scholarly journals Complex karyotype, older age, and reduced first-line dose intensity determine poor survival in core binding factor acute myeloid leukemia patients with long-term follow-up

2015 ◽  
Vol 90 (6) ◽  
pp. 515-523 ◽  
Author(s):  
Federico Mosna ◽  
Cristina Papayannidis ◽  
Giovanni Martinelli ◽  
Eros Di Bona ◽  
Angela Bonalumi ◽  
...  
2018 ◽  
Vol 36 (7) ◽  
pp. 697-703 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mazyar Shadman ◽  
Hongli Li ◽  
Lisa Rimsza ◽  
John P. Leonard ◽  
Mark S. Kaminski ◽  
...  

Purpose SWOG S0016 was a phase III randomized study that compared the safety and efficacy of R-CHOP (rituximab plus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone) with CHOP-RIT (CHOP followed by consolidation with iodine-133–tositumomab radioimmunotherapy) for previously untreated patients with follicular lymphoma. Understanding the long-term outcome of patients provides a benchmark for novel treatment regimens for FL. Patients and Methods Between 2001 and 2008, 531 previously untreated patients with FL were randomly assigned to receive either six cycles of R-CHOP or six cycles of CHOP-RIT. Patients with advanced-stage disease (bulky stage II, III, or IV) of any pathologic grade (1, 2, or 3) were eligible. Results After a median follow-up of 10.3 years, 10-year estimates of progression-free and overall survival were 49% and 78% among all patients, respectively. Patients in the CHOP-RIT arm had significantly better 10-year progression-free survival compared with patients in the R-CHOP arm (56% v 42%; P = .01), but 10-year overall survival was not different between the two arms (75% v 81%; P = .13). There was no significant difference between the CHOP-RIT and R-CHOP arms in regard to incidence of second malignancies (15.1% v 16.1%; P = .81) or myelodysplastic syndrome or acute myeloid leukemia (4.9% v 1.8%; P = .058). The estimated 10-year cumulative incidences of death resulting from second malignancies were not different (7.1% v 3.2%; P = .16), but cumulative incidence of death resulting from myelodysplastic syndrome or acute myeloid leukemia was higher in the CHOP-RIT arm compared with the R-CHOP arm (4% v 0.9%; P = .02). Conclusion Given these outstanding outcomes, immunochemotherapy should remain the standard induction approach for patients with high-risk FL until long-term follow-up of alternative approaches demonstrates superiority.


Cancer ◽  
1997 ◽  
Vol 80 (S11) ◽  
pp. 2210-2214 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charles A. Schiffer ◽  
Richard Dodge ◽  
Richard A. Larson ◽  

Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 2710-2710
Author(s):  
Nikhil Patkar ◽  
Chinmayee Kakirde ◽  
Anam Fatima Shaikh ◽  
Shrinidhi Nathany ◽  
Gaurav Chatterjee ◽  
...  

Introduction: Core binding factor acute myeloid leukemia (CBF-AML) is one of the commonest subtypes of AML characterized presence of t(8;21)(q22;q22) or inv(16)(p13q22)/t(16;16)(p13;q22). It is characterised by a high frequency of somatic mutations especially in RAS and tyrosine kinase signalling pathways. Here we investigated the feasibility of improving risk prediction of CBF-AML using machine learning algorithms. Methods: We developed a next generation sequencing panel that targeted 50 genes implicated in the pathogenesis of myeloid malignancies using single molecule molecular inversion probes. This panel was used to sequence 106 patients of CBF-AML accrued over a six year period (March 2012 - December 2018) treated with conventional "3 + 7" chemotherapy. Post data analysis, we devised a supervised machine learning (ML) approach for identification of mutations most likely to predict for favorable outcome in CBF-AML. We included somatic mutations in genes occurring in CBF-AML at a frequency of >5%. A total of 11 variables were included for feature selection to predict for favorable outcome (including mutations in ASXL2, CSF3R,FLT3, KIT, NF1, NRAS, RAD21, TET2 and WT1 genes as well as mutation burden). Approaches for supervised ML were naïve bayes, generalized linear model, logistic regression, deep learning and random forest methods. Based on the ML results top 6 selected variables were allotted an individual score. A final score for that case was devised as a sum total of the individual scores. These sum were used to generate a genetic risk for a patient. Overall survival (OS) was calculated from date of diagnosis to time of last follow up or death. Relapse free survival (RFS) was calculated from date of CR till time to relapse or death or last follow up if in CR. Results of the genetic risk were analyzed for their impact on OS and RFS using log rank test. Multivariate analysis was performed using cox proportional hazards regression model. Results: The median follow up of the cohort was 27.6 months. A total of 181 somatic mutations were identified in this subset of AML with 86.7% harbouring at least one somatic mutation (median = 2). Based on ML data, a genetic score was formulated that incorporated mutations in RAD21, FLT3, KIT D816, ASXL2, NRAS genes as well as high mutation burden (≥2) into two genetic risk classes (favorable risk and poor ML derived genetic genetic risk). Patients classified as poor genetic risk had a significantly lower OS [median OS: 34.8 months; 95% confidence interval (CI) (14.2-34.8); p=0.0086] and RFS [median RFS: 17.9 months; 95%CI (12.7-33.6); p=0.0043] as compared to patients with favorable genetic risk (median OS and RFS not reached). These results can be seen in Figure 1. On multivariate analysis poor genetic risk was the most important independent risk factor that predicted for inferior OS [hazard ratio(HR), 2.7; 95% CI 1.3 to 5.7] and RFS (HR, 2.6; 95% CI:1.3 to 5.1). Conclusions In a proof of concept, we describe a novel ML derived genomics scoring model that provides a mechanism to risk stratify CBF-AML, a seemingly homogeneous disease entity. This study, to the best of our knowledge represents a novel application of ML to CBF mutated AML. Our data indicates that this scoring system will be useful in identifying CBF mutated AML patients who are at higher risk of relapse and distinguishes them from patients who are truly good risk. Figure 1 Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document