Impact of trisomy 19 on outcome according to genetic makeup in patients with acute myeloid leukemia.

We retrospectively studied 97 acute myeloid leukemia patients with trisomy 19 (median age at diagnosis 57 years; range, 17- 83 years) treated between 2001 and 2019 within two multicenter study groups. Trisomy 19 occurred alone in ten (10.5%) patients, with additional abnormalities being present in non-complex karyotypes in eight (8%) patients and in complex karyotypes in 79 (82%) patients. Altogether, karyotypes characterized by trisomies only were present in 27 (28%) patients. Data on response and outcome of intensively treated patients were available for 92 cases. The median follow-up was 6.4 years (95% confidence interval [95% CI]: 2.9-9.0 years). The complete remission (CR) rate after induction therapy was 52% (48 patients); the early death rate was 10% (n=9). Notably, patients with trisomy 19 as the sole abnormality had a CR rate of 89%. Allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HCT) was performed in 34 (35%) patients (CR, n=19; active disease, n=15). Five-year relapse-free and overall survival rates were 26% (95% CI: 16-43%) and 20% (95% CI: 13-31%), respectively. Overall survival rates were significantly higher in patients with trisomy 19 as the sole abnormality or within karyotypes characterized by trisomies only (P=0.05). An Andersen-Gill model including allo-HCT as a time-dependent covariable on overall survival revealed that trisomy 19 as the sole abnormality or within karyotypes characterized by trisomies only was a favorable factor (hazard ratio [HR]=0.47; P=0.021); higher age at diagnosis had an adverse impact (10 years difference; HR=1.29; P=0.002), whereas allo-HCT did not have a beneficial impact (odds ratio=1.45; P=0.21). In our cohort, patients with trisomy 19 as the sole abnormality or within karyotypes characterized by trisomies only had a high CR rate and better clinical outcome.

Mapping the genetic features of T-ALL cases through simplified NGS approach.

BACKGROUND: Despite the irruption of massive sequencing technologies in clinical routine, the genetic diagnosis of T-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia (T-ALL) continues to be based on traditional techniques. The integration of old and new technologies with diagnostic and prognostic purposes represents a major challenge. METHODS: A High-Throughput Sequencing (HTS) approach was applied to analyze the genetic landscape of two patients diagnosed with T-ALL and one early T cell precursor acute leukemia. Orthogonal standard techniques were used to confirm the findings of NGS analysis. RESULTS: By using a single test, a complete genetic map including 2 previously unreported missense mutations in BCL11B gene are reported. Cooperating oncogenic lesions including CDKN2A/B deletions, SIL-TAL1 rearrangement and FLT3 amplification were also captured by using a single test. CONCLUSIONS: HTS is a useful approach that allows simultaneously analyzing mutations, CNVs and the clonal repertoire in T-ALL patients. This approach may simplify the genetic assessment of ALL.

Healthcare resource utilization trends in patients with acute myeloid leukemia ineligible for intensive chemotherapy receiving first-line systemic treatment or best supportive care: A multicenter international study.

OBJECTIVES: This retrospective chart review examined real-world healthcare resource utilization (HRU) in patients with AML ineligible for intensive therapy who received first-line systemic therapy or best supportive care (BSC). METHODS: Data were collected anonymously on patients with AML who initiated first-line hypomethylating agents (HMA), low-dose cytarabine (LDAC), other systemic therapy, or BSC. HRU endpoints included hospitalizations, outpatient consultations, transfusions, and supportive care. RESULTS: Of 1762 patients included, 46% received HMA, 11% received LDAC, 17% received other systemic therapy, 26% received BSC; median treatment durations were 118, 35, 33, and 57 days, respectively. Most patients were hospitalized, most commonly for treatment administration, transfusion, or infection (HMA 82%, LDAC 93%, other systemic therapy 83%, BSC 83%). A median number of hospitalizations were 2-6 across systemic groups and two for BSC, with median durations of 8-18 days. Transfusion rates and outpatient consultations were highest for HMA (80% and 79%) versus LDAC (57% and 53%), other systemic therapy (57% and 63%), and BSC (71% and 66%). Antivirals/antibiotics and antifungals were used more frequently than growth factors (72-92%, 34-63%, and 7-27%, respectively). CONCLUSION: Patients with AML ineligible for intensive therapy have high HRU; novel therapies are needed to alleviate this burden.

Performance of prognostic scoring systems in elderly patients with acute myeloid leukaemia on intensive chemotherapy: A PETHEMA registry study.

Selection of elderly patients (aged ≥60 years) for intensive chemotherapy treatment of acute myeloblastic leukaemia (AML) remains challenging. Several cooperative groups such as Acute Leukaemia French Association (ALFA), Haematological Oncology Clinical Studies Group (HOCSG) and MD Anderson Cancer Center (MDACC) have developed predictive models to select those patients who can benefit from intensive chemotherapy. Our purpose is to validate and compare these three models in a cohort of patients treated in real-life setting. For this, a total of 1724 elderly AML patients and treated with intensive chemotherapy regimens were identified in the PETHEMA registry. Median age was 67.2 years (range, 60-84,9) and median overall survival [OS] 9 months (95 % confidence interval [CI], 8.2-9.7). Taking into account the ALFA group's model, patients likely to benefit from intensive chemotherapy had longer OS (14 months, 95 % CI 12.3-15.7) than those unlikely to benefit (5 months, 95 % CI 4.1-5.9; p < 0.001). Significant differences in OS were observed between patients with favourable risk (17 months, 95 % CI 13.2-20.7), intermediate risk (11 months, 95 % CI 9.3-12.6) and adverse risk (6 months, 95 % CI 5.1-6.4; p < 0.001) according to the HOCSG model. No significant differences in OS were observed between patients with 0, 1, 2 or ≥3 points according to the MDACC model. However, when patients with ≥1 point were compared with those with 0 points, median OS was significantly longer in the latter [15 months (95 % CI 12.1-17.8) vs 7 (95 % CI 5.7-8.5)]. This retrospective study validates predictive models proposed by the ALFA, HOCSG and MDACC groups in this real-life cohort.

Cytogenetics and gene mutations influence survival in older patients with acute myeloid leukemia treated with azacitidine or conventional care.

Older patients with newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia (AML) in the phase 3 AZA-AML-001 study were evaluated at entry for cytogenetic abnormalities, and a subgroup of patients was assessed for gene mutations. Patients received azacitidine 75 mg/m2/day x7 days (n = 240) or conventional care regimens (CCR; n = 245): intensive chemotherapy, low-dose cytarabine, or best supportive care only. Overall survival (OS) was assessed for patients with common (occurring in ≥10% of patients) cytogenetic abnormalities and karyotypes, and for patients with recurring gene mutations. There was a significant OS improvement with azacitidine vs CCR for patients with European LeukemiaNet-defined Adverse karyotype (HR 0.71 [95%CI 0.51-0.99]; P = 0.046). Azacitidine-treated patients with -5/5q-, -7/7q-, or 17p abnormalities, or with monosomal or complex karyotypes, had a 31-46% reduced risk of death vs CCR. The most frequent gene mutations were DNMT3A (27%), TET2 (25%), IDH2 (23% [R140, 15%; R172, 8%]), and TP53 (21%). Compared with wild-type, OS was significantly reduced among CCR-treated patients with TP53 or NRAS mutations and azacitidine-treated patients with FLT3 or TET2 mutations. Azacitidine may be a preferred treatment for older patients with AML with Adverse-risk cytogenetics, particularly those with chromosome 5, 7, and/or 17 abnormalities and complex or monosomal karyotypes. The influence of gene mutations in azacitidine-treated patients warrants further study.

Azacitidine improves clinical outcomes in older patients with acute myeloid leukaemia with myelodysplasia-related changes compared with conventional care regimens.

BACKGROUND: Compared with World Health Organization-defined acute myeloid leukaemia (AML) not otherwise specified, patients with AML with myelodysplasia-related changes (AML-MRC) are generally older and more likely to have poor-risk cytogenetics, leading to poor response and prognosis. More than one-half of all older (≥65 years) patients in the phase 3 AZA-AML-001 trial had newly diagnosed AML-MRC. METHODS: We compared clinical outcomes for patients with AML-MRC treated with azacitidine or conventional care regimens (CCR; induction chemotherapy, low-dose cytarabine, or supportive care only) overall and within patient subgroups defined by cytogenetic risk (intermediate or poor) and age (65-74 years or ≥75 years). The same analyses were used to compare azacitidine with low-dose cytarabine in patients who had been preselected to low-dose cytarabine before they were randomized to receive azacitidine or CCR (ie, low-dose cytarabine). RESULTS: Median overall survival was significantly prolonged with azacitidine (n = 129) versus CCR (n = 133): 8.9 versus 4.9 months (hazard ratio 0.74, [95%CI 0.57, 0.97]). Among patients with intermediate-risk cytogenetics, median overall survival with azacitidine was 16.4 months, and with CCR was 8.9 months (hazard ratio 0.73 [95%CI 0.48, 1.10]). Median overall survival was significantly improved for patients ages 65-74 years treated with azacitidine compared with those who received CCR (14.2 versus 7.3 months, respectively; hazard ratio 0.64 [95%CI 0.42, 0.97]). Within the subgroup of patients preselected to low-dose cytarabine before randomization, median overall survival with azacitidine was 9.5 months versus 4.6 months with low-dose cytarabine (hazard ratio 0.77 [95%CI 0.55, 1.09]). Within the low-dose cytarabine preselection group, patients with intermediate-risk cytogenetics who received azacitidine had a median overall survival of 14.1 months versus 6.4 months with low-dose cytarabine, and patients aged 65-74 years had median survival of 14.9 months versus 5.2 months, respectively. Overall response rates were similar with azacitidine and CCR (24.8% and 17.3%, respectively), but higher with azacitidine versus low-dose cytarabine (27.2% and 13.9%). Adverse events were generally comparable between the treatment arms. CONCLUSIONS: Azacitidine may be the preferred treatment for patients with AML-MRC who are not candidates for intensive chemotherapy, particularly patients ages 65-74 years and those with intermediate-risk cytogenetics. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study was registered at clinicalTrials.gov on February 16, 2010 ( NCT01074047 ).