Concurrent intensive chemotherapy and imatinib before and after stem cell transplantation in newly diagnosed Philadelphia chromosome-positive acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Final results of the CSTIBES02 trial.

BACKGROUND: Imatinib, given concurrently or alternating with chemotherapy, has improved the response and survival of patients with Philadelphia chromosome-positive acute lymphoblastic leukemia (Ph(+) ALL) but relapses are still frequent. The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility and results of giving imatinib concurrently with intensive chemotherapy, stem cell transplantation and post-transplant imatinib maintenance therapy in patients with newly diagnosed Ph(+) ALL. DESIGN AND METHODS: This was a phase II study of patients with newly diagnosed Ph(+) ALL given standard chemotherapy, together with imatinib (400 mg/day) until stem cell transplantation, followed by imatinib maintenance therapy for all patients regardless of the molecular status of the disease. RESULTS: Of the 30 patients included, 27 (90%) achieved complete remission, one was resistant to treatment and two died during induction therapy. The percentages of major and complete molecular responses were 86% and 21% after induction, and 81% and 65% after consolidation, respectively. Similar results were observed assessing minimal residual disease by flow cytometry. Of the 27 patients who achieved complete remission, 21 underwent stem cell transplantation (16 allogeneic, 5 autologous). Imatinib (400 mg/day) could be administered after transplantation for a median of 3.9 months in 12 patients, although it was interrupted in 10 patients (in 2 cases because of side effects of the drug). Nine patients relapsed, four before and five after stem cell transplantation and eight patients died of transplant-related causes. With a median follow-up of 4.1 years, the probabilities (95% CI) of disease-free and overall survival were 30% (15% to 45%) and 30% (16% to 45%), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: These results confirm that imatinib is an effective first-line treatment for adult Ph(+) ALL when given concurrently with chemotherapy, making stem cell transplantation feasible in a high proportion of patients. However, post-transplantation imatinib administration was limited, mainly because of transplantation-derived complications rather than drug-specific toxicity.

Compassionate use of intrathecal depot liposomal cytarabine as treatment of central nervous system involvement in acute leukemia: report of 6 cases.

The depot formulation of liposomal cytarabine (DepoCyte) has proven to be useful as intrathecal (IT) treatment of neoplastic and lymphomatous meningitis. We report the results of compassionate use of DepoCyte in 6 patients diagnosed with acute leukemia (AL) and CNS involvement. Two patients had CNS involvement at diagnosis and the remaining 4 had CNS relapse. Three patients received DepoCyte as adjuvant therapy and achieved complete response whereas 2 out of the remaining 3 cases treated with DepoCyte as the only drug showed sustained response. The side effects were mild and manageable in all patients. These findings justify the development of clinical trials to evaluate the efficacy and safety of IT depot cytarabine in meningeal involvement of AL.

Comparison of intensive chemotherapy, allogeneic, or autologous stem-cell transplantation as postremission treatment for children with very high risk acute lymphoblastic leukemia: PETHEMA ALL-93 Trial.

PURPOSE: The optimal postremission therapy for children with very high-risk (VHR) acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) is not well established. This randomized trial compared three options of postremission therapy: chemotherapy and allogeneic or autologous stem-cell transplantation (SCT). PATIENTS AND METHODS: All 106 VHR-ALL patients received induction with five drugs followed by intensification with three cycles of chemotherapy. Patients in complete remission (CR) with an HLA-identical family donor were assigned to allogeneic SCT (n = 24) and the remaining were randomly assigned to autologous SCT (n = 38) or to delayed intensification followed by maintenance chemotherapy up to 2 years in CR (n = 38). RESULTS: Overall, 100 patients achieved CR (94%). With a median follow-up of 6.5 years, 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) probabilities were 45% (95% CI, 37% to 54%) and 48% (95% CI, 40% to 57%), respectively. The three groups were comparable in the main pretreatment ALL characteristics. Intention-to-treat analysis showed no differences for donor versus no donor in DFS (45%; 95% CI, 27% to 65% v 45%; 95% CI, 37% to 55%) and OS (48%; 95% CI, 30% to 67% v 51%; 95% CI, 43% to 61%), as well as for autologous SCT versus chemotherapy comparisons (DFS: 44%; 95% CI, 29% to 60% v 46%; 95% CI, 32% to 62%; OS: 45%; 95% CI, 31% to 62% v 57%; 95% CI, 43% to 73%). No differences were found within the different subgroups of ALL and neither were differences observed when the analysis was made by treatment actually performed. CONCLUSION: This study failed to prove that, when a family donor is available, allogeneic SCT produces a better outcome than autologous SCT or chemotherapy in children with VHR-ALL.