4.7 Article

Long-term results of the Italian Association of Pediatric Hematology and Oncology (AIEOP) Studies 82, 87, 88, 91 and 95 for childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia

Journal

LEUKEMIA
Volume 24, Issue 2, Pages 255-264

Publisher

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/leu.2009.250

Keywords

acute lymphoblastic leukemia; childhood; long-term results

Funding

  1. Ministero Universita Ricerca Scientifica e Tecnologica (MURST) [9906152551007]
  2. AIRC (MGV)
  3. PRIN (GB)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We analyzed the long-term outcome of 4865 patients treated in Studies 82, 87, 88, 91 and 95 for childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) of the Italian Association of Pediatric Hematology and Oncology (AIEOP). Treatment was characterized by progressive intensification of systemic therapy and reduction of cranial radiotherapy. A progressive improvement of results with reduction of isolated central nervous system relapse rate was obtained. Ten-year event-free survival increased from 53% in Study 82 to 72% in Study 95, whereas survival improved from 64 to 82%. Since 1991, all patients were treated according to Berlin-Frankfurt-Muenster (BFM) ALL treatment strategy. In Study 91, reduced treatment intensity (25%) yielded inferior results, but intensification of maintenance with high-dose (HD)-L-asparaginase (randomized) allowed to compensate for this disadvantage; in high-risk patients (HR, 15%), substitution of intensive polychemotherapy blocks for conventional BFM backbone failed to improve results. A marked improvement of results was obtained in HR patients when conventional BFM therapy was intensified with three polychemotherapy blocks and double delayed intensification (Study 95). The introduction of minimal residual disease monitoring and evaluation of common randomized questions by AIEOP and BFM groups in the protocol AIEOP-BFM-ALL 2000 are expected to further ameliorate treatment of children with ALL. Leukemia (2010) 24, 255-264; doi: 10.1038/leu.2009.250; published online 17 December 2009

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available