RESUMEN
The prognostic impact of PICALM::MLLT10 status in childhood leukaemia is not well described. Ten International Berlin Frankfurt Münster-affiliated study groups and the Children's Oncology Group collaborated in this multicentre retrospective study. The presence of the PICALM::MLLT10 fusion gene was confirmed by fluorescence in situ hybridization and/or RNA sequencing at participating sites. Ninety-eight children met the study criteria. T-cell acute lymphoblastic leukaemia (T-ALL) and acute myeloid leukaemia (AML) predominated 55 (56%) and 39 (40%) patients, respectively. Most patients received a chemotherapy regimen per their disease phenotype: 58% received an ALL regimen, 40% an AML regimen and 1% a hybrid regimen. Outcomes for children with PICALM::MLLT10 ALL were reasonable: 5-year event-free survival (EFS) 67% and 5-year overall survival (OS) 76%, but children with PICALM::MLLT10 AML had poor outcomes: 5-year EFS 22% and 5-year OS 26%. Haematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) did not result in a significant improvement in outcomes for PICALM::MLLT10 AML: 5-year EFS 20% for those who received HSCT versus 23% for those who did not (p = 0.6) and 5-year OS 37% versus 36% (p = 0.7). In summary, this study confirms that PICALM::MLLT10 AML is associated with a dismal prognosis and patients cannot be salvaged with HSCT; exploration of novel therapeutic options is warranted.
Asunto(s)
Leucemia Mieloide Aguda , Proteínas de Ensamble de Clatrina Monoméricas , Niño , Humanos , Hibridación Fluorescente in Situ , Estudios Retrospectivos , Proteínas de Fusión Oncogénica/genética , Resultado del Tratamiento , Leucemia Mieloide Aguda/genética , Factores de Transcripción/genética , Enfermedad Aguda , Pronóstico , Proteínas de Ensamble de Clatrina Monoméricas/genéticaRESUMEN
Background And Objectives: Langerhans cell histiocytosis (LCH) is an inflammatory myeloid neoplasm with a wide spectrum of clinical presentations. Programmed Cell Death-1 (PD-1) receptor and its ligand (PD-L1) are overexpressed in LCH, but their clinical significance is unknown. We performed a clinical correlation study of PD-1/PD-L1 and VE1(BRAFp.V600E) expression in 131 children with LCH. Methods: A total of 111 samples were tested for PD-1/PD-L1 and 109 for VE1(BRAFp.V600E) mutant protein by immunohistochemistry. Results: PD-1, PD-L1 and VE1(BRAFp.V600E) positivity was observed in 40.5%, 31.53% and 55%, respectively. PD-1/ PD-L1 expression showed no significant effect on the rate of disease reactivations, early response to therapy or late sequelae. The 5-year EFS was not statistically different between patients with PD-1 positive compared to those with PD-1 negative tumours (47.7% vs.58.8%, p=0.17). Similar 5-year EFS rates were also seen in those who were PD-L1 positive compared to PD-L1 negative cases (50.5% vs.55.5%, p=0.61). VE1(BRAFp.V600E) positivity was associated with a significantly higher frequency of risk-organ involvement (p=0.0053), but no significant effect on early response to therapy or rates of reactivations or late sequelae. Conclusions: Our study showed no significant correlation between VE1(BRAFp.V600E) expression, PD-1 and PD-L1 and clinical outcome in pediatric LCH.
