Significance of Measurable Residual Disease in Adult Philadelphia Chromosome-Positive ALL: A GRAAPH-2014 Study.

PURPOSE: BCR::ABL1 quantification is widely regarded as the standard for monitoring measurable residual disease (MRD) in Philadelphia chromosome-positive (Ph+) ALL. However, recent evidence of BCR::ABL1 multilineage involvement questions the significance of BCR::ABL1 MRD. We aimed to define the prognostic role of MRD as assessed by BCR::ABL1 or lymphoid-specific immunoglobulin/T-cell receptor (IG/TR) gene markers. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted BCR::ABL1 and IG/TR quantification after each treatment cycle in 264 patients treated in the GRAAPH-2014 trial, which used four cycles of reduced-intensity chemotherapy with nilotinib, followed by hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation (HSCT). RESULTS: Comparing BCR::ABL1 and IG/TR MRD revealed residual BCR::ABL1-positive non-ALL cells in 98 (43%) of 228 patients, defining multilineage Ph+ ALL. Despite poorer BCR::ABL1 responses, patients with multilineage Ph+ ALL had similar disease-free survival (DFS; hazard ratio [HR], 0.83 [95% CI, 0.49 to 1.41]; P = .50). Although BCR::ABL1 response failed to predict outcomes, IG/TR positivity (≥0.01%) was strongly associated with lower DFS (after cycle 2, HR, 2.49 [95% CI, 1.40 to 4.40]; P = .002; after cycle 4, HR, 4.13 [95% CI, 1.82 to 9.38]; P = .001). In multivariable analysis, both IG/TR positivity after cycle 2 and initial WBC count ≥30 × 109/L predicted poorer DFS, enabling to define a high-risk group having a 4-year DFS of 56.5% compared with 87.6% (HR, 3.72 [95% CI, 1.93 to 7.15]; P < .001). Moreover, allogeneic HSCT significantly improved DFS in the high-risk group (HR, 0.33 [95% CI, 0.18 to 0.60]; P < .001), whereas the standard-risk group had favorable outcomes regardless of allogeneic HSCT. CONCLUSION: Our findings challenge the significance of BCR::ABL1 monitoring in adult Ph+ ALL and demonstrate the prognostic role of IG/TR MRD. This study provides a framework for using MRD to guide treatment strategies in adults with Ph+ ALL.

Thalidomide versus placebo in myeloid metaplasia with myelofibrosis: a prospective, randomized, double-blind, multicenter study.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: In non-randomized studies, thalidomide appeared to be effective in myeloid metaplasia with myelofibrosis (MMM). We compared thalidomide to placebo for treatment of anemia in MMM. DESIGN AND METHODS: A prospective phase II B, randomized double-blind multicenter trial comparing thalidomide 400 mg/d with placebo for 180 days was conducted in 52 anemic patients (hemoglobin pounds Sterling 9 g/dL or transfused). The main outcome measure was a 2 g/L increase in hemoglobin or 20% reduction in transfusions. RESULTS: In the thalidomide group only 10 patients completed 6 months of treatment. At 180 days, in an intention-to-treat analysis, no difference was observed between the thalidomide and placebo groups as regards improvement of hemoglobin levels (one patient in each group) or reduction of red blood cell transfusions (three vs five patients, respectively). The spleen size, determined by ultrasonography, increased significantly less in the thalidomide group than in the placebo group (p < 0.05). Thalidomide had no apparent benefit on the Dupriez score, the severity score, survival, death, or any other clinical or biological parameter. Somnolence, gastro-intestinal signs, weight gain, and edema were significantly more frequent in the thalidomide group. Outpatient discontinuation of thalidomide was significantly correlated with a high severity score > 4 (odds ratio, OR = 16; p < 0.01), and g-glutamyl transferase levels > 40 IU/L (OR = 12; p < 0.05). INTERPRETATION AND CONCLUSIONS: Thalidomide (200-400 mg/d) does not demonstrate substantial efficacy in anemic MMM patients. The natural history of disease in the placebo group revealed spontaneous periods of remission of anemia. Tolerance of thalidomide was significantly correlated wih the severity and liver involvement of the disease.

Burkitt cells on a peripheral blood smear: how to deal with?

The diagnosis of double hit lymphoma remains a challenge for the biologist for a good management of the patient. This new category of lymphoma "double hit" (DH) is part of a new entity of the WHO classification 2008: « Unclassifiable B lymphoma with features intermediate between diffuse large cell B lymphoma and Burkitt's lymphoma ¼. It is defined by the presence of a breakpoint at the locus 8q24 of the c-MYC gene associated with a recurrent translocation involving BCL2 genes primarily BCL6 or more rarely CCDN1 or BCL3 genes. These chromosomal alterations are not systematically screened at diagnosis, which can cause misdiagnosis and poor therapy management. These lymphomas DH have variable cytology and may be confused with Burkitt lymphoma (BL) or with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). They have a very poor prognosis and are often resistant to chemotherapy. Their therapy and their prognosis are different from those of the BL or the DLBCL. This entity and its morphology as well as histology either immunophenotypic or cytogenetic characteristics must therefore be known to biologists, pathologists, and clinicians. Cooperation between the various actors in these disciplines is essential in case of atypical BL or DLBCL to lead to a precise classification of the pathology.