Treatment of Acute Myeloid Leukemia with 20-30% Bone Marrow Blasts

The transition of patients with ≥20% <30% bone marrow (BM) blast from the FAB category of myelodysplasia to the family of acute myeloid leukemia (AML) according to the recent WHO classification has not resolved the argument as to whether the natural history and responsiveness to therapy of these diseases is comparable to that of AML with > 30% BM blast. These controversies are even more manifest when it comes to elderly patients in whom concern for intensive chemotherapy (IC) related toxicity is the critical determinant for the therapeutic choice. In fact, due to concerns of treatment-related morbidity and mortality associated with delivery of IC, approximately only 30% of all patients ≥65 years are considered eligible for this approach. Therefore, a great deal of attention has been dedicated to alternative agents such as hypomethylators (azacitidine and decitabine). Actually, these agents have shown efficacy with reduced toxicity when administered to elderly patients with 20–30% BM blasts and not eligible for IC. In the present review, we will discuss the clinical results achieved in the treatment of elderly patients with 20%–30% BM blasts AML using intensive chemotherapy (IC) or hypomethylating agents. Overall, our survey of the literature suggests that only controlled, randomized, clinical trials will answer the question as to whether hypomethylating agents has the potential to substitute for IC even in elderly patients with an optimal functional status

The addition of rituximab to fludarabine improves clinical outcome in untreated patients with ZAP-70-negative chronic lymphocytic leukemia.

Clinical trials of monoclonal antibodies in combination with chemotherapy have reported previously unattained response rates in patients with B-cell chronic lymphocytic leukemia (B-CLL); however, the analysis of ZAP-70 protein and/or CD38 may explain better the discordant outcomes independent of treatment

CD90/Thy-1 is preferentially expressed on blast cells of high risk acute myeloid leukaemias

Different transformation mechanisms have been proposed for elderly acute myeloid leukaemia (AML) and secondary AML (sAML) when compared with de novo AML or AML of younger patients. However, little is known regarding differences in the immunophenotypic profile of blast cells in these diseases. We systematically analysed, by flow cytometry, 148 patients affected by de novo (100 cases) or sAML (48 cases). By defining a cut-off level of 20% of CD34+ cells co-expressing CD90, the frequency of CD90+ cases was higher in sAML (40%) versus de novo AML (6%, P < 0.001), elderly AML (>60 years) (24%) versus AML of younger patients (10%, P = 0.010) and poor- versus good-risk karyotypes (according to the Medical Research Council classification, P < 0.001). The correlation between CD90 expression, sAML and unfavourable karyotypes was confirmed by analysing the subset of CD34+ AML cases alone (91/148). Consistently, univariate analysis showed that expression of CD90 was statistically relevant in predicting a shorter survival in CD90+ AML patients (P = 0.042). Our results, demonstrating CD90 expression in AML with unfavourable clinical and biological features, suggest an origin of these diseases from a CD90-expressing haemopoietic progenitor and indicate the use of CD90 as an additional marker of prognostic value in AML

Toward optimization of postremission therapy for residual disease-positive patients with acute myeloid leukemia

Purpose:Despite the identification of several baseline prognostic indicators, the outcome of patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) is generally heterogeneous. The effects of autologous (AuSCT) or allogeneic stem-cell transplantation (SCT) are still under evaluation. Minimal residual disease (MRD) states may be essential for assigning patients to therapy-dependent risk categories. Patients and Methods: By multiparametric flow cytometry, we assessed the levels of MRD in 142 patients with AML who achieved complete remission after intensive chemotherapy. Results: A level of 3.5 x 10(-4) residual leukemia cells (RLCs) after consolidation therapy was established to identify MRD-negative and MRD-positive cases, with 5-year relapse-free survival (RFS) rates of 60% and 16%, respectively (P <.0001) and overall survival (OS) rates of 62% and 23%, respectively (P=.0001). Of patients (n = 77) who underwent a transplantation procedure (56 AuSCT and 21 SCT procedures); 42 patients (55%) were MRD positive (28 patients who underwent AuSCT and 14 patients who underwent SCT) and 35 patients (45%) were MRD negative (28 patients who underwent AuSCT and seven who underwent SCT). MRD-negative patients had a favorable prognosis, with only eight (22%) of 35 patients experiencing relapse, whereas 29 (69%) of 42 MRD-positive patients experienced relapse (P <.0001). In this high-risk group of 42 patients, we observed that 23 (82%) of 28 of those who underwent AuSCT experienced relapse, whereas six (43%) of 14 who underwent SCT experienced relapse (P=.014). Patients who underwent SCT also had a higher likelihood of RFS (47% v 14%). Conclusion A threshold of 3.5 x 10(-4) RLCs postconsolidation is critical for predicting disease outcome. MRD-negative patients have a good outcome regardless of the type of transplant they receive. In the MRD-positive group, AuSCT does not improve prognosis and SCT represents the primary option

Azacitidine for the treatment of lower risk myelodysplastic syndromes : a retrospective study of 74 patients enrolled in an Italian named patient program.

BACKGROUND: Azacitidine induces responses and prolongs overall survival compared with conventional care regimens in patients who have high-risk myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS). However, limited data are available concerning the efficacy and safety of azacitidine in patients who have lower risk MDS. METHODS: The authors retrospectively evaluated 74 patients with International Prognostic Scoring System low-risk or intermediate 1-risk MDS, who received azacitidine on a national named patient program. At baseline, 84% of patients were transfusion-dependent, 57% had received erythropoietin, and 51% were aged >70 years. Azacitidine was administered subcutaneously for 5 days (n = 29 patients), 7 days (n = 43 patients), or 10 days (n = 2 patients) every month at a dose of 75 mg/m(2) daily (n = 45 patients) or at a fixed dose of 100 mg daily (n = 29 patients) and for a median of 7 cycles (range, 1-30 cycles). RESULTS: According to the 2006 International Working Group criteria, overall response rate (ORR) was 45.9%, including complete responses (10.8%), partial responses (9.5%), hematologic improvements (20.3%), and bone marrow complete responses (5.4%). The ORR was 51.6% in 64 patients who completed > or = 4 cycles of treatment. The median duration of response was 6 months (range, 1-30 months). After a median follow-up of 15 months, 71% of patients remained alive. A survival benefit was observed in responders versus nonresponders (94% vs 54% of patients projected to be alive at 2.5 years, respectively; P < .0014). The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events were myelosuppression (21.6%) and infection (6.8%). CONCLUSIONS: The current results indicated that azacitidine may be a feasible and effective treatment for patients with lower risk MDS

Clinical significance of bax/bcl-2 ratio in chronic lymphocytic leukemia

In chronic lymphocytic leukemia the balance between the pro-apoptotic and anti-apoptotic members of the bcl-2 family is involved in the pathogenesis, chemorefractoriness and clinical outcome. Moreover, the recently proposed anti-bcl-2 molecules, such as ABT-199, have emphasized the potential role of of bcl-2 family proteins in the context of target therapies. We investigated bax/bcl-2 ratio by flow cytometry in 502 patients and identified a cut off of 1.50 to correlate bax/bcl-2 ratio with well-established clinical and biological prognosticators. Bax/bcl-2 was 1.50 or over in 263 patients (52%) with chronic lymphocytic leukemia. Higher bax/bcl-2 was associated with low Rai stage, lymphocyte doubling time over 12 months, beta-2 microglobulin less than 2.2 mg/dL, soluble CD23 less than 70 U/mL and a low risk cytogenetic profile (P<0.0001). On the other hand, lower bax/bcl-2 was correlated with unmutated IGHV (P<0.0001), mutated NOTCH1 (P<0.0001) and mutated TP53 (P=0.00007). Significant shorter progression-free survival and overall survival were observed in patients with lower bax/bcl-2 (P<0.0001). Moreover, within IGHV unmutated (168 patients) and TP53 mutated (37 patients) subgroups, higher bax/bcl-2 identified cases with significant longer PFS (P=0.00002 and P=0.039). In multivariate analysis of progression-free survival and overall survival, bax/bcl-2 was an independent prognostic factor (P=0.0002 and P=0.002). In conclusion, we defined the prognostic power of bax/bcl-2 ratio, as determined by a flow cytometric approach, and highlighted a correlation with chemoresistance and outcome in chronic lymphocytic leukemia. Finally, the recently proposed new therapies employing bcl-2 inhibitors prompted the potential use of bax/bcl-2 ratio to identify patients putatively resistant to these molecules

Assessment of the consistency and robustness of results from a multicenter trial of remission maintenance therapy for acute myeloid leukemia

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Data from a randomized multinational phase 3 trial of 320 adults with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) demonstrated that maintenance therapy with 3-week cycles of histamine dihydrochloride plus low-dose interleukin-2 (HDC/IL-2) for up to 18 months significantly improved leukemia-free survival (LFS) but lacked power to detect an overall survival (OS) difference.</p> <p>Purpose</p> <p>To assess the consistency of treatment benefit across patient subsets and the robustness of data with respect to trial centers and endpoints.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Forest plots were constructed with hazard ratios (HRs) of HDC/IL-2 treatment effects versus no treatment (control) for prospectively defined patient subsets. Inconsistency coefficients (I²) and interaction tests (X²) were used to detect any differences in benefit among subsets. Robustness of results to the elimination of individual study centers was performed using "leave-one-center-out" analyses. Associations between treatment effects on the endpoints were evaluated using weighted linear regression between HRs for LFS and OS estimated within countries.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The benefit of HDC/IL-2 over controls was statistically consistent across all subsets defined by baseline prognostic variables. I²and <it>P</it>-values of X²ranged from 0.00 to 0.51 and 0.14 to 0.91, respectively. Treatment effects were statistically significant in 14 of 28 subsets analyzed. The "leave-one-center-out" analysis confirmed that no single center dominated (<it>P</it>-values ranged from 0.004 to 0.020 [mean 0.009]). The HRs representing the HDC/IL-2 effects on LFS and OS were strongly correlated at the country level (R²= 0.84).</p> <p>Limitations</p> <p>Small sample sizes in some of the subsets analyzed.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>These analyses confirm the consistency and robustness of the HDC/IL-2 effect as compared with no treatment. LFS may be an acceptable surrogate for OS in future AML trials. Analyses of consistency and robustness may aid interpretation of data from multicenter trials, especially in populations with rare diseases, when the size of randomized clinical trials is limited.</p> <p>Trial Registration</p> <p>ClinicalTrials.gov: <a href="http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00003991">NCT00003991</a></p

Technical Aspects of Flow Cytometry-based Measurable Residual Disease Quantification in Acute Myeloid Leukemia: Experience of the European LeukemiaNet MRD Working Party

Measurable residual disease (MRD) quantified by multiparameter flow cytometry (MFC) is a strong and independent prognostic factor in acute myeloid leukemia (AML). However, several technical factors may affect the final read-out of the assay. Experts from the MRD Working Party of the European LeukemiaNet evaluated which aspects are crucial for accurate MFC-MRD measurement. Here, we report on the agreement, obtained via a combination of a cross-sectional questionnaire, live discussions, and a Delphi poll. The recommendations consist of several key issues from bone marrow sampling to final laboratory reporting to ensure quality and reproducibility of results. Furthermore, the experiences were tested by comparing two 8-color MRD panels in multiple laboratories. The results presented here underscore the feasibility and the utility of a harmonized theoretical and practical MFC-MRD assessment and are a next step toward further harmonization

ELN2017 risk stratification improves outcome prediction when applied to the prospective GIMEMA AML1310 protocol

The 2017 version of the European LeukemiaNet (ELN) recommendations, by integrating cytogenetics and mutational status of specific genes, divides patients with acute myeloid leukemia into 3 prognostically distinct risk categories: favorable (ELN2017-FR), intermediate (ELN2017-IR), and adverse (ELN2017-AR). We performed a post hoc analysis of the GIMEMA (Gruppo Italiano Malattie EMatologiche dell’Adulto) AML1310 trial to investigate the applicability of the ELN2017 risk stratification to our study population. In this trial, after induction and consolidation, patients in complete remission were to receive an autologous stem cell transplant (auto-SCT) if categorized as favorable risk or an allogeneic stem cell transplant (allo-SCT) if adverse risk. Intermediate-risk patients were to receive auto-SCT or allo-SCT based on the postconsolidation levels of measurable residual disease as measured by using flow cytometry. Risk categorization was originally conducted according to the 2009 National Comprehensive Cancer Network recommendations. Among 500 patients, 445 (89%) were reclassified according to the ELN2017 criteria: ELN2017-FR, 186 (41.8%) of 455; ELN2017-IR, 179 (40.2%) of 445; and ELN2017-AR, 80 (18%) of 455. In 55 patients (11%), ELN2017 was not applicable. Two-year overall survival (OS) was 68.8%, 51.3%, 45.8%, and 42.8% for the ELN2017-FR, ELN2017-IR, ELN2017-not classifiable, and ELN2017-AR groups, respectively (P, .001). When comparing the 2 different transplant strategies in each ELN2017 risk category, a significant benefit of auto-SCT over allo-SCT was observed among ELN2017-FR patients (2-year OS of 83.3% vs 66.7%; P 5 .0421). The 2 transplant procedures performed almost equally in the ELN2017-IR group (2-year OS of 73.9% vs 70.8%; P 5 .5552). This post hoc analysis of the GIMEMA AML1310 trial confirms that the ELN2017 classification is able to accurately discriminate patients with different outcomes and who may benefit from different transplant strategies. This trial was registered as EudraCT number 2010-023809-36 and at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT01452646

A phase 1b/2b multicenter study of oral panobinostat plus azacitidine in adults with MDS, CMML or AML with less than or equal to 30% blasts

Treatment with azacitidine (AZA), a demethylating agent, prolonged overall survival (OS) vs conventional care in patients with higher-risk myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS). As median survival with monotherapy is <2 years, novel agents are needed to improve outcomes. This phase 1b/2b trial (n=113) was designed to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) or recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) of panobinostat (PAN)+AZA (phase 1b) and evaluate the early efficacy and safety of PAN+AZA vs AZA monotherapy (phase 2b) in patients with higher-risk MDS, chronic myelomonocytic leukemia or oligoblastic acute myeloid leukemia with <30% blasts. The MTD was not reached; the RP2D was PAN 30 mg plus AZA 75 mg/m2. More patients receiving PAN+AZA achieved a composite complete response ([CR)+morphologic CR with incomplete blood count+bone marrow CR (27.5% (95% CI, 14.6–43.9%)) vs AZA (14.3% (5.4–28.5%)). However, no significant difference was observed in the 1-year OS rate (PAN+AZA, 60% (50–80%); AZA, 70% (50–80%)) or time to progression (PAN+AZA, 70% (40–90%); AZA, 70% (40–80%)). More grade 3/4 adverse events (97.4 vs 81.0%) and on-treatment deaths (13.2 vs 4.8%) occurred with PAN+AZA. Further dose or schedule optimization may improve the risk/benefit profile of this regimen