Pediatric High Risk Leukemia — Molecular Insights

Acute leukemia comprises of 31% of all cancers in children making it the most common childhood malignancy. Significant strides have been made in treatment, partly through risk stratification and intensified therapy. A number of subtypes remain at high risk for relapse and poor outcome, despite current therapies. Here we describe risk stratification and molecular diagnosis used to identify high risk leukemias and guide treatment. Specific cytogenetic alterations that contribute to high risk B and T cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL), as well as infant leukemia are discussed. Particular attention is given to genetic alterations in IKZF1, CRLF2, and JAK, that have been identified by whole genome sequencing and recently associated with Ph-like ALL. Ongoing studies of disease mechanisms and challenges in developing pre-clinical patient-derived xenograft models to evaluate therapies are discussed

The Current Genomic and Molecular Landscape of Philadelphia-like Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia

Philadelphia (Ph)-like acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) is a high-risk B-cell Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia (B-ALL) characterized by a gene expression profile similar to Ph-positive B-ALL but lacking the BCR-ABL1 translocation. The molecular pathogenesis of Ph-like B-ALL is heterogenous and involves aberrant genomics, receptor overexpression, kinase fusions, and mutations leading to kinase signaling activation, leukemogenic cellular proliferation, and differentiation blockade. Testing for the Ph-like signature, once only a research technique, is now available to the clinical oncologist. The plethora of data pointing to poor outcomes for this ALL subset has triggered investigations into the role of targeted therapies, predominantly involving tyrosine kinase inhibitors that are showing promising results

Incidence and risk factors associated with bleeding and thrombosis following chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy

Abstract Bleeding and thrombotic events are an emerging toxicity associated with chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) therapies. To determine their incidence, we retrospectively analyzed consecutive adult patients (N = 127) with large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL) or B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia (B-ALL) treated from 2017 through 2020 with axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi-cel; n = 89) or a bispecific CD19/CD22 CAR (n = 38). Twelve (9.4%) and 8 (6.3%) patients developed bleeding and thrombosis within the first 3 months, respectively. In the axi-cel subgroup, these occurred in 11.2% and 6.7%, respectively. Bleeding occurred between days 8 and 30 (median, 17.5) and thrombosis between days 2 and 91 (median, 29). Bleeding sites included genitourinary, soft tissue, intracranial, gastrointestinal, and pulmonary and were associated with features of consumptive coagulopathy. On univariate analysis, patients with bleeding were older, had lower baseline platelets (86 × 103/μL vs 178 × 103/μL; P < .01), lower platelet and fibrinogen nadirs , and elevated lactate dehydrogenase. Immune effector cell (IEC)–associated neurotoxicity syndrome (ICANS) grade ≥3 was associated with increased bleeding (50% vs 15%; P = .01), thrombosis (50% vs 16%; P = .04), prothrombin time prolongation, hypofibrinogenemia, and elevated D-dimer. Low pretreatment platelet counts were associated with bleeding in a multivariate logistic regression model. Patients with thrombocytopenia or severe ICANS are at increased risk of bleeding and should be closely monitored, particularly within the first month after CAR therapy. Future studies in larger cohorts should assess risk factors for systemic coagulopathies in CAR T therapy, including their association with neurotoxicity

Real-World Experience of Cryopreserved Allogeneic Hematopoietic Grafts during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Single-Center Report.

In response to the widespread COVID-19 pandemic, cryopreservation of allogeneic donor apheresis products was implemented to mitigate the challenges of donor availability and product transport. Although logistically beneficial, the impact of cryopreservation on clinical outcomes and graft composition remains unclear. In this study, we compared outcomes and graft composition with cryopreserved versus fresh allografts in the setting of allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (allo-HCT). We retrospectively analyzed the clinical outcomes of 30 consecutive patients who received cryopreserved allografts between March and August 2020 and 60 consecutive patients who received fresh allografts before the COVID-19 pandemic. Primary endpoints were hematopoietic engraftment and graft failure (GF), and secondary outcomes were overall survival (OS), relapse-free survival (RFS) and nonrelapse mortality (NRM). In addition, extended immunophenotype analysis was performed on cryopreserved and prospectively collected fresh apheresis samples. Compared with recipients of fresh allografts, both neutrophil and platelet recovery were delayed in recipients of cryopreserved reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) allo-HCT, with a median time to engraftment of 24 days versus 18 days (P&nbsp;=&nbsp;.01) for neutrophils and 27 days versus 18 days (P&nbsp;=&nbsp;.069) for platelets. We observed primary GF in 4 of 30 patients in the cryopreserved cohort (13.3%) versus only 1 of 60 patients (1.7 %) in the fresh cohort (P&nbsp;=&nbsp;.03). Cryopreserved RIC allo-HCT was associated with significantly lower median total, myeloid, and T cell donor chimerism at 1 month. OS and RFS were inferior for cryopreserved graft recipients (hazard ratio [HR], 2.16; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.00 to 4.67) and HR, 1.90; 95% CI, 0.95 to 3.79, respectively. Using an extended immunophenotype analysis, we compared 14 samples from the cryopreserved cohort to 6 prospectively collected fresh apheresis donor samples. These analyses showed both a decrease in total cell viability and a significantly reduced absolute number of natural killer cells (CD3-CD56+) in the cryopreserved apheresis samples. In this single-institution study, we found delayed engraftment and a trend toward clinical inferiority of cryopreserved allografts compared with fresh allografts. Further evaluation of the use of cryopreserved allografts and their impact on clinical and laboratory outcomes is warranted