Detection of minimal residual disease identifies differences in treatment response between T-ALL and precursor B-ALL

We performed sensitive polymerase chain reaction-based minimal residual disease (MRD) analyses on bone marrow samples at 9 follow-up time points in 71 children with T-lineage acute lymphoblastic leukemia (T-ALL) and compared the results with the precursor B-lineage ALL (B-ALL) results (n = 210) of our previous study. At the first 5 follow-up time points, the frequency of MRD-positive patients and the MRD levels were higher in T-ALL than in precursor-B-ALL, reflecting the more frequent occurrence of resistant disease in T-ALL. Subsequently, patients were classified according to their MRD level at time point 1 (TP1), taken at the end of induction treatment (5 weeks), and at TP2 just before the start of consolidation treatment (3 months). Patients were considered at low risk if TP1 and TP2 were MRD negative and at high risk if MRD levels at TP1 and TP2 were 10(-3) or higher; remaining patients were considered at intermediate risk. The relative distribution of patients with T-ALL (n = 43) over the MRD-based risk groups differed significantly from that of precursor B-ALL (n = 109). Twenty-three percent of patients with T-ALL and 46% of patients with precursor B-ALL were classified in the low-risk group (P =.01) and had a 5-year relapse-free survival (RFS) rate of 98% or greater. In contrast, 28% of patients with T-ALL were classified in the MRD-based high-risk group compared to only 11% of patients with precursor B-ALL (P =.02), and the RFS rates were 0% and 25%, respectively (P =.03). Not only was the distribution of patients with T-ALL different over the MRD-based risk groups, the prognostic value of MRD levels at TP1 and TP2 was higher in T-ALL (larger RFS gradient), and consistently higher RFS rates were found for MRD-negative T-ALL patients at the first 5 follow-up time points

Acute biphenotypic leukaemia: immunophenotypic and cytogenetic analysis

The incidence of acute biphenotypic leukaemia has ranged from less than 1% to almost 50% in various reports in the literature. This wide variability may be attributed to a number of reasons including lack of consistent diagnostic criteria, use of various panels of antibodies, and the failure to recognize the lack of lineage specificity of some of the antibodies used. The morphology, cytochemistry, immunophenotype and cytogenetics of acute biphenotypic leukaemias from our institution were studied. The diagnostic criteria took into consideration the morphology of the analysed cells, light scatter characteristics, and evaluation of antibody fluorescence histograms in determining whether the aberrant marker expression was arising from leukaemic blasts or differentiated bone marrow elements. Fifty-two of 746 cases (7%) fulfilled our criteria for acute biphenotypic leukaemias. These included 30 cases of acute lymphoblastic leukaemia (ALL) expressing myeloid antigens, 21 cases of acute myelogenous leukaemia (AML) expressing lymphoid markers, and one case of ALL expressing both B- and T-cell associated antigens. The acute biphenotypic leukaemia cases consisted of four major immunophenotypic subgroups: CD2± AML (11), CD19± AML (8), CD13 and/or CD33± ALL (24), CD11b± ALL (5) and others (4). Chromosomal analysis was carried out in 42/52 of the acute biphenotypic leukaemia cases; a clonal abnormality was found in 31 of these 42 cases. This study highlights the problems encountered in the diagnosis of acute biphenotypic leukaemia, some of which may be reponsible for the wide variation in the reported incidence of this leukaemia. We suggest that the use of strict, uniform diagnostic criteria may help in establishing a more consistent approach towards diagnosis of this leukaemic entity. We also suggest that biphenotypic leukaemia is comprised of biologically different groups of leukaemia based on immunophenotypic and cytogenetic findings.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/73301/1/j.1365-2141.1993.tb03024.x.pd