4.7 Article

High-risk childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia in first remission treated with novel intensive chemotherapy and allogeneic transplantation

Journal

LEUKEMIA
Volume 27, Issue 7, Pages 1497-1503

Publisher

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/leu.2013.44

Keywords

childhood; acute lymphoblastic leukemia; MRD testing; bone marrow transplant; drug toxicity

Funding

  1. National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia
  2. Cancer Council New South Wales
  3. Steven Walter Children's Cancer Foundation
  4. Leukemia Foundation
  5. Cancer Institute New South Wales
  6. I-BFM

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Children with acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) and high minimal residual disease (MRD) levels after initial chemotherapy have a poor clinical outcome. In this prospective, single arm, Phase 2 trial, 111 Dutch and Australian children aged 1-18 years with newly diagnosed, t(9; 22)-negative ALL, were identified among 1041 consecutively enrolled patients as high risk (HR) based on clinical features or high MRD. The HR cohort received the AIEOP-BFM (Associazione Italiana di Ematologia ed Oncologia Pediatrica (Italy)-Berlin- Frankfurt-Munster ALL Study Group) 2000 ALL Protocol I, then three novel HR chemotherapy blocks, followed by allogeneic transplant or chemotherapy. Of the 111 HR patients, 91 began HR treatment blocks, while 79 completed the protocol. There were 3 remission failures, 12 relapses, 7 toxic deaths in remission and 10 patients who changed protocol due to toxicity or clinician/parent preference. For the 111 HR patients, 5-year event-free survival (EFS) was 66.8% (+/- 5.5) and overall survival (OS) was 75.6% (+/- 4.3). The 30 patients treated as HR solely on the basis of high MRD levels had a 5-year EFS of 63% (+/- 9.4%). All patients experienced grade 3 or 4 toxicities during HR block therapy. Although cure rates were improved compared with previous studies, high treatment toxicity suggested that novel agents are needed to achieve further improvement.

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