Correction to: Fludarabine and rituximab with escalating doses of lenalidomide followed by lenalidomide/rituximab maintenance in previously untreated chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (CLL): the REVLIRIT CLL-5 AGMT phase I/II study.

The original version of this article contained a mistake. The name of Tanja Nicole Hartman should have been Tanja Nicole Hartmann. The original article has been corrected.

Fludarabine and rituximab with escalating doses of lenalidomide followed by lenalidomide/rituximab maintenance in previously untreated chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (CLL): the REVLIRIT CLL-5 AGMT phase I/II study.

Despite recent advances, chemoimmunotherapy remains a standard for fit previously untreated chronic lymphocytic leukaemia patients. Lenalidomide had activity in early monotherapy trials, but tumour lysis and flare proved major obstacles in its development. We combined lenalidomide in increasing doses with six cycles of fludarabine and rituximab (FR), followed by lenalidomide/rituximab maintenance. In 45 chemo-naive patients, included in this trial, individual tolerability of the combination was highly divergent and no systematic toxicity determining a maximum tolerated dose was found. Grade 3/4 neutropenia (71%) was high, but only 7% experienced grade 3 infections. No tumour lysis or flare > grade 2 was observed, but skin toxicity proved dose-limiting in nine patients (20%). Overall and complete response rates after induction were 89 and 44% by intention-to-treat, respectively. At a median follow-up of 78.7 months, median progression-free survival (PFS) was 60.3 months. Minimal residual disease and immunoglobulin variable region heavy chain mutation state predicted PFS and TP53 mutation most strongly predicted OS. Baseline clinical factors did not predict tolerance to the immunomodulatory drug lenalidomide, but pretreatment immunophenotypes of T cells showed exhausted memory CD4 cells to predict early dose-limiting non-haematologic events. Overall, combining lenalidomide with FR was feasible and effective, but individual changes in the immune system seemed associated with limiting side effects. clinicaltrials.gov (NCT00738829) and EU Clinical Trials Register ( www.clinicaltrialsregister.eu , 2008-001430-27).

Azacitidine for Front-Line Therapy of Patients with AML: Reproducible Efficacy Established by Direct Comparison of International Phase 3 Trial Data with Registry Data from the Austrian Azacitidine Registry of the AGMT Study Group.

We recently published a clinically-meaningful improvement in median overall survival (OS) for patients with acute myeloid leukaemia (AML), >30% bone marrow (BM) blasts and white blood cell (WBC) count ≤15 G/L, treated with front-line azacitidine versus conventional care regimens within a phase 3 clinical trial (AZA-AML-001; NCT01074047; registered: February 2010). As results obtained in clinical trials are facing increased pressure to be confirmed by real-world data, we aimed to test whether data obtained in the AZA-AML-001 trial accurately represent observations made in routine clinical practice by analysing additional AML patients treated with azacitidine front-line within the Austrian Azacitidine Registry (AAR; NCT01595295; registered: May 2012) and directly comparing patient-level data of both cohorts. We assessed the efficacy of front-line azacitidine in a total of 407 patients with newly-diagnosed AML. Firstly, we compared data from AML patients with WBC ≤ 15 G/L and >30% BM blasts included within the AZA-AML-001 trial treated with azacitidine ("AML-001" cohort; n = 214) with AAR patients meeting the same inclusion criteria ("AAR (001-like)" cohort; n = 95). The current analysis thus represents a new sub-analysis of the AML-001 trial, which is directly compared with a new sub-analysis of the AAR. Baseline characteristics, azacitidine application, response rates and OS were comparable between all patient cohorts within the trial or registry setting. Median OS was 9.9 versus 10.8 months (p = 0.616) for "AML-001" versus "AAR (001-like)" cohorts, respectively. Secondly, we pooled data from both cohorts (n = 309) and assessed the outcome. Median OS of the pooled cohorts was 10.3 (95% confidence interval: 8.7, 12.6) months, and the one-year survival rate was 45.8%. Thirdly, we compared data from AAR patients meeting AZA-AML-001 trial inclusion criteria (n = 95) versus all AAR patients with World Health Organization (WHO)-defined AML ("AAR (WHO-AML)" cohort; n = 193). Within the registry population, median OS for AAR patients meeting trial inclusion criteria versus all WHO-AML patients was 10.8 versus 11.8 months (p = 0.599), respectively. We thus tested and confirmed the efficacy of azacitidine as a front-line agent in patients with AML, >30% BM blasts and WBC ≤ 15 G/L in a routine clinical practice setting. We further show that the efficacy of azacitidine does not appear to be limited to AML patients who meet stringent clinical trial inclusion criteria, but instead appears efficacious as front-line treatment in all patients with WHO-AML.

Azacitidine in 302 patients with WHO-defined acute myeloid leukemia: results from the Austrian Azacitidine Registry of the AGMT-Study Group.

Data on efficacy and safety of azacitidine in acute myeloid leukemia (AML) with >30 % bone marrow (BM) blasts are limited, and the drug can only be used off-label in these patients. We previously reported on the efficacy and safety of azacitidine in 155 AML patients treated within the Austrian Azacitidine Registry (clinicaltrials.gov identifier NCT01595295). We herein update this report with a population almost twice as large (n = 302). This cohort included 172 patients with >30 % BM blasts; 93 % would have been excluded from the pivotal AZA-001 trial (which led to European Medicines Agency (EMA) approval of azacitidine for high-risk myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) and AML with 20-30 % BM blasts). Despite this much more unfavorable profile, results are encouraging: overall response rate was 48 % in the total cohort and 72 % in patients evaluable according to MDS-IWG-2006 response criteria, respectively. Median OS was 9.6 (95 % CI 8.53-10.7) months. A clinically relevant OS benefit was observed with any form of disease stabilization (marrow stable disease (8.1 months), hematologic improvement (HI) (9.7 months), or the combination thereof (18.9 months)), as compared to patients without response and/or without disease stabilization (3.2 months). Age, white blood cell count, and BM blast count at start of therapy did not influence OS. The baseline factors LDH >225 U/l, ECOG ≥2, comorbidities ≥3, monosomal karyotype, and prior disease-modifying drugs, as well as the response-related factors hematologic improvement and further deepening of response after first response, were significant independent predictors of OS in multivariate analysis. Azacitidine seems effective in WHO-AML, including patients with >30 % BM blasts (currently off-label use). Although currently not regarded as standard form of response assessment in AML, disease stabilization and/or HI should be considered sufficient response to continue treatment with azacitidine.

Successful alemtuzumab retreatment in progressive B-cell chronic lymphocytic leukemia: a multicenter survey in 30 patients.

Although retreatment with alemtuzumab in relapsing B-cell chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) may be beneficial, there has thus far been no thorough analysis available on this topic. Data were collected from 30 chemotherapy-pretreated patients with progressive CLL who had received alemtuzumab twice in consecutive, distinct therapy lines. The median dose of alemtuzumab retreatment was 402 mg (range, 43-1,090 mg). Retreatment with alemtuzumab induced an overall response rate of 47%. From the start of alemtuzumab retreatment, median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 6.3 and 20.0 months, respectively. Response rates, PFS and OS upon alemtuzumab retreatment were correlated with response to initial alemtuzumab treatment, the time interval between the initial course of alemtuzumab and start of retreatment, and the hemoglobin concentration prior to retreatment. Reported toxicities from 24 cases included infections (50%), febrile reactions upon alemtuzumab administration (38%), exanthema (21%), and grade 4 neutropenia (13%) and thrombocytopenia (17%). We conclude that alemtuzumab retreatment represents an effective and tolerable therapeutic option for selected patients with CLL.

Rituximab maintenance overcomes the negative prognostic factor of obesity in CLL: Subgroup analysis of the international randomized AGMT CLL-8a mabtenance trial.

No data are available regarding obesity and outcome in Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia (CLL). We analyzed 263 patients from the AGMT CLL-8a Mabtenance trial for the impact of obesity. The trial included patients after rituximab-containing induction treatment in first or second line that had achieved at least a PR. A randomization to rituximab maintenance treatment (375 mg/m2 q3 months for 2 years) vs observation was performed. In this cohort 22% of the patients (58/263) were classified as obese. The baseline response to induction treatment was inferior in obese patients with a lower CR rate (43.1% vs 60.5% in obese vs non-obese, P = 0.018) and with a lower rate of patients achieving MRD negativity after chemoimmunotherapy induction treatment (19.6% vs 35.8%, P = 0.02). The PFS outcome of obese patients was significantly worse in the observation group of the trial (24 vs 39 months median PFS, P = 0.03). However, in the rituximab maintenance group the outcome for obese vs non-obese was not different (P = 0.4). In summary, obesity was overall associated with a worse outcome of chemoimmunotherapy induction. However, rituximab maintenance treatment seems to be able to overcome this negative effect.

Establishment and validation of a novel risk model for estimating time to first treatment in 120 patients with chronic myelomonocytic leukaemia.

Chronic myelomonocytic leukaemia is a rare disease and data on the treatment are often extrapolated from myelodysplastic syndrome studies. Although several scores exist for the prognosis of overall survival in chronic myelomonocytic leukaemia, so far there is no designated score for the prediction of the time to first treatment. We tested clinical parameters and cytogenetic information for their ability to predict the time to first treatment in our single center cohort of 55 unselected consecutive chronic myelomonocytic leukaemia patients. In multivariate analysis we identified elevated lactate dehydrogenase (≥223 U/l), higher bone marrow blast percentage (≥7.5%) and thrombocytopenia (<55 G/l) at initial diagnosis as the most relevant parameters for the time to first treatment. Using these three parameters we developed a risk score that efficiently estimates the time to treatment initiation with azacitidine or hydroxyurea (p < 0.001; log-rank). In the high-risk group (≥2 risk factors) 85% of patients required treatment within 1 year, whereas this was the case in 48% in the intermediate-risk (1 risk factor) and in 0% in the low-risk group (0 risk factors). Our risk model was validated in an external test cohort of 65 patients and may serve as a simplified and easily applicable tool for identifying patients who may not require early treatment initiation.

Azacitidine front-line in 339 patients with myelodysplastic syndromes and acute myeloid leukaemia: comparison of French-American-British and World Health Organization classifications.

BACKGROUND: The MDS-IWG and NCCN currently endorse both FAB and WHO classifications of MDS and AML, thus allowing patients with 20-30 % bone marrow blasts (AML20-30, formerly MDS-RAEB-t) to be categorised and treated as either MDS or AML. In addition, an artificial distinction between AML20-30 and AML30+ was made by regulatory agencies by initially restricting approval of azacitidine to AML20-30. Thus, uncertainty prevails regarding the diagnosis, prognosis and optimal treatment timing and strategy for patients with AML20-30. Here, we aim to provide clarification for patients treated with azacitidine front-line. METHODS: The Austrian Azacitidine Registry is a multicentre database (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01595295). For this analysis, we selected 339 patients treated with azacitidine front-line. According to the WHO classification 53, 96 and 190 patients had MDS-RAEB-I, MDS-RAEB-II and AML (AML20-30: n = 79; AML30+: n = 111), respectively. According to the FAB classification, 131, 101 and 111 patients had MDS-RAEB, MDS-RAEB-t and AML, respectively. RESULTS: The median ages of patients with MDS and AML were 72 (range 37-87) and 77 (range 23-93) years, respectively. Overall, 80 % of classifiable patients (≤30 % bone marrow blasts) had intermediate-2 or high-risk IPSS scores. Most other baseline, treatment and response characteristics were similar between patients diagnosed with MDS or AML. WHO-classified patients with AML20-30 had significantly worse OS than patients with MDS-RAEB-II (13.1 vs 18.9 months; p = 0.010), but similar OS to patients with AML30+ (10.9 vs 13.1 months; p = 0.238). AML patients that showed MDS-related features did not have worse outcomes compared with patients who did not (13.2 vs 8.9 months; p = 0.104). FAB-classified patients with MDS-RAEB-t had similar survival to patients with AML30+ (12.8 vs 10.9 months; p = 0.376), but significantly worse OS than patients with MDS-RAEB (10.9 vs 24.4 months; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Our data demonstrate the validity of the WHO classification of MDS and AML, and its superiority over the former FAB classification, for patients treated with azacitidine front-line. Neither bone marrow blast count nor presence of MDS-related features had an adverse prognostic impact on survival. Patients with AML20-30 should therefore be regarded as having 'true AML' and in our opinion treatment should be initiated without delay.

Prognostic impact of early response to induction therapy as assessed by multiparameter flow cytometry in acute myeloid leukemia.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Early response after induction therapy is an independent prognostic factor in acute myeloid leukemia (AML). We improved the identification of this parameter by implementing multiparameter flow cytometry to quantify bone marrow cells carrying leukemia-associated immunophenotypes (LAIP). DESIGN AND METHODS: In 106 uniformly treated patients flow cytometric analyses were performed at diagnosis and one week after induction therapy (day 16). The log-difference between LAIP-positive cells on day 1and day 16 (LD16) was determined for each patient. RESULTS: The LD16 (median, 2.11; range, -0.37 to 4.20) was significantly correlated to CR rate, event-free survival (EFS), overall survival (OS), and relapse-free survival (RFS). Separation of patients by the median LD16 resulted in significant differences in CR rate (81% vs. 51%, p=0.002), EFS (53% at 2 years vs. median 2.8 months, p<0.0001), 2-year OS (58% vs. 43%, p=0.0133), and 2-year RFS (65% vs. 30%, p=0.0037). Multivariate analysis revealed that LD16 was an independent prognostic parameter for CR rate, EFS, and RFS. INTERPRETATION AND CONCLUSIONS: Flow cytometric evaluation of early response may serve as a new response parameter in AML. It may be used for development of risk-adapted therapies. High-risk patients can be identified early after the first induction therapy and assigned alternative and salvage treatment strategies.

Four-fold staining including CD45 gating improves the sensitivity of multiparameter flow cytometric assessment of minimal residual disease in patients with acute myeloid leukemia.

Multiparameter flow cytometry (MFC) is capable of quantifying minimal residual disease (MRD) in acute myeloid leukemia (AML). Its broad application, however, is limited by a lack of sensitivity in about 20% of patients. CD45 gating may improve sensitivity. A broad panel of four-fold combinations of monoclonal antibodies including CD45 in each was used to define leukemia-associated aberrant immunophenotypes (LAIP), to define their sensitivities in normal bone marrow samples, and to compare results to data obtained without CD45 gating using triple staining. In 45 patients, a LAIP was defined, 11 normal bone marrow samples were analyzed as controls. The median percentage of LAIP-positive AML cells with and without CD45 gating was 21.95% (range, 3.31-82.52%) and 20.52% (range, 3.22-81.94%). The median percentage of LAIP-positive normal bone marrow cells ranged from 0.01 to 0.42% (median, 0.02%) and 0.02 to 0.58% (median, 0.15%) with and without CD45 gating. The difference of LAIP-positive cells between AML and normal bone marrow samples amounted to a median of 3.08 log (range, 1.22-4.01) and 2.28 log (range, 1.12-3.34) with and without CD45 gating. CD45 gating improves the sensitivity of MFC-based MRD monitoring in AML by 1 log.

Stability of leukemia-associated aberrant immunophenotypes in patients with acute myeloid leukemia between diagnosis and relapse: comparison with cytomorphologic, cytogenetic, and molecular genetic findings.

BACKGROUND: Multiparameter flow cytometry is increasingly used to monitor minimal residual disease in patients with acute myeloid leukemia to identify leukemic cells by leukemia-associated aberrant immunophenotypes (LAIPs). Changes in LAIPs during the course of the disease may be a limitation for this approach. METHODS: We analyzed 49 patients at diagnosis and relapse by flow cytometry, cytomorphology, cytogenetics, and molecular genetics. RESULTS: In 37 patients (76%), at least one LAIP detectable at diagnosis was present at relapse; in 12 patients (24%), none of the original LAIPs were present in at least 1% of bone marrow cells. Three groups were identified: no change in LAIPs, partial changes in LAIPs, and complete change in LAIPs. There were significant differences across these groups with regard to changes in cytomorphology (11%, 40%, and 58% of all cases, respectively; P = 0.007), cytogenetics (15%, 20%, and 25%; not significant), and molecular genetics (18%, 0, and 86%; P = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: These data indicate that, in a subset of patients with acute myeloid leukemia, the disease is biologically different at relapse; therefore, monitoring of minimal residual disease is difficult to accomplish. In most patients with acute myeloid leukemia, multiparameter flow cytometry may be used to monitor minimal residual disease.

A case of acute myeloid leukemia (AML) with an unreported combination of chromosomal abnormalities: gain of isochromosome 5p, tetrasomy 8 and unbalanced translocation der(19)t(17;19)(q23;p13).

BACKGROUND: Acute myeloid leukemia (AML) comprises a spectrum of myeloid malignancies which are often associated with distinct chromosomal abnormalities, and the analysis of such abnormalities provides us with important information for disease classification, treatment selection and prognosis. Some chromosomal abnormalities albeit recurrent are rare such as tetrasomy 8 or isochromosome 5p. In addition, erratic chromosomal rearrangements may occur in AML, sometimes unbalanced and also accompanied by other abnormalities. Knowledge on the contribution of rare abnormalities to AML disease, progression and prognosis is limited.Here we report a unique case of acute monoblastic leukemia with gain of i(5)(p10), tetrasomy 8, an unbalanced translocation der(19)t(17;19)(q23;p13.3) and mutated NPM1. RESULTS: Bone marrow cells were examined by conventional karyotyping, fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) and mutation analysis at diagnosis and follow-up. At diagnosis we detected trisomy 8, an unbalanced translocation der(19)t(17;19)(q23;p13.3) and mutated NPM1. During the course of the disease we observed clonal evolution with gain of i(5)(p10), tetrasomy 8 and eventually duplication of der(19)t(17;19)(q23;p13.3). By using the der(19)t(17;19) as clonal marker, we found that i(5)(p10) and tetrasomy 8 were secondary genetic events and that tetrasomy 8 had clonally evolved from trisomy 8. CONCLUSIONS: This case of acute monoblastic leukemia presents a combination of rare chromosomal abnormalities including the unbalanced translocation der(19)t(17;19)(q23;p13.3), hitherto un-reported in AML. In addition, our case supports the hypothesis of a step-wise clonal evolution from trisomy 8 to tetrasomy 8 in AML. Reporting and collecting data of rare chromosomal abnormalities will add information to AML disease, progression and prognosis, and may eventually translate to improved patient management.

Azacitidine in patients with WHO-defined AML - results of 155 patients from the Austrian Azacitidine Registry of the AGMT-Study Group.

OBJECTIVE: The Austrian Azacitidine Registry is a multi-center database (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01595295). The nature and intent of the registry was to gain a comprehensive view of the use, safety and efficacy of the drug in a broad range of AML-patients treated in real-life scenarios. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The sole inclusion criteria were the diagnosis of WHO-AML and treatment with at least one dose of azacitidine. No formal exclusion criteria existed. A total of 155 AML-patients who were mostly unfit/ineligible for intensive chemotherapy, or had progressed despite conventional treatment, were included. True ITT-analyses and exploratory analyses regarding the potential prognostic value of baseline-variables/performance-/comorbidity-/risk-scores on overall survival (OS), were performed. RESULTS: In this cohort of 155 pretreated (60%), and/or comorbid (87%), elderly (45% ≥75 years) AML-patients, azacitidine was well tolerated and efficacious, with an overall response rate (CR, mCR, PR, HI) of 45% in the total cohort (ITT) and 65% in patients evaluable according to IWG-criteria, respectively. Pre-treatment with conventional chemotherapy (P = .113), age ≤/>80 years (P = .853), number of comorbidities (P = .476), and bone marrow (BM) blast count (P = .663) did not influence OS. In multivariate analysis hematologic improvement alone (without the requirement of concomitant bone marrow blast reduction), although currently not regarded as a standard form of response assessment in AML, was sufficient to confer OS benefit (18.9 vs. 6.0 months; P = .0015). Further deepening of response after first response was associated with improved OS (24.7 vs. 13.7 months; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: In this large cohort of AML-patients treated with azacitidine, age >80 years, number of comorbidities and/or BM-blasts >30% did not adversely impact OS.

Determination of relapse risk based on assessment of minimal residual disease during complete remission by multiparameter flow cytometry in unselected patients with acute myeloid leukemia.

Quantification of minimal residual disease (MRD) reveals significant prognostic information in patients treated for acute myeloid leukemia (AML). The application of multiparameter flow cytometry (MFC) for MRD assessment has resulted in significant prognostic information in selected cases in previous analyses. We analyzed MRD in unselected patients with AML in complete remission (CR) after induction (n = 58) and consolidation (n = 62) therapies. By using a comprehensive panel of monoclonal antibodies we identified at least one leukemia-associated aberrant immunophenotype (LAIP) in each patient. The degree of reduction between diagnosis and CR in LAIP-positive cells (log difference [LD]) as a continuous variable was significantly related to relapse-free survival (RFS) both after induction (P = .0001) and consolidation (P = .000 08) therapies, respectively. The LD determined after consolidation therapy was the only parameter related to overall survival (OS) (P = .005). Separation of patients based on the 75th percentile of LD after consolidation therapy resulted in groups with highly different RFS (83.3% versus 25.7%, P = .0034) and OS (87.5% versus 51.4%, P = .0507) at 2 years. Multivariate analysis identified LD as an independent prognostic factor for RFS at both checkpoints. MFC-based quantification of MRD reveals important prognostic information in unselected patients with AML in addition to cytogenetics and should be further evaluated and used in clinical trials.