Early T-cell precursor acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ETP-ALL) is a distinct subtype of T lymphoblastic leukemia (T-ALL) identified in 2009, due to its unique immunophenotypic and genomic profile. The outcome of patients was poor in earlier studies, and they were prone to have induction failure, with more frequent relapse/refractory disease. Recent advances had been made in discoveries of genetic aberrations and molecular pathogenesis of ETP-ALL. However, the diagnosis and management of ETP-ALL is still challenging. There are limited choices of novel therapies so far. In this review article, it highlighted the diagnostic issue of ETP-ALL, pitfall in diagnosis, and strategy of accurate diagnosis. The review also summarized current understanding of molecular mechanism of leukemogenesis. The emerging role of risk-adapted therapy and allogenic stem cell transplant in optimizing the outcome of patients with ETP-ALL was discussed. Finally, some potential novel therapies were proposed based on the current understanding of molecular pathogenesis.
Background: Therapy-related acute myeloid leukemia (AML) is a well-described entity and known to carry a worse prognosis, compared to de novo AML. In the current study, we sought to describe the presenting features and outcome of patients with AML, in the setting of previous history of cancer with or without exposure to chemotherapy or radiotherapy.
Methods: A Mayo Clinic database of patients with AML was queried to identify patients with a previous history of cancer, both hematologic and solid tumors. A comparative analysis of presenting features, treatment details and survival were performed between patients with therapy-related AML (Group A) and those with AML and a history of cancer that had been managed with surgery alone (Group B).
Results: A total of 250 patients (median age 68 years, range 19-90; 60% males) with AML and a previous history of cancer (both hematologic and solid) were identified; 182 (73%) cases were determined to be therapy-related AML (Group A) while the remaining 68 (27%) did not receive chemotherapy or radiotherapy for their antecedent cancer (Group B) (Table). Among group A patients 106 (58%) were exposed to chemotherapy, 37 (20%) to radiotherapy and 39 (22%) to combination chemotherapy and radiotherapy for their cancer.
At the time of AML diagnosis, adverse karyotype was noted in 91 (51%) group A and 12 (19%) group B patients (p<0.0001); the incidence of adverse karyotype in patients exposed to chemotherapy vs radiotherapy alone vs combined chemoradiotherapy was 54% (57/106), 30% (11/37), and 59% (23/39) respectively (p=0.04). Group A patients, compared to those in group B, included more females (46% vs 24%; p=0.001), and more preceding hematologic malignancies (p=<0.0001). Next generation sequencing was performed in 74 patients and the results showed no significant difference between groups A and B (Table).
Treatment and outcome in Groups A and B: Intensive and less intensive AML-directed chemotherapy were given to 100 (55%) and 44 (24%) patients in group A and 38 (56%) and 14 (21%) patients in group B (P=0.8). 79 (65%) remissions (complete remission (CR) 42 (29%) and CR with incomplete count recovery (CRi) 37 (26%) were documented in Group A and 37 (71%) remissions (CR: 21 (40%) and CRi=16 (31%) in Group B (P=0.2). After a median follow-up of 8.4 months (range: 0.9-217), 184 deaths were documented: 132 (72.5%) in Group A and 52 (76.5%) in Group B (P=0.5). 52 (36%) patients from Group A and 25 (48%) from Group B relapsed (P=0.1).
The median (range) overall survival (OS) rates of patients from Group A was 13 (9-17) months and that of Group B was 14 (10-35) months (P=0.6). The 1-, 3- and 5-year OS rates were 52%, 28%, and 24% in Group A; and 62%, 33%, and 24% in Group B patients (Fig 1). Multivariable analysis identified relapse (HR 2.8, 95% CI 1.7-4.7) and failure to achieve CR/CRi (HR 2.8 95% CI 1.9-4.7) as risk factors for inferior survival (Fig 2a and 2b). The median (range) relapse free survival of patients in Group A was 28 (17 -81) and that of Group B was 27 (14 - 76) months (P=0.9) (Fig 2c). 28 patients underwent allogenic stem-cell transplant (25 in CR1 and 3 in CR2), 23 in Group A and 5 in Group B; the 1-, 3-, and 5-year OS of patients who underwent allogenic stem cell transplant were 88%, 72%, and 72% regardless of the group (Fig 2d).
Conclusion: The current study did not find significant differences between AML patients with previous history of cancer with or without exposure to chemo/radiotherapy, in terms of either response to AML-directed therapy or overall or relapse-free survival, despite a higher prevalence of adverse karyotype in therapy-related AML.
Figure 1 Figure 1.
Patnaik: Kura Oncology: Research Funding; Stemline Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Stemline Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Al-Kali: Astex: Other: Research support to institution; Novartis: Research Funding. Litzow: Pluristem: Research Funding; Actinium: Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding; Astellas: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Jazz: Other: Advisory Board; Omeros: Other: Advisory Board; Biosight: Other: Data monitoring committee.
We compared the feasibility of four CMV- and Aspergillus-reactive T-cell immunoassay protocols in allogenic stem cell transplant recipients. While ELISPOT performed best overall, logistically advantageous whole blood-based assays performed comparably in patients with less severe lymphocytopenia. CMV-induced interferon-gamma responses correlated strongly across all protocols and showed high concordance with serology.
AbstractThe prognosis of patients with multiple myeloma has improved significantly over the past 20 years. However, the patient population in the relapse situation is very heterogeneous due to increasing age and the previous course of the disease and therapy. In particular, the approval of new targeted substances offers numerous treatment options that can be adapted to the individual situation.In relapsed multiple myeloma, disease- and patient-specific factors must be considered for an individually adapted therapy. Suitable patients can also receive an autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) or, in the case of early relapse after ASCT, an allogenic stem cell transplant, if possible as part clinical studies. Proteasome or immunomodulator-based triple combinations are the standard in recurrence. In frail patients, a combination of two can also be used. The new substances also offer very good therapeutic options for high-risk cytogenetics or renal insufficiency. The monoclonal antibodies Daratumumab and Elotuzumab are well tolerated except for infusion reactions and are highly effective in various combinations, even in high-risk cytogenetics.