few cases showed gene rearrangements in the M-bcr (6%) or G-CSF gene (3%). Survival of pAML patients with TcR-beta gene rearrangements was longer and survival of pAML patients with IL-3 or GM-CSF gene rearrangement was shorter than in patients without those rearrangements. No worse survival outcome was seen in patients with rearrangements in the MLL, Ig-JH or M-bcr gene. In remission of AML (CR), clonal gene rearrangements were detected in 23 of 48 cases (48%) if samples were taken once in CR, in 23 of 26 cases (88%) if samples were taken twice in CR and in 23 of 23 cases (100%) if samples were studied three times in CR. All cases with gene rearrangements at diagnosis showed the same kind of rearrangement at relapse of the disease (n = 12). Our data show that (1) populations with clonal gene rearrangements can be regularly detected at diagnosis, in CR and at relapse of AML. (2) Certain gene rearrangements that are detectable at diagnosis have a prognostic significance for the patients' outcome. Our results point out the significance of gene rearrangement analyses at diagnosis of AML in order to identify `poor risk' patients - independently of the karyotype. Moreover, the persistence of clonal cells in the further course of AML can be studied by gene rearrangement analysis. Copyright (C) 2000 S. Karger AG, Basel

Cheat Sensitive Quantum Bit Commitment

We define cheat sensitive cryptographic protocols between mistrustful parties as protocols which guarantee that, if either cheats, the other has some nonzero probability of detecting the cheating. We give an example of an unconditionally secure cheat sensitive non-relativistic bit commitment protocol which uses quantum information to implement a task which is classically impossible; we also describe a simple relativistic protocol.Comment: Final version: a slightly shortened version of this will appear in PRL. Minor corrections from last versio

Using mutual information to measure order in model glass-formers

Whether or not there is growing static order accompanying the dynamical heterogeneity and increasing relaxation times seen in glassy systems is a matter of dispute. An obstacle to resolving this issue is that the order is expected to be amorphous and so not amenable to simple order parameters. We use mutual information to provide a general measurement of order that is sensitive to multi-particle correlations. We apply this to two glass-forming systems (2D binary mixtures of hard disks with different size ratios to give varying amounts of hexatic order) and show that there is little growth of amorphous order in the system without crystalline order. In both cases we measure the dynamical length with a four-point correlation function and find that it increases significantly faster than the static lengths in the system as density is increased. We further show that we can recover the known scaling of the dynamic correlation length in a kinetically constrained model, the 2-TLG.Comment: 10 pages, 12 Figure

Coin Tossing is Strictly Weaker Than Bit Commitment

We define cryptographic assumptions applicable to two mistrustful parties who each control two or more separate secure sites between which special relativity guarantees a time lapse in communication. We show that, under these assumptions, unconditionally secure coin tossing can be carried out by exchanges of classical information. We show also, following Mayers, Lo and Chau, that unconditionally secure bit commitment cannot be carried out by finitely many exchanges of classical or quantum information. Finally we show that, under standard cryptographic assumptions, coin tossing is strictly weaker than bit commitment. That is, no secure classical or quantum bit commitment protocol can be built from a finite number of invocations of a secure coin tossing black box together with finitely many additional information exchanges.Comment: Final version; to appear in Phys. Rev. Let