Inotuzumab ozogamicin in adult acute lymphoblastic leukemia: Development, current status, and future directions.

Inotuzumab ozogamicin (InO) is an antibody-drug conjugate approved for the treatment of relapsed/refractory B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL). Several clinical trials are investigating InO in combination with low-intensity chemotherapy or other anti-ALL-targeted therapies in the salvage and frontline settings, notably in older adults who often cannot tolerate intensive chemotherapy and tend to have higher-risk disease. InO is also increasingly used to bridge patients to hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT), in sequence with chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy, to eliminate measurable residual disease and to prevent post-HSCT relapse. Veno-occlusive disease/sinusoidal obstruction syndrome is a potential complication of InO treatment, particularly when followed by HSCT. Herein, the authors review the historical development and current status of InO, strategies for mitigating the risk of InO-related veno-occlusive disease/sinusoidal obstruction syndrome, and future directions for InO research and clinical use.

Liver failure after treatment with inotuzumab and polychemotherapy including PEG-asparaginase in a patient with relapsed Philadelphia chromosome-negative acute lymphoblastic leukemia.

We present the case of a 58-year-old female patient who presented with an extramedullary B-ALL relapse after prior allogenic HSCT and blinatumomab therapy. The patient died from complications of a drug-induced acute liver failure after a salvage therapy combining inotuzumab ozogamicin (InO)-based induction followed by consolidation with high dose MTX and pegaspargase based on the GMALL protocol for older ALL patients. After a diagnosis of the extramedullary relapse in the form of a retro vesical chloroma, the patient received an individualized multi-agent chemotherapy based on induction chemotherapy for older patients in combination with InO. After four administrations of InO, in combination with vincristine, dexamethasone, cytarabine, and cyclophosphamide, CT-imaging showed a reduction in volume of the chloroma and response to therapy. Consolidation with high-dose methotrexate and pegaspargase was administered. The patient developed toxic liver damage manifested by hyperbilirubinemia and progressive hepatic encephalopathy. The diagnostic criteria for VOD were met, and therapy with defibrotide was initiated. Liver biopsy revealed no histological signs of VOD but instead steatohepatitis indicative of drug-induced toxicity. The patient ultimately died of hemorrhagic shock through postinterventional hemorrhage after liver biopsy. In conclusion, although InO shows promising results in the therapy of r/r ALL with and without additional chemotherapy, the combination with MTX and pegaspargase in an intensively pretreated patient with relapse after HCST may impart an increased risk for liver-related toxicity. Special caution is required when assessing fitness for further liver toxic regimens. A key takeaway is also the reminder that InO can cause liver damage not only in the form of VOD but also through direct hepatocellular toxicity.

Prediction of Response to FDA-Approved Targeted Therapy and Immunotherapy in Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia (ALL).

OPINION STATEMENT: Acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) represents the predominant cancer in pediatric populations, though its occurrence in adults is relatively rare. Pre-treatment risk stratification is crucial for predicting prognosis. Important factors for assessment include patient age, white blood cell (WBC) count at diagnosis, extramedullary involvement, immunophenotype, and cytogenetic aberrations. Minimal residual disease (MRD), primarily assessed by flow cytometry following remission, plays a substantial role in guiding management plans. Over the past decade, significant advancements in ALL outcomes have been witnessed. Conventional chemotherapy has remarkably reduced mortality rates; however, its intensive nature raises safety concerns and has led to the emergence of treatment-resistant cases with recurrence of relapses. Consequently, The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved several novel treatments for relapsed/refractory ALL due to their demonstrated efficacy, as indicated by improved complete remission and survival rates. These treatments include tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs), the anti-CD19 monoclonal antibody blinatumomab, anti-CD22 inotuzumab ozogamicin, anti-CD20 rituximab, and chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy. Identifying the variables that influence treatment decisions is a pressing necessity for tailoring therapy based on heterogeneous patient characteristics. Key predictive factors identified in various observational studies and clinical trials include prelymphodepletion disease burden, complex genetic abnormalities, and MRD. Furthermore, the development of serious adverse events following treatment could be anticipated through predictive models, allowing for appropriate prophylactic measures to be considered. The ultimate aim is to incorporate the concept of precision medicine in the field of ALL through valid prediction platform to facilitate the selection of the most suitable treatment approach.

[Sequential therapy with inotuzumab ozogamicin followed by CAR T-cell therapy for Philadelphia chromosome-negative acute lymphoblastic leukemia].

A 25-year-old woman with a history of B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia over ten years ago was referred to our hospital with a chief complaint of leukoblastosis. She was participating in a JPLSG (Japanese Pediatric Leukemia/Lymphoma Study Group) clinical study at that time. We diagnosed ALL relapse by multi-color flow cytometric analysis of bone marrow samples at admission, with reference to previous JPLSG data. Because her leukemic cells were resistant to conventional cytotoxic agents, she proceeded to lymphocyte apheresis for chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR-T, Tisagenlecleucel [Tisa-cel]). She received two cycles of inotuzumab ozogamicin as a bridging therapy to Tisa-cel, resulting in a hematological complete remission (minimal residual disease measured by polymerase chain reaction [PCR-MRD] was positive at 1.0×10-4). She was finally administered Tisa-cel and achieved MRD negativity. She is currently in complete remission with careful MRD monitoring. This strategy of sequential bi-targeted therapy combining antibody conjugates and CAR-T cells provides tumor control in deeper remission and minimal damage to organ function through reduced use of cytotoxic anti-tumor agents. Therefore, we believe that this therapeutic strategy is an effective and rational treatment for adolescent and young adult ALL patients.

Comparing the efficacy of salvage regimens for relapsed/refractory B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukaemia: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

The complete remission (CR) rate and overall survival (OS) of relapsed/refractory (R/R) B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukaemia (B-ALL) are not satisfactory. The available salvage regimens include standard chemotherapy, inotuzumab ozogamicin, blinatumomab and cluster of differentiation (CD)19 chimeric antigen receptor T cells (CAR T), and the NCCN guidelines recommend all of these therapies with no preference. Dual CD19/CD22 CAR T-cells have emerged as new treatments and have shown some efficacy, with high CR rates and preventing CD19-negative relapse. However, direct comparisons of the CR rate and long-term survival among the different salvage therapies are lacking. Databases including PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Cochrane were searched from inception to January 31, 2022, for relevant studies. The outcomes of interest were complete remission/complete remission with incomplete haematologic recovery (CR/CRi) rates and 1-year overall survival (OS) rates. Odds ratios (ORs) were generated for binary outcomes, and the mean difference (MD) was generated for consecutive outcomes by network meta-analysis. CD19 CAR T-cells demonstrated a significantly better effect in improving the CR/CRi rate than blinatumomab (OR = 8.32, 95% CI: 1.18 to 58.44) and chemotherapy (OR = 16.4, 95% CI: 2.76 to 97.45). In terms of OS, CD19 CAR T-cells and dual CD19/CD22 CAR T-cells both had a higher 1-year OS rate than blinatumomab, inotuzumab ozogamicin and chemotherapy. There was no significant difference between CD19 CAR T-cells and dual CD19/CD22 CAR T-cells in terms of 1-year OS and CR/CRi rates. CD19 CAR T-cells are effective in inducing CR, and CD19 CAR T-cells and dual CD19/CD22 CAR T-cells show benefits for overall survival. More high-quality randomized controlled trials and longer follow-ups are needed to confirm and update the results of this analysis in the future.

Evaluation of the efficacy of ursodiol for prevention of hepatotoxicity in patients receiving gemtuzumab ozogamicin and inotuzumab ozogamicin.

Gemtuzumab ozogamicin (GO) and inotuzumab ozogamicin (InO) are indicated for newly diagnosed or relapsed/refractory CD33-positive acute myeloid leukemia and relapsed/refractory B-cell precursor acute lymphoblastic leukemia respectively. Patients undergoing therapy with these agents are at increased risk for hepatotoxicity. Forty-nine patients received either GO or InO with concomitant ursodiol (n=14) or no ursodiol (n=35) for hepatotoxicity prophylaxis. Hepatotoxicity occurred in 2 (14%) patients in the ursodiol group compared to 15 (43%) patients in the no ursodiol group (p=0.10). Median days (17 versus 11; p=0.66) and doses (4 versus 2; p=0.28) to development of hepatotoxicity were higher in the ursodiol versus no ursodiol group. After adjusting for concomitant hepatotoxic medications and prior chemotherapy, ursodiol did not significantly reduce the incidence of hepatotoxicity. Ursodiol prophylaxis was associated with a similar incidence of hepatotoxicity compared to no ursodiol, but may delay the time to occurrence.

Evaluation of the inpatient use of inotuzumab ozogamicin and creation of appropriate use guidelines.

Inpatient use of inotuzumab ozogamicin (IO) at our academic medical center has increased since its FDA approval in 2017. Administration of IO does not require hospitalization and is appropriate for outpatient use. The aim of this report is to assess the appropriateness of use, overall inpatient utilization, and cost of IO. This is a retrospective chart review of patients that received at least one dose of IO while admitted to the hospital. Data points included rationale for inpatient IO administration, hospital admission reason, number of IO doses and number of vials used, length of stay, in-hospital mortality, percentage of admissions that were new-starts, outpatient continuation of IO, use of concomitant regimens, and CD22 positivity. Between September 1, 2017, and June 30, 2022, 55 doses of IO were identified. Of the 29 unique admissions, common rationales for inpatient IO use included high disease burden/tumor lysis syndrome risk (31%) and use of a regimen requiring hospitalization (28%). The rationale for hospitalization was most commonly 'chemotherapy administration' (34%) and 'relapsed/refractory disease' (38%). Median length of stay was 23 days, most were new starts (76%), and 5 patients died during the associated admission. Only 63% of patients continued therapy in the outpatient setting. The inpatient use of IO was associated with a prolonged length-of-stay, a 17% in-hospital mortality, and represents a significant cost burden to the health system. As a result of these findings, guidelines for inpatient use of IO were implemented across the health system.

[Relapsed/refractory Philadelphia chromosome-positive acute lymphoblastic leukemia responding to retreatment with inotuzumab ozogamicin].

A 72-year-old man with Philadelphia chromosome-positive acute lymphoblastic leukemia (Ph+ALL) was treated with dasatinib (week1: 50 mg/day, week2: 70 mg/day, week3-: 100 mg/day) and prednisolone from June 2017. However, in January 2018, it relapsed with the T315I mutation. Although the treatment was changed to ponatinib 30 mg/day, he experienced a second relapse in June 2018. Following confirmation of CD22 positivity, he was treated with three cycles of inotuzumab ozogamicin (InO), resulting in CR. He was CR for 2.9 years before relapsing for the third time in May 2021. Because the patient was still CD22-positive, InO was given again, and the patient achieved CR at the end of the second cycle. We had a case where re-administering InO was effective as a salvage therapy for relapsed/refractory Ph+ALL (r/r Ph+ALL) in an elderly patient.

Baseline cluster of differentiation 22 fluorescent intensity correlates with patient outcome after Inotuzumab Ozogamicin treatment.

Antigen-directed target therapy for B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia (B-ALL) is now the standard of care for relapsed/refractory (R/R) disease. A comprehensive determination of the target itself is mandatory to aid physician's choice. We determined baseline Cluster of differentiation 22 (CD22) expression percentage and fluorescent intensity on lymphoblasts of 30 patients with R/R B-ALL treated with anti-CD22 immunoconjugate drug Inotuzumab Ozogamicin (INO) and analyzed the impact of both parameters on patient outcome. Most patients (24/30, 80%) had a high leukemic blast CD22-positivity defined as ≥90%. We did not observe a benefit in terms of complete remission, overall survival (OS) and duration of response (DoR) for patients with CD22 ≥ 90% versus CD22 < 90%. Concerning CD22-FI quartile analysis we appreciated a trend for superior response rates in higher quartiles (Q2 -Q4 ) compared to Q1 and a significant benefit in terms of OS and DoR for patients with higher CD22-FI. INO demonstrates to be effective also in patients with lower CD22 expression, but therapeutical benefits are more evident in patients with higher CD22-FI. The evaluation of both CD22 percentage and CD22-FI of the leukemic blast may help physicians in therapeutic choices for R/R B-ALL patients when multiple treatment options are available, although no CD22 expression threshold can currently be identified below which INO should be considered not effective.

Cytogenetic guided therapy using blinatumomab and inotuzumab ozogamicin in a patient with relapse/refractory acute lymphoblastic leukemia.

INTRODUCTION: Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia (ALL) is an aggressive cancer that requires intense chemotherapy and has a high rate of recurrence. Treatments of Relapse/Refractory (R/R) B-cell ALL are limited. Blinatumomab, a bispecific T-cell engager (CD19/CD3) monocolonal antibody, and Inotuzumab Ozogamicin, an anti-CD22 antibody conjugate, are current recommended options. CASE REPORT: To describe a R/R B-cell ALL patient who failed blinatumomab therapy. Subsequently she received inotuzumab ozogamicin achieving a complete response. MANAGEMENT & OUTCOME: Our patient was initially treated with CALGB 10403 regimen but did not achieve a complete response. Blinatumomab was given for relapse/refractory disease however she had an incomplete response despite having 100% expression in CD19 markers. Consequently, she received inotuzumab ozogamicin attributable to 70% expression of CD22. She responded with a complete response and transitioned to a successful hematopoietic stem cell transplant. DISCUSSION: There is limited clinical guidance on the preferred treatment of adult R/R B-Cell ALL. Currently, there are no randomized head-to-head trials comparing efficacy of blinatumomab and inotuzumab ozogamicin. Clinical patterns of blinatumomab resistance has been reported. Our case study remains unclear of why our patient had unsuccessful outcomes with blinatumomab regardless of having CD19 positivity of 100%. Future prospective analysis and comparative studies are needed to determine proper sequencing of these therapies.

Primary ovarian insufficiency secondary to chemotherapy with inotuzumab ozogamicin and other agents.

Recent advances in targeted therapy with monoclonal antibodies have significantly improved outcomes for people with cancer, sometimes allowing patients to avoid ovotoxic agents altogether. The current understanding is that monoclonal antibody cancer therapies that are not targeted to ovarian antigens should not impact ovarian reserve or increase the risk of primary ovarian insufficiency (POI). We present a case of rapid onset POI in a 23-year-old patient following chemotherapy for relapse/refractory B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia with a monoclonal antibody drug-conjugate, inotuzumab ozogamicin, that targets CD22. She was also treated with intrathecal methotrexate, cytarabine, and vincristine which are typically considered low risk for ovotoxicity. She was ovulatory with an AMH of 1.0 ng/mL prior to treatment and 2 months later was found to have an undetectable AMH. The patient experienced a canceled fertility preservation cycle due to an absent response to gonadotropins during ovarian stimulation. Consideration should be given to potential gonadal effects of monoclonal antibody therapies that may not have previously been explored.

[Allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantations for relapsed and refractory acute lymphoblastic leukemia following inotuzumab ozogamicin treatment].

Inotuzumab ozogamicin (InO) was administered in three cases of relapsed/refractory adult acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) before allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-SCT). One case developed extremely severe sinusoidal obstruction syndrome (SOS) but recovered after receiving defibrotide therapy. A gap of 63 days in the SOS case was noted from the last administration of InO to allo-SCT, the duration was 133 and 86 days for the other two cases, and the remaining risk factors for SOS were comparable in the three cases. In contrast to gemtuzumab ozogamicin (GO), the interval between InO exposure and allo-SCT has not been reported as a risk for SOS. Nevertheless, this case suggests that the intervals should be as long as possible.

Efficacy of inotuzumab ozogamicin in patients with Philadelphia chromosome-positive relapsed/refractory acute lymphoblastic leukemia.

BACKGROUND: Patients with relapsed/refractory (R/R) Philadelphia chromosome-positive (Ph+) acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) have a poor prognosis and limited treatment options. METHODS: The efficacy of inotuzumab ozogamicin (InO), a humanized anti-CD22 monoclonal antibody conjugated to the cytotoxic antibiotic calicheamicin, was evaluated in R/R ALL patients in the phase 1/2 study 1010 (NCT01363297) and open-label, randomized, phase 3 study 1022 (INO-VATE; NCT01564784). This analysis focused specifically on Ph+ R/R ALL patients. In study 1022, Ph+ patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to InO (n = 22) or standard intensive chemotherapy (SC) (n = 27) and 16 Ph+ patients in study 1010 received InO. RESULTS: In study 1022, rates of complete remission/complete remission with incomplete hematologic recovery (CR/CRi) and minimal residual disease (MRD) negativity (patients achieving CR/CRi) were higher with InO (CR/CRi = 73%; MRD = 81%) versus SC (CR/CRi = 56%; MRD = 33%). The corresponding rates in study 1010 were 56% (CR/CRi) and 100% (MRD). The hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) rate in study 1022 was 41% versus 19% for InO versus SC; however, there was no benefit in overall survival (median OS: 8.7 vs 8.4 months; hazard ratio, 1.17 [95% CI, 0.64-2.14]). The probability of being event-free (progression-free survival) at 12 months was greater with InO versus SC (20.1% vs 4.8%). CONCLUSION: Given the substantial improvement in responses and rates of HSCT, InO is an important treatment option for patients with R/R Ph+ ALL. Future studies need to consider better characterization of disease characteristics, more sensitive MRD measurements, MRD-directed therapy before HSCT, and potentially combination therapies, including tyrosine kinase inhibitors.

Sequencing of novel agents in relapsed/refractory B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia: Blinatumomab and inotuzumab ozogamicin may have comparable efficacy as first or second novel agent therapy in relapsed/refractory acute lymphoblastic leukemia.

BACKGROUND: The availability of novel agents (NAs), including blinatumomab and inotuzumab ozogamicin (InO), has improved the outcomes of patients with relapsed/refractory (RR) B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL). Because of the relative effectiveness, it is often a challenge for clinicians to determine how to best sequence these NAs with respect to efficacy and toxicity. METHODS: In this multicenter, retrospective study of patients with RR ALL treated with blinatumomab, InO, or both, their efficacy as a first or second NA was compared. RESULTS: Among 276 patients, 221 and 55 received blinatumomab and InO, respectively, as a first NA therapy. The complete remission (CR)/complete remission with incomplete count recovery (CRi) rate was 65% and 67% for the blinatumomab and InO groups, respectively (P = .73). The rate of treatment discontinuation due to adverse events was 4% and 7% in the blinatumomab and InO groups, respectively. Ninety-two patients (43%) in the blinatumomab group and 13 patients (29%) in the InO group proceeded with allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. The median overall survival (OS) was 15 and 11.6 months in the blinatumomab and InO groups, respectively. A subset analysis was performed for 61 patients who received both NAs (blinatumomab and then InO [n = 40] or InO and then blinatumomab [n = 21]). The CR/CRi rate was 58% for patients who received InO as the second NA and 52% for patients who received blinatumomab as the second NA. The median OS was 10.5 for patients who received InO as the second NA and 5.9 months for patients who received blinatumomab as the second NA (P = .09). CONCLUSIONS: Although the limited power of this study to detect a significant difference between subgroups is acknowledged, the data suggest that blinatumomab and InO may have comparable efficacy as a first or second NA therapy in RR ALL.

Inotuzumab ozogamicin in infants and young children with relapsed or refractory acute lymphoblastic leukaemia: a case series.

No data on inotuzumab ozogamicin (InO) in infant acute lymphoblastic leukaemia (ALL) have been published to date. We collected data internationally on infants/young children (<3 years) with ALL treated with InO. Fifteen patients (median 4.4 months at diagnosis) received InO due to relapsed or refractory (R/R) disease. Median percentage of CD22+ blasts was 72% (range 40-100%, n = 9). The median dose in the first course was 1.74 mg/m2 (fractionated). Seven patients (47%) achieved complete remission; one additional minimal residual disease (MRD)-positive patient became MRD-negative. Six-month overall survival was 47% (95% confidence interval [CI] 27-80%). Two patients developed veno-occlusive disease after transplant. Further evaluation of InO in this subgroup of ALL is justified.

Loss of CD22 expression and expansion of a CD22dim subpopulation in adults with relapsed/refractory B-lymphoblastic leukaemia after treatment with Inotuzumab-Ozogamicin.

Treatment options for relapsed or refractory B-lymphoblastic leukaemia (r/r B-ALL) are limited and the prognosis of these patients remains dismal, but novel immunotherapeutic options such as the anti-CD22 antibody-drug-conjugate Inotuzumab-Ozogamicin (InO) have improved outcomes in these patients. Flow cytometry is essential to assess antigen-expression prior to treatment initiation of antigen-directed immunotherapies. Here, we present flow cytometric and clinical data of three adult patients with r/r B-ALL who failed treatment with InO associated with reduced or lost antigen-expression. In addition, we present comparative data on two different diagnostic CD22-specific antibody clones that exhibit significant differences in staining intensities.

[Successful treatment with blinatumomab for refractory B lymphoblastic leukemia complicated with malignant pleural effusion].

A 77-year-old man diagnosed with mixed-phenotype acute leukemia (MPAL (B/Myeloid), NOS) achieved complete remission (CR) after eight courses of hyper-CVAD/MA therapy. However, 6 months later, blasts were observed on peripheral blood smear, and bone marrow aspiration revealed that the disease had relapsed as B lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL). At this time, he had left pleural effusion. He received two courses of inotuzumab ozogamicin (InO) and achieved second hematological CR, but the left pleural effusion worsened over time, suggesting poor disease control. After changing the regimen to blinatumomab, aspiration biopsy cytology showed that the blasts in the pleural fluid disappeared and respiratory distress improved after one course of treatment. Flow cytometry results showed increased populations of CD3-positive T-cells, suggesting that blinatumomab may have migrated into the pleural fluid and exerted an antitumor effect. Although new ALL-specific antibody drugs, such as InO and blinatumomab, are expected to improve prognosis, only few reports have described their tissue migration. The difference between InO and blinatumomab in terms of efficacy of treating malignant pleural effusion remains unclear and should be explored in additional cases.

Immunotherapy for the Treatment of Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Immunotherapy for the treatment of acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) broadens therapeutic options beyond chemotherapy and targeted therapy. Here, we review the use of monoclonal antibody-based drugs and cellular therapies to treat ALL. We discuss the challenges facing the field regarding the optimal timing and sequencing of these therapies in relation to other treatment options as well as considerations of cost effectiveness. RECENT FINDINGS: By early identification of patients at risk for leukemic relapse, monoclonal antibody and cellular immunotherapies can be brought to the forefront of treatment options. Novel CAR design and manufacturing approaches may enhance durable patient response. Multiple clinical trials are now underway to evaluate the sequence and timing of monoclonal antibody, cellular therapy, and/or stem cell transplantation. The biologic and clinical contexts in which immunotherapies have advanced the treatment of ALL confer optimism that more patients will achieve durable remissions. Immunotherapy treatments in ALL will expand through rationally targeted approaches alongside advances in CAR T cell therapy design and clinical experience.

[Current status of cancer immunotherapy for relapsed/refractory acute lymphoblastic leukemia in children and adolescents in Japan].

Several novel therapeutics that employ immunological mechanisms have been introduced in recent years for the treatment of hematological malignancies. To date, very few drugs have been introduced for acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL). Nonetheless, three novel agents have been approved recently in the US, Europe, Australia, and Japan: blinatumomab, which kills CD19-positive leukemia cells via cytotoxic activity of the patient's autologous T cells; inotuzumab ozogamicin, which delivers the anti-cancer antibiotic calicheamicin via CD22 internalization after antibody binding; and tisagenlecleucel, which uses patient's T cells via anti-CD19 chimeric antigen receptors. Aggressive multi-agent chemotherapy followed by allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation has been the only curative strategy for relapsed or refractory ALL. However, treatment strategies for such patients are about to change dramatically. In this article, I review the clinical development of the new therapeutics and discuss their roles in modern therapy for ALL in children and adolescents. An approach for treatment selection has not yet been established. Therefore, it is important to understand the advantages and disadvantages of each treatment for choosing a treatment strategy for each individual.

[State-of-the-art therapy for adult Philadelphia chromosome-negative acute lymphoblastic leukemia].

With pediatric-inspired chemotherapy, the survival of adult patients with Philadelphia chromosome-negative acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) has improved. For standard-risk patients in the first complete remission (CR1), pediatric-inspired chemotherapy may be superior than allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HSCT). However, increased dose of steroid, vincristine, and L-asparaginase (L-Asp) in pediatric-inspired chemotherapy induces adverse events in certain number of adult ALL patients. Especially, the administration of L-Asp is often reduced to 60-70% for thrombosis or liver dysfunction. The optimal dose of these agents for adult ALL patients with higher age is under investigation. Moreover, minimal residual disease (MRD) >10-4 is a poor prognostic factor. The time point for the assessment of MRD should be defined. For relapsed or refractory ALL, inotuzumab ozogamicin and blinatumomab are promising antibody agents that diminish MRD and proceed to allo-HSCT.