NOTCH1, SF3B1 and BIRC3 Mutations in Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia (CLL) Patients Requiring First-LINE Treatment: Correlation with Biological Parameters and Response to Treatment

Blood ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 120 (21) ◽  
pp. 1784-1784 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sabina Chiaretti ◽  
Marilisa Marinelli ◽  
Ilaria Del Giudice ◽  
Silvia Bonina ◽  
Sara Gabrielli ◽  
...  

Abstract Abstract 1784 Introduction: The introduction of whole exome sequencing has allowed to unravel novel molecular lesions in CLL. NOTCH1, SF3B1 and BIRC3 mutations are detected, according to the phases of disease, in 4–12%, 5–17% and 4–24% of patients, respectively. In retrospective studies, their presence has been shown to correlate with overall survival (OS) and treatment-free interval shortening. Aims: To define the incidence, correlation with known prognostic factors and clinical impact of NOTCH1, SF3B1 and BIRC3 mutations in CLL patients undergoing first-line treatment. Methods: We evaluated 162 CLL patients enrolled in the GIMEMA LLC0405 protocol (n=80) for patients aged <60 yrs and in the ML21445 protocol (n=82) for elderly patients (aged >65 yrs or 60–65 if not eligible for fludarabine-based programs). In the GIMEMA LLC0405 protocol, patients were stratified into low and high-risk: patients with del17p or with del11q plus an unmutated IGHV status and/or CD38 positivity and/or ZAP70 positivity were considered as high-risk (HR) and underwent Fludarabine plus Campath, followed by stem cell transplantation procedures, whereas low-risk patients received Fludarabine and Cyclophosphamide. The MLL21445 protocol consisted of 8 cycles of Chlorambucil and 6 of Rituximab induction treatment. NOTCH1 (exon 34), SF3B1 (exons 14 and 15) and BIRC3 (exons 2–9, including splicing sites) were screened by Sanger sequencing on either genomic DNA (gDNA) or whole genome amplified DNA (WGA) collected at the time of treatment. These studies were not part of the clinical protocols. Results: NOTCH1 mutations were detected at the time of treatment in 18 cases (22%) enrolled in the LLC0405 study. There was a significant association with high-risk stratification (p=0.036), namely with an IGHV unmutated status (p=0.0035), CD38 (p=0.03), +12 (p=0.034) and, partly, ZAP-70 expression (p=0.059). While the overall response rate (ORR) did not differ between NOTCH1 mutated vs wild-type (WT) cases (82% vs 77%, respectively), the complete response (CR) rate was significantly lower in NOTCH1 mutated patients (43% for WT vs 17% for NOTCH1 mutated cases; p=0.05). So far, no significant difference between mutated and WT patients has emerged in terms of OS and progression-free survival (PFS); this may be contributed by the fact that most NOTCH1 mutated cases were HR and were therefore treated more aggressively. SF3B1 mutations were recorded in 9 cases (11%); no significant associations were found with known biological parameters and, so far, with the ORR and CR rate. A single case harbored a BIRC3 mutation; this patient had an IGHV unmutated status, no FISH abnormalities and a concomitant SF3B1 mutation. In the ML21445 cohort, NOTCH1 mutations were found in 12 cases (15%), were associated with an unmutated IGHV status (p=0.047) and ZAP-70 expression (p=0.007), and did not impact on the ORR and CR rate. SF3B1 mutations were found in 11 cases (13%); no significant associations were found with known biological parameters and the ORR rate. Of interest, only 1/11 SF3B1 mutated patients achieved a CR. BIRC3 mutations were recorded in 3 patients (3.6%); of these, 2 were IGHV mutated, 1 had no cytogenetic abnormalities and 1 carried a del11q, while the third patient was IGHV unmutated status and had no cytogenetic abnormalities. No NOTCH1 and/or SF3B1 mutations were detected. Overall, NOTCH1, SF3B1 and BIRC3 mutations were largely mutually exclusive among each other and with TP53 lesions in the whole cohort. Conclusions: This study confirms the association of NOTCH1 mutations with unfavorable biologic markers and +12, while the presence of SF3B1 mutations was not coupled to poor prognostic markers in CLL patients requiring first-line treatment. Furthermore, it suggests that NOTCH1 mutations impact on the CR rate of young patients receiving Fluda-based regimens, while SF3B1 appears to impact on the CR rate of elderly patients treated with Chlorambucil and Rituximab. Given the small numbers of patients harboring BIRC3, it is at present difficult to draw any conclusion on the clinical impact of this mutation in the cohort of patients hereby analyzed. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

2013 ◽  
Vol 68 ◽  
pp. S16
Author(s):  
Philip Borg ◽  
John M. Trotter ◽  
Heather Harris ◽  
Nick Everett ◽  
Krish Ravi ◽  
...  

Blood ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 112 (11) ◽  
pp. 4449-4449
Author(s):  
Vadim Ivanov ◽  
Diane Coso ◽  
Jerome Rey ◽  
Therese Aurran ◽  
Anne-Marie Stoppa ◽  
...  

Abstract Limited data is available concerning feasibility and efficacy of high dose therapy (HDT) supported by autologous PBSCT in elderly patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL). In young patients with poor prognostic features intensification supported by PBSCT as a part of first-line treatment suggests survival benefit. It is not clear if the same strategy is applicable to the older patients. The Institute Paoli-Calmettes database was reviewed for all DLBCL patients who received BEAM followed by PBSCT in patients &gt;=60 years old between January 1998 and December 2006 (9 years). All patients were HIV-negative and received BEAM intensification as a part of front-line treatment. All of them were in a complete or partial response after CHOP or R-CHOP induction prior to autograft. Twenty seven auto-transplanted patients were identified (median age 63 y, range 60–68). This cohort was compared with closely matched group of 37 patients of same age range, who received first-line CHOP or R-CHOP regimen without intensification in the same 9-years interval. Only patients in a complete response after first line were included. As frontline autoPBSCT was performed in high-risk patients, the group without HDT was naturally privileged in the terms of Ann-Arbor stage and aaIPI index. There was significant difference in the localised vs disseminated disease (stage I–II: 54% in no-HDT vs 26% in HDT group, p=0.03)) and aaIPI (0–1: 66% in no-HDT vs 37% in HDT, p=0.046) between the two groups. Factors evaluated included treatment-related mortality (TRM), overall survival (OS) and event-free survival (EFS). TRM in the HDT group (1/27 pts (3,7%)) was comparable with previously published data. The estimated 5-year OS was 75,5% (95%CI 52–90 %) for HDT group compared to 79,9% (95%CI 58–92%) in the no-HDT group (p=0,75). There were 8 events (1 TRM and 7 relapses) in the HDT group and 11events (all relapses) in no-HDT (5-year EFS 49,4% vs 64,2%, p=0.45). We conclude that frontline autologous PBSCT with BEAM conditioning can be safely performed in patients aged 60 years or above with DLBCL after CHOP of R-CHOP induction. There was no difference in OS and EFS between cohorts with and without intensification even if the auto-transplantation procedure was reserved for the high risk patients. We conclude that first-line HDT with autologous PBSCT in older patients with high-risk IPI score might improve survival in this group and produce results similar to those in the low-risk group.


Blood ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 128 (22) ◽  
pp. 4634-4634
Author(s):  
Angelo Belotti ◽  
Rossella Ribolla ◽  
Claudia Crippa ◽  
Vincenza Orlando ◽  
Mariella D'Adda ◽  
...  

Abstract Introduction: Immunoglobulin light chain amyloidosis (AL) may occur in association with a recognizable plasma cell (PC) clone diagnostic for multiple myeloma (MM) both with CRAB symptoms (AL-CRAB) and without them but with more than 10% marrow PCs (AL-PCMM). Prognosis of AL-CRAB and AL-PCMM was significantly poorer than AL in a large retrospective study by the Mayo Clinic (Kourelis et al, JCO 2013). Treatment with autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) improved the 5-y overall survival (OS) rates of all the three entities by approximately 40%. Therefore it is debated if patients with AL should receive more MM-oriented treatment including ASCT and if patients with AL-PCMM or AL-CRAB should receive the same treatment as MM patients. Aims: to contribute to this debate we analysed the outcome of patients with amyloidosis treated at our center according to their underlying disease: AL, AL-PMCC and AL-CRAB. Furthermore, we analysed the outcome according to the use of ASCT as part of first line treatment strategy. Methods: Of 53 patients newly diagnosed between Jan 1999 to June 2016 (median age 62 years), 19 (36%) were affected by AL, whereas 23 (43%) presented with AL-PCMM and 11 (21%) with AL-CRAB. Of 53 patients 18 (34%) underwent first line ASCT (21% of AL patients, 35% of AL-PCMM and 55% of AL-CRAB patients), upfront (6) or following induction chemotherapy (12). The 35 patients (66%) who didn't receive ASCT were treated with CyBorD regimen (21), melphalan-dexamethasone (8), VMP (4) or lenalidomide-dexamethasone (2). Risk groups were identified as follows: cTnI >0.1ng/ml and/or ECOG PS ³3: high risk; age ²65 years with normal cTnI levels, ECOG PS <3 and eGFR > 50ml/min: low risk. Intermediate risk patients were defined if not meeting criteria for high or low risk. Mayo Stage classification (Dispenzieri et al, JCO 2004) was also applied to stratify risk categories. MM diagnosis was made according to IMWG criteria. Haematological and organ response (OR), OS and event free survival (EFS: time to 2nd line therapy or death) were analysed. Results: the proportion of high risk patients was 37%, 44% and 18% in AL, AL-PCMM and AL-CRAB, respectively, whereas the proportion of Mayo stage III patients was 47%, 30% and 9% for each subgroup. Median dFLC was similar (150, 150 and 146, respectively), such as baseline NT-proBNP (1318, 1301 and 1396). No difference was observed in terms of haematologic and organ response between patients with AL only or with concomitant MM: overall response rate (ORR) and complete remission (CR) were 63% and 37% in AL only patients and 88% and 32% if concomitant MM was present, whereas organ response was 47% and 56%, respectively. Similar results were seen among high risk or Mayo Stage III patients between the two subgroups. Haematologic response was similar between patients receiving ASCT in first line treatment and patients who did not: ORR and CR rates were 89% and 44% in the ASCT group and 71% and 29% in the no ASCT group, respectively. However, OR was significantly higher in the ASCT group (83% vs 37%, p 0.0014). Toxicity was manageable in both groups. After a median follow up of 32 months no significant difference was seen overall between AL only and AL with concomitant MM in terms of EFS (65% vs 85% at 2 years, respectively; HR 1,46, 95% CI 0,64-3,35) and OS (71% vs 87% at 2 years, respectively; HR 2,28, 95% CI 0,75-6,95). ASCT significantly improved both EFS and OS, comparing patients receiving or not transplantation (EFS 87% vs 64% at 2 years, p 0,013; HR 0,41, 95% CI 0,21-0,83; OS 100% vs 71% at 2 years, p 0,005; HR 0,23, 95% CI 0,08-0,64, see Figure 1). Of note, in patients achieving OR, similar OS was observed regardless of having received ASCT or not. Our data confirm the survival advantage with ASCT reported by Kourelis et al. The better outcome observed in AL with concomitant MM may be due to the more frequent use of a transplant strategy in first line treatment for AL-MM at our institution. Conclusion: We confirm that selected patients with AL AL-PCMM and AL-CRAB may have a survival advantage when receiving ASCT. These results may be related to the higher OR rates obtained with ASCT and to the improvement in OS in patients achieving OR. As no difference in terms of treatment response were observed between different underlying diseases, our study also supports the use of conventional MM treatment therapies incorporating high doses of melphalan followed by ASCT also for patients with AL Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.


2010 ◽  
Vol 102 (10) ◽  
pp. 1468-1473 ◽  
Author(s):  
J Feliu ◽  
M J Safont ◽  
A Salud ◽  
F Losa ◽  
C García-Girón ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document