Download
References
Role of Allogeneic Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation in Adult Patients with Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia
Federico Lussana1 and Alessandro Rambaldi1
1 Hematology and Bone Marrow Transplant Unit, Azienda Ospedaliera Papa Giovanni XXIII, Bergamo, Italy.
Corresponding author: Federico Lussana, Hematology and
Bone Marrow Transplant Unit, A.O. Ospedale Papa Giovanni XXIII Bergamo.
Piazza OMS, 1, 24127 Bergamo. Italy. Tel: +39 035 2673684, Fax:+39 035
2674968
Published: October 1, 2014
Received: August 20, 2014
This article is available on PDF format at:
Received: August 20, 2014
Accepted: Septmebr 11, 2014
Meditter J Hematol Infect Dis 2014, 6(1): e2014065, DOI 10.4084/MJHID.2014.065This article is available on PDF format at:
This
is an Open Access article distributed
under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0),
which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any
medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
|
Abstract Adult acute lymphoblastic leukemia
(ALL) is a heterogeneous disease, due to the expression of different
biological and clinical risk factors, for which allogeneic stem cell
transplantation (alloHSCT) is an effective consolidation therapy. The
non-relapse mortality of alloHSCT remains significantly higher compared
with that of conventional chemotherapy; therefore, one of the main
challenges in the care of ALL is to establish a more precise prognostic
definition to select patients who could take advantage from an
alloHSCT. Currently, the use of minimal residual disease following
induction and early consolidation therapy has improved the prognostic
accuracy in defining ALL risk class. In Philadelphia-positive ALL, the
introduction of tyrosine kinase inhibitors pre and post alloHSCT
appears to improve outcomes significantly and, in the absence of
specifically designed clinical trials, alloHSCT remains the most
effective post- remission therapy. Nowadays, alloHSCT can be performed
according to different modalities encompassing the use of different
conditioning regimens, as well as different donors and stem cell
source, with a significant accessibility to transplant.
|
Introduction
Modern intensive induction chemotherapy allows most adult patients with acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) to achieve a complete hematologic remission (CR). However, only 40% of patients survive five years or more.[1-4] Allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (alloHSCT) is an effective post-remission therapy in patients with ALL, but its remarkable curative potential is often counterbalanced by a high incidence of post-transplant complications, which lead to a high non-relapse mortality (NRM). Chronic graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) with a related poor quality of life represents an additional severe concern, so that the optimal timing and use of this treatment modality remains an issue of debate. Thus, it is crucial to identify patients who have high chances of cure with standard therapy and those for whom alloHSCT is the only possible post-remission therapy. In this regard, a risk-adapted strategy, using clinical and/or biological features, such as age, white cell count, time to obtain CR, disease immunophenotype, cytogenetics, and molecular abnormalities, may help in selecting patients at highest risk for relapse, who may benefit from alloHSCT. Moreover, evidence is growing that the evaluation of minimal residual disease (MRD) can further improve the prognostic accuracy in defining ALL risk classes. In this review, we will update the indications for an alloHSCT in adult ALL patients. We will also discuss the issue of the conditioning regimens before transplant as well as the most appropriate stem cell source.
Which Patients Should Have a Transplant?
Clinical and biological risk stratification. At diagnosis, prognostic factors can be defined as disease or patients’ related. Among these latter white blood cell count (WBC) and some, well defined, immunologic, cytogenetic or molecular profiles reflect the wide biologic heterogeneity of ALL.[5] A high WBC count at diagnosis (greater than 30x109/L for B lineage ALL and 100x109/L for T-lineage ALL) is associated with a poor prognosis.[6-9] Similarly, a very immature phenotypes, such as pro-B or pro and pre T, and mature T phenotypes (EGIL BI and TI/TII/TIV) are considered adverse prognosticator.[10,11] Some cytogenetic abnormalities such as t(9;22)(q34;q11), t(4;11)(q21;q23), t(8;14)(q24.1;q32), the presence of a complex karyotype (defined as ≥ 5 chromosomal abnormalities) or low hypodiploidy/near triploidy, are similarly associated with an adverse prognosis.[12,13] Age remains the most important clinical risk factor and overall survival (OS) dramatically decreases with an increasing age. Young adults (younger than 35 years) may have a very good OS (up to 60% or more) if they are appropriately treated according to intensive pediatric protocols. On the contrary older adults (older than 55) have a probability of survival of 20% at 3 years with a disease-free survival (DFS) rate lower than 20% if no transplant options are offered as post- remission therapy.[6-7,14-17] The above reported prognostic factors are summarized in Table 1.
Risk class and alloHSCT.
Several studies have shown a potential benefit for alloHSCT over
conventional chemotherapy for patients with high-risk (HR) disease. The
French multi-center randomized trial LALA-87 found that only patients
with HR features have better OS and DFS with alloHSCT while patients
with standard-risk (SR) had no significant advantage of alloHSCT over
chemotherapy or autologous HSCT.[18] This was confirmed by the same
group in a larger study (LALA-94), that stratified only HR patients
with donors to alloHSCT, showing an advantage in patients transplanted
(5-year DFS 45% in transplanted compared to 23% in patients
without donor, p=0.007).[1] Similarly, the GOELAL02 trial showed an
improved six year OS in the HR patients undergoing alloHSCT compared to
patients without donor (6-year OS 75% vs. 40%, p=0.0027,
respectively).[16] Other studies suggested that alloHSCT in HR patients
in first CR (CR1) offers good survival rates ranging from 40 to
60%.[19-23] In contrast to the former results, there have been a number
of studies, including the EORTC ALL3 trial[24] or the Spanish PETHEMA
ALL-93 trial,[17] that failed to prove that alloHSCT produces a better
outcome than autologous HSCT or chemotherapy in adults with HR ALL.
More recently, the large MRC/ECOG trial,[7] including almost 2000
patients between 15 and 55 years old, and comparing the outcomes of
patients with donor versus no donor, showed that an allogeneic
transplant resulted in better disease control compared to chemotherapy
or autologous transplant. However, surprisingly, in this study the
5-year OS was significantly improved in SR patients (62% vs52%,
p=0.02), while in the HR group the reduction of relapse rate was offset
by a high non relapse mortality (NRM) (at 2 years 36% vs 22% with
conventional therapy) with a 5-year OS of 41% vs 35%, p=0.2.
Meta-analyses and unsolved issues. The uncertain results in evaluating the true benefit of the allogeneic transplant in HR patients has been highlighted by several meta-analyses performed over the past few years.[25-27] In the most recent one, including data from 13 studies involving 2962 patients (excluding Ph+ patients), the age at transplant turned out to be again the most important prognostic factor.[28] Indeed, a true survival benefit was reported only for patients < 35 years of age (OR 0.79; 95% CI, 0.70-0.90) because of the higher absolute risk of NRM for older patients.[28] There are several explanations for these controversial results, the most likely being that some of the analyzed trials were either numerically underpowered or gave variable definitions of “high-risk” ALL.
All in all, these controversial results highlight the fact that in adult ALL, classic prognostic factors have a limited accuracy.[2-3,6,12,29] A significant proportion of SR patients (up to 40% to 50%), treated with standard chemotherapy, will eventually relapse, and conversely, 20% to 25% of HR patients will not relapse, even in the absence of an alloHSCT.[1,7,16-17,30]
Minimal residual disease. In addition to the above mentioned clinical and biologic prognostic features identified at diagnosis, the most important prognostic factor remains the sensitivity to chemotherapy. This crucial factor can be evaluated by several ways that include time to achieve complete remission, time to leukemic blast cell clearance and, particularly in childhood ALL, the initial response to prednisone. However, most recently, a number of studies performed in children and adults have clearly shown how quantitative measurements of MRD at various time points during treatment provide the most accurate estimate of chemosensitivity. The definition of MRD either by immunophenotype or molecular biology implies the ability to identify the persistence of a very low number of leukemic cells in patients otherwise considered in hematologic remission. The persistence of such MRD is an indicator of intrinsic drug resistance that can herald overt hematologic relapse.[9,31-35] The persistence after ten weeks of treatment of MRD at a level exceeding 10-4 or 10-3 identifies a condition of high or very high risk, respectively, for relapse. Recently, a panel of experts summarized how to best assess MRD analysis, that can be made using either real-time quantitative polymerase chain reaction (RQ- PCR) or multichannel flow cytometry,[36] which is normally applicable in the vast majority of patients.[5] The use of MRD has been shown to be highly promising prognostic and decisional tool during the treatment program of ALL patients. The German Multicenter Study Group for Adult ALL (GMALL), in 196 SR patients, identified different MRD groups with 3-year relapse rates ranging from 0% to 94%.[33] Data from the MRC/ECOG trial[35] and Northern Italy Leukemia Group (NILG)[9] confirmed that MRD was the most significant risk factor for relapse. The prognosis was favorable in patients responsive to chemotherapy obtaining an MRD negativity and poor in patients MRD positive.[9] The GMALL group recently published the largest cohort of MRD data in adults.[37] This study corroborates the evidence that the measurement of MRD allows the identification of a subgroup of patients with an inadequate initial response and an HR of relapse.[37]
Finally, new data from Spanish PETHEMA group showed, in multivariable analysis, that poor MRD clearance was the only prognostic factor for an unfavorable DFS and OS.[38]
Table 2 summarizes the association between MRD status and clinical outcomes in ALL patients, reporting data from the largest prospective studies.
Overall, these data provide evidence for introducing MRD analysis for
the identification of patients at HR of relapse who may benefit from
early transplantation, despite a morphologic remission and the absence
of clinico-biological risk factors. Conversely MRD analysis identifies
a group of patients who are sensitive to chemotherapy, achieve a
non-detectable level of MRD, and then probably do not need
transplantation, as consolidation therapy also when risk factors are
present. The most relevant and urgent challenges into future
investigations about MRD are:
A) to determine the most predictive point time for the measurement and its threshold during and after treatment. B) to identify the best strategy in patients with high MRD, before allogeneic transplantation, such as the need of further therapy to reduce tumor load before transplant. C) to demonstrate the utility and efficacy of tapering or withholding the immunosuppressive therapy or of using donor lymphocyte infusion (DLI) in patients in molecular relapse after transplant. D) to demonstrate the efficacy of an MRD-guided choice in avoiding the alloHSCT in HR patients with no detectable MRD.
Allogeneic transplant for patients with Philadelphia- positive (Ph+) ALL. Historically, Ph+ ALL marked the most unfavorable subgroup of adult ALL. In the pre- tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) era, the overall survival, observed in unselected series of patients, was less than 25%, even when alloHSCT was offered whenever possible.[5,39] The incorporation of TKIs in the standard ALL therapy significantly changed the outcomes of ALL, increasing the remission induction rates as well as the depth of remission,[40-43] allowing an improved cure rate. Unfortunately, although almost all patients, receiving imatinib or dasatinib, as a single agent, achieve a hematologic CR,[44-45] it is likely that at least during the consolidation phase, chemotherapy should be added.[46-47] The use of refined programs with first/second generation TKIs and chemotherapy together with alloHSCT allow up to 50% of all patients to be cured.[40,48-49] A positive impact of imatinib on the clinical outcome of alloHSCT has been reported early after its therapeutic use in Ph+ ALL.[50] This result has been recently confirmed by the Japanese Adult Leukemia Study Group, that compared the alloHSCT outcomes between 542 patients who received imatinib before alloHSCT and during the initial complete remission period (imatinib cohort) and 196 patients who did not receive imatinib (non-imatinib cohort). The 5-year OS was significantly higher in the imatinib cohort than in the non-imatinib cohort (59% vs. 38%; p <0.001).[51] There is little information on the efficacy of TKIs administration after alloHSCT. Recently, Pfeifer et al. compared the tolerability and efficacy of post-transplant imatinib, administered either prophylactically or following detection of MRD; the prophylactic imatinib significantly reduced the incidence of molecular recurrence after alloHSCT compared with MRD-triggered imatinib (40% vs 69%; P=0.046).[52] Ram et al reported that imatinib, given after reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) with fludarabine and low-dose total body irradiation (TBI), was associated with significantly reduced mortality in univariate analysis, although the effect on relapse was not statistically significant.[53] Finally, data from European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation (EBMT) registry[54] showed that the introduction of TKIs pre and post alloHSCT significantly improved outcomes of Ph+ ALL patients. Of note, in this analysis the Authors described a significant association between the use of TKIs post- transplant and a low cumulative incidence of chronic GVHD, including its extensive form. In general, the available data suggest that TKIs administration at time of induction should be considered as a mainstay treatment of Ph+ ALL patients. It increases initial remission rates with a beneficial impact on feasibility of alloHSCT and also improves the short-term outcome while the impact of TKIs-based therapy on long-term outcome after alloHSCT remains unclear.
Impact of minimal residual disease on allogeneic transplantation. It must be kept in mind that patients undergoing allogeneic transplantation with a measurable level of minimal residual disease clearly show an inferior outcome after transplant due to a significantly increased risk of leukemia relapse.[55-58] This datum implies that, whenever possible, patients selected for allogeneic transplant should be considered for newer experimental treatment strategies able to achieve such a molecular remission before the transplant is performed. Among the innovative treatments of minimal residual disease, blinatumomab, the first member of a novel class of T cell-engaging, bispecific single-chain (BiTE) antibodies (it engages T cells for redirected lysis of CD19+ target cells), showed very encouraging results.[59] The crucial prognostic role of MRD has also been demonstrated in the case of Ph+ patients for whom the effort to achieve a convincing molecular CR should be pursued. In this respect, Ponatinib (a third generation TKI) has been recently shown to overcome the pharmacologic resistance mediated by some mutations of the BCR/ABL protein, such as the T315I, achieving an impressive frequency of molecular CR.[60]
Allogeneic transplant for relapsed or refractory ALL patients. ALL is primary refractory to chemotherapy in less than 10% of the cases. According to a few large studies from MRC/ECOG[61] and LALA groups,[62] the salvage treatment after relapse may induce an
hematologic remission in some patients but the long-term outcome is usually dismal. However, more intensive re-induction chemotherapy programs followed by an alloHSCT may achieve durable remissions.[63]
Doney et al. reported a long-term DFS of 24% in patients transplanted after achieving a second remission, and only of 9% of those transplanted with refractory disease, confirming that, in most cases, salvage after relapse is not feasible, even with transplantation.[64]
In this setting the use of blinatumomab[65] and other innovative drugs such as inotuzumab66 or ponatinib[47] may open the door to effective rescue treatments which may significantly increase the effective role of allogeneic transplant for this unlucky group of patients.
How to Perform an Allogeneic Transplant
It is now clear that alloHSCT represents a very effective post- remission therapy with high chances of achieving a long-term disease control in patients at highest risk for relapse. Nowadays, this procedure can be performed according to remarkably different modalities encompassing the use of different conditioning regimens, as well as different donors and stem cell source.
Which is the Optimal Transplant Regimen?
Myeloablative conditioning (MAC). Myeloablative conditioning regimens based on a combination of cyclophosphamide (Cy) (120 mg/kg) and total body irradiation (TBI) ranging from 12 up to 13,2 Gy) are still currently used as standard preparative regimens for ALL. Radiotherapy has an intrinsic and powerful anti-leukemic activity and the peculiar ability to eradicate leukemic cells within the central nervous system and testicles.[67-68] However, in order to reduce radiation- related toxicities other regimens have been developed. Regimens substituting busulfan (BU) for TBI showed comparable OS, relapse rate and DFS; but, until conversion from oral to IV BU the number of serious side effects, such as hepatic veno-occlusive disease (VOD) or hemorrhagic cystitis was high.[69-70] Recently, the combination regimen of IV BU/Cy in CR1 patients showed a three year OS of 66% with a relapse rate of 40% and a decreased transplant-related mortality (TRM).[71] The group at the City of Hope National Medical Center evaluated the substitution of Cy with etoposide (VP-16) in combination with fractioned TBI (13.2 Gy) reporting a significant activity also in patients with advanced ALL, with a DFS of 57% and a relapse rate of 32%.[72] These interesting results were confirmed in a subsequent trial conducted by Southwest Oncology Group.[73] Finally, Marks et al. recently published a comparative study of TBI combined with either Cy or VP-16.[74] In this study four groups were compared based on the radiation dose: Cy-TBI<13Gy, Cy-TBI>13Gy,VP-16-TBI <13Gy and VP-16-TBI >13Gy. No difference in OS, DFS and TRM was observed in CR1 patients, while an advantage in substituting VP-16 for Cy or, when Cy is used, in increasing the TBI dose >13 Gy, was reported for patients in CR2.[74]
In conclusion, the standard MAC are regimens based on TBI combined with Cy or VP-16, although to avoid TBI toxicities, the use of a regimen containing IV BU and Cy is considered a valid a safe alternative. Based on EBMT registry data,[71] the use of regimens using IV BU is increasing.
Reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC). The procedure of RIC transplant has been established in acute myeloid leukemia setting while the experience in ALL is limited with no randomized trial comparing RIC to MAC. Two large registry studies have demonstrated the feasibility and potential efficacy of RIC for ALL. A retrospective study from the EBMT[75] compared the outcome of 576 adult ALL patients who received a RIC (n=127) or MAC (n=449) alloHSCT in CR. As expected, the multivariate analysis showed that RIC patients experienced a decreased risk for NRM compared to MAC (hazard ratio (HR) 1.98, p=0.0001), but a higher relapse rate (HR 0.59, p=0.03). However, in multivariate analysis, the type of conditioning regimen (RIC vs. MAC) was not significantly associated with leukemia-free survival (LFS) (HR 0.84, p=0.23). Data from a second large registry of International Bone Marrow Transplant Registry (IBMTR) confirmed the feasibility of RIC with OS at 3 years of 45%.[76] In keeping with registry data, other small studies, reporting single Institution experience, demonstrated RIC feasible with good outcomes with OS over 50% and TRM between 10 and 20%.[53,77-79] Of note, in patients transplanted in CR2, or not in remission RIC regimen seems to have a limited benefit.[53,80]
In conclusion, these results, even if did not allow definitive conclusions, due to the absence of randomized clinical trial comparing RIC vs MAC, suggest that RIC could be a reasonable therapeutic option for ALL patients not eligible for MAC.
Is there Evidence about the Optimal Donor Cell Source?
Matched related donors are the ideal choice for alloHSCT due to lower incidence and severity of GVHD, but only about 30% of patients who need a transplant have an identical sibling donor. Advances in high-resolution human leukocyte antigen (HLA) typing and improvements in GVHD prophylaxis have made possible the use of alternative donor sources of stem cells, including matched unrelated, cord blood and haploidentical donor. According to a retrospective analysis of the IBMTR registry, in 672 ALL patients a similar incidence of relapse and NRM was observed after alloHSCT from both matched unrelated (MUD) and matched related donors, with an OS approximately of 50% at 5 years.[81] Recent retrospective studies comparing unrelated with sibling donors confirmed comparable outcomes: Kiehl et al. reported no significant difference in 5 years DFS in 221 patients in CR1 who underwent MUD vs sibling donor transplant (45% vs 42%, respectively)[82] and a larger study of 1139 patients[83] showed no significant difference between related and unrelated alloHSCT (at 4 years OS 65% vs 62% in related vs unrelated, respectively p=0.19).
For patients without MUD donors, the use of unrelated cord blood (UCB) and haploidentical donor are under clinical investigations. According to IBMTR registry data of 150 UCB transplants, of which 45 in patients with ALL, OS was 26% in UCB compared to 35% in MUD, with a higher TRM.[84] The EBMT and eurocord data showed similar results between UCB group (including 53 patients with ALL of 98) and MUD group (including 267 ALL patients of 584) in terms of OS, NRM and relapse rate.[85] Several recent small studies confirmed encouraging results with the use of UCB reporting no significant difference in OS and DFS between patients who underwent a UCB vs. MUD transplantation.[86-88] Finally, a very recent study, comparing outcomes of 116 UCB transplants with 686 unrelated adult donor, found that the survival of UCB graft recipients at 3 years (44%) was similar to that of recipients of matched or mismatched unrelated adult donor grafts (44% and 43%, respectively).[89] The use of haploidentical HSCT should be still considered an experimental procedure. Early results obtained with an ex vivo T cell depletion approach showed dismal results.[90] More recently, and in a pediatric setting, more attractive results have been reported; it has been supposed that the different laboratory procedures for ex vivo T cell depletion or the use of post- transplantation cyclophosphamide could be responsible for these better results.[91-93]
In general, the results of the above discussed studies demonstrate the feasibility of alloHSCT from alternative source of stem cells. In particular, the use of UCB should be considered a valid alternative source of stem cells for adults with ALL in the absence of an identical sibling donor or MUD. However, further studies specifically designed to test prospectively whether or not alternative cell sources are effective and safe for adult ALL need to be developed.
Conclusions
Adult ALL is a heterogeneous disease for which alloHSCT is an effective consolidation therapy. The non-relapse mortality of alloHSCT remains significantly high compared with that of conventional chemotherapy; thus, one of the main challenges in the care of ALL is to establish a more precise prognostic definition for selection of patients at higher risk for relapse to make better therapeutic decisions. In this context, a risk-adapted strategy is critical, and the use of MRD has shown promising results in establishing more precise prognostic definitions of patients at highest risk for relapse. MRD status must also be considered after alloHSCT for deciding additional treatments to prevent relapse. In Ph+ ALL, the introduction of TKI pre and post alloHSCT appears to improve outcomes significantly and, in the absence of specifically designed clinical trials, it remains the most effective post-remission therapy for this HR ALL. An appropriate timing for alloHSCT is crucial to obtain better results, given that the prognosis of relapsed ALL is very poor, and the possibility of achieving CR2 is uncertain. Thus, in most patients HLA typing should be performed at diagnosis for considering transplant options early during the treatment. The development of RIC regimens and the possibility of using alternative sources of stem cells, such as MUD and UCB grafts, facilitate the possibility of transplant in a wider range of patients, including those without a family donor and also elderly patients and those with comorbidities. Balancing the risks of relapse rate against the potential adverse effects of alloHSCT, in Figure 1 we summarized our suggestions for treatment of adult ALL. As discussed in this review, our strategy was also derived from observational databases and small retrospective single Institution experience, therefore, it is subject of debate. Further prospective clinical studies are needed to obtain definitive and reliable data and, considering the low incidence of ALL in adults, these efforts should probably be made within collaborative multicenter studies.
Modern intensive induction chemotherapy allows most adult patients with acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) to achieve a complete hematologic remission (CR). However, only 40% of patients survive five years or more.[1-4] Allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (alloHSCT) is an effective post-remission therapy in patients with ALL, but its remarkable curative potential is often counterbalanced by a high incidence of post-transplant complications, which lead to a high non-relapse mortality (NRM). Chronic graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) with a related poor quality of life represents an additional severe concern, so that the optimal timing and use of this treatment modality remains an issue of debate. Thus, it is crucial to identify patients who have high chances of cure with standard therapy and those for whom alloHSCT is the only possible post-remission therapy. In this regard, a risk-adapted strategy, using clinical and/or biological features, such as age, white cell count, time to obtain CR, disease immunophenotype, cytogenetics, and molecular abnormalities, may help in selecting patients at highest risk for relapse, who may benefit from alloHSCT. Moreover, evidence is growing that the evaluation of minimal residual disease (MRD) can further improve the prognostic accuracy in defining ALL risk classes. In this review, we will update the indications for an alloHSCT in adult ALL patients. We will also discuss the issue of the conditioning regimens before transplant as well as the most appropriate stem cell source.
Which Patients Should Have a Transplant?
Clinical and biological risk stratification. At diagnosis, prognostic factors can be defined as disease or patients’ related. Among these latter white blood cell count (WBC) and some, well defined, immunologic, cytogenetic or molecular profiles reflect the wide biologic heterogeneity of ALL.[5] A high WBC count at diagnosis (greater than 30x109/L for B lineage ALL and 100x109/L for T-lineage ALL) is associated with a poor prognosis.[6-9] Similarly, a very immature phenotypes, such as pro-B or pro and pre T, and mature T phenotypes (EGIL BI and TI/TII/TIV) are considered adverse prognosticator.[10,11] Some cytogenetic abnormalities such as t(9;22)(q34;q11), t(4;11)(q21;q23), t(8;14)(q24.1;q32), the presence of a complex karyotype (defined as ≥ 5 chromosomal abnormalities) or low hypodiploidy/near triploidy, are similarly associated with an adverse prognosis.[12,13] Age remains the most important clinical risk factor and overall survival (OS) dramatically decreases with an increasing age. Young adults (younger than 35 years) may have a very good OS (up to 60% or more) if they are appropriately treated according to intensive pediatric protocols. On the contrary older adults (older than 55) have a probability of survival of 20% at 3 years with a disease-free survival (DFS) rate lower than 20% if no transplant options are offered as post- remission therapy.[6-7,14-17] The above reported prognostic factors are summarized in Table 1.
Table 1. Clinical and biological risk factor at diagnosis in adult ALL. |
Meta-analyses and unsolved issues. The uncertain results in evaluating the true benefit of the allogeneic transplant in HR patients has been highlighted by several meta-analyses performed over the past few years.[25-27] In the most recent one, including data from 13 studies involving 2962 patients (excluding Ph+ patients), the age at transplant turned out to be again the most important prognostic factor.[28] Indeed, a true survival benefit was reported only for patients < 35 years of age (OR 0.79; 95% CI, 0.70-0.90) because of the higher absolute risk of NRM for older patients.[28] There are several explanations for these controversial results, the most likely being that some of the analyzed trials were either numerically underpowered or gave variable definitions of “high-risk” ALL.
All in all, these controversial results highlight the fact that in adult ALL, classic prognostic factors have a limited accuracy.[2-3,6,12,29] A significant proportion of SR patients (up to 40% to 50%), treated with standard chemotherapy, will eventually relapse, and conversely, 20% to 25% of HR patients will not relapse, even in the absence of an alloHSCT.[1,7,16-17,30]
Minimal residual disease. In addition to the above mentioned clinical and biologic prognostic features identified at diagnosis, the most important prognostic factor remains the sensitivity to chemotherapy. This crucial factor can be evaluated by several ways that include time to achieve complete remission, time to leukemic blast cell clearance and, particularly in childhood ALL, the initial response to prednisone. However, most recently, a number of studies performed in children and adults have clearly shown how quantitative measurements of MRD at various time points during treatment provide the most accurate estimate of chemosensitivity. The definition of MRD either by immunophenotype or molecular biology implies the ability to identify the persistence of a very low number of leukemic cells in patients otherwise considered in hematologic remission. The persistence of such MRD is an indicator of intrinsic drug resistance that can herald overt hematologic relapse.[9,31-35] The persistence after ten weeks of treatment of MRD at a level exceeding 10-4 or 10-3 identifies a condition of high or very high risk, respectively, for relapse. Recently, a panel of experts summarized how to best assess MRD analysis, that can be made using either real-time quantitative polymerase chain reaction (RQ- PCR) or multichannel flow cytometry,[36] which is normally applicable in the vast majority of patients.[5] The use of MRD has been shown to be highly promising prognostic and decisional tool during the treatment program of ALL patients. The German Multicenter Study Group for Adult ALL (GMALL), in 196 SR patients, identified different MRD groups with 3-year relapse rates ranging from 0% to 94%.[33] Data from the MRC/ECOG trial[35] and Northern Italy Leukemia Group (NILG)[9] confirmed that MRD was the most significant risk factor for relapse. The prognosis was favorable in patients responsive to chemotherapy obtaining an MRD negativity and poor in patients MRD positive.[9] The GMALL group recently published the largest cohort of MRD data in adults.[37] This study corroborates the evidence that the measurement of MRD allows the identification of a subgroup of patients with an inadequate initial response and an HR of relapse.[37]
Finally, new data from Spanish PETHEMA group showed, in multivariable analysis, that poor MRD clearance was the only prognostic factor for an unfavorable DFS and OS.[38]
Table 2 summarizes the association between MRD status and clinical outcomes in ALL patients, reporting data from the largest prospective studies.
Table 2. Prognostic impact of MRD in prospective studies of adult ALL. |
A) to determine the most predictive point time for the measurement and its threshold during and after treatment. B) to identify the best strategy in patients with high MRD, before allogeneic transplantation, such as the need of further therapy to reduce tumor load before transplant. C) to demonstrate the utility and efficacy of tapering or withholding the immunosuppressive therapy or of using donor lymphocyte infusion (DLI) in patients in molecular relapse after transplant. D) to demonstrate the efficacy of an MRD-guided choice in avoiding the alloHSCT in HR patients with no detectable MRD.
Allogeneic transplant for patients with Philadelphia- positive (Ph+) ALL. Historically, Ph+ ALL marked the most unfavorable subgroup of adult ALL. In the pre- tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) era, the overall survival, observed in unselected series of patients, was less than 25%, even when alloHSCT was offered whenever possible.[5,39] The incorporation of TKIs in the standard ALL therapy significantly changed the outcomes of ALL, increasing the remission induction rates as well as the depth of remission,[40-43] allowing an improved cure rate. Unfortunately, although almost all patients, receiving imatinib or dasatinib, as a single agent, achieve a hematologic CR,[44-45] it is likely that at least during the consolidation phase, chemotherapy should be added.[46-47] The use of refined programs with first/second generation TKIs and chemotherapy together with alloHSCT allow up to 50% of all patients to be cured.[40,48-49] A positive impact of imatinib on the clinical outcome of alloHSCT has been reported early after its therapeutic use in Ph+ ALL.[50] This result has been recently confirmed by the Japanese Adult Leukemia Study Group, that compared the alloHSCT outcomes between 542 patients who received imatinib before alloHSCT and during the initial complete remission period (imatinib cohort) and 196 patients who did not receive imatinib (non-imatinib cohort). The 5-year OS was significantly higher in the imatinib cohort than in the non-imatinib cohort (59% vs. 38%; p <0.001).[51] There is little information on the efficacy of TKIs administration after alloHSCT. Recently, Pfeifer et al. compared the tolerability and efficacy of post-transplant imatinib, administered either prophylactically or following detection of MRD; the prophylactic imatinib significantly reduced the incidence of molecular recurrence after alloHSCT compared with MRD-triggered imatinib (40% vs 69%; P=0.046).[52] Ram et al reported that imatinib, given after reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) with fludarabine and low-dose total body irradiation (TBI), was associated with significantly reduced mortality in univariate analysis, although the effect on relapse was not statistically significant.[53] Finally, data from European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation (EBMT) registry[54] showed that the introduction of TKIs pre and post alloHSCT significantly improved outcomes of Ph+ ALL patients. Of note, in this analysis the Authors described a significant association between the use of TKIs post- transplant and a low cumulative incidence of chronic GVHD, including its extensive form. In general, the available data suggest that TKIs administration at time of induction should be considered as a mainstay treatment of Ph+ ALL patients. It increases initial remission rates with a beneficial impact on feasibility of alloHSCT and also improves the short-term outcome while the impact of TKIs-based therapy on long-term outcome after alloHSCT remains unclear.
Impact of minimal residual disease on allogeneic transplantation. It must be kept in mind that patients undergoing allogeneic transplantation with a measurable level of minimal residual disease clearly show an inferior outcome after transplant due to a significantly increased risk of leukemia relapse.[55-58] This datum implies that, whenever possible, patients selected for allogeneic transplant should be considered for newer experimental treatment strategies able to achieve such a molecular remission before the transplant is performed. Among the innovative treatments of minimal residual disease, blinatumomab, the first member of a novel class of T cell-engaging, bispecific single-chain (BiTE) antibodies (it engages T cells for redirected lysis of CD19+ target cells), showed very encouraging results.[59] The crucial prognostic role of MRD has also been demonstrated in the case of Ph+ patients for whom the effort to achieve a convincing molecular CR should be pursued. In this respect, Ponatinib (a third generation TKI) has been recently shown to overcome the pharmacologic resistance mediated by some mutations of the BCR/ABL protein, such as the T315I, achieving an impressive frequency of molecular CR.[60]
Allogeneic transplant for relapsed or refractory ALL patients. ALL is primary refractory to chemotherapy in less than 10% of the cases. According to a few large studies from MRC/ECOG[61] and LALA groups,[62] the salvage treatment after relapse may induce an
hematologic remission in some patients but the long-term outcome is usually dismal. However, more intensive re-induction chemotherapy programs followed by an alloHSCT may achieve durable remissions.[63]
Doney et al. reported a long-term DFS of 24% in patients transplanted after achieving a second remission, and only of 9% of those transplanted with refractory disease, confirming that, in most cases, salvage after relapse is not feasible, even with transplantation.[64]
In this setting the use of blinatumomab[65] and other innovative drugs such as inotuzumab66 or ponatinib[47] may open the door to effective rescue treatments which may significantly increase the effective role of allogeneic transplant for this unlucky group of patients.
How to Perform an Allogeneic Transplant
It is now clear that alloHSCT represents a very effective post- remission therapy with high chances of achieving a long-term disease control in patients at highest risk for relapse. Nowadays, this procedure can be performed according to remarkably different modalities encompassing the use of different conditioning regimens, as well as different donors and stem cell source.
Which is the Optimal Transplant Regimen?
Myeloablative conditioning (MAC). Myeloablative conditioning regimens based on a combination of cyclophosphamide (Cy) (120 mg/kg) and total body irradiation (TBI) ranging from 12 up to 13,2 Gy) are still currently used as standard preparative regimens for ALL. Radiotherapy has an intrinsic and powerful anti-leukemic activity and the peculiar ability to eradicate leukemic cells within the central nervous system and testicles.[67-68] However, in order to reduce radiation- related toxicities other regimens have been developed. Regimens substituting busulfan (BU) for TBI showed comparable OS, relapse rate and DFS; but, until conversion from oral to IV BU the number of serious side effects, such as hepatic veno-occlusive disease (VOD) or hemorrhagic cystitis was high.[69-70] Recently, the combination regimen of IV BU/Cy in CR1 patients showed a three year OS of 66% with a relapse rate of 40% and a decreased transplant-related mortality (TRM).[71] The group at the City of Hope National Medical Center evaluated the substitution of Cy with etoposide (VP-16) in combination with fractioned TBI (13.2 Gy) reporting a significant activity also in patients with advanced ALL, with a DFS of 57% and a relapse rate of 32%.[72] These interesting results were confirmed in a subsequent trial conducted by Southwest Oncology Group.[73] Finally, Marks et al. recently published a comparative study of TBI combined with either Cy or VP-16.[74] In this study four groups were compared based on the radiation dose: Cy-TBI<13Gy, Cy-TBI>13Gy,VP-16-TBI <13Gy and VP-16-TBI >13Gy. No difference in OS, DFS and TRM was observed in CR1 patients, while an advantage in substituting VP-16 for Cy or, when Cy is used, in increasing the TBI dose >13 Gy, was reported for patients in CR2.[74]
In conclusion, the standard MAC are regimens based on TBI combined with Cy or VP-16, although to avoid TBI toxicities, the use of a regimen containing IV BU and Cy is considered a valid a safe alternative. Based on EBMT registry data,[71] the use of regimens using IV BU is increasing.
Reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC). The procedure of RIC transplant has been established in acute myeloid leukemia setting while the experience in ALL is limited with no randomized trial comparing RIC to MAC. Two large registry studies have demonstrated the feasibility and potential efficacy of RIC for ALL. A retrospective study from the EBMT[75] compared the outcome of 576 adult ALL patients who received a RIC (n=127) or MAC (n=449) alloHSCT in CR. As expected, the multivariate analysis showed that RIC patients experienced a decreased risk for NRM compared to MAC (hazard ratio (HR) 1.98, p=0.0001), but a higher relapse rate (HR 0.59, p=0.03). However, in multivariate analysis, the type of conditioning regimen (RIC vs. MAC) was not significantly associated with leukemia-free survival (LFS) (HR 0.84, p=0.23). Data from a second large registry of International Bone Marrow Transplant Registry (IBMTR) confirmed the feasibility of RIC with OS at 3 years of 45%.[76] In keeping with registry data, other small studies, reporting single Institution experience, demonstrated RIC feasible with good outcomes with OS over 50% and TRM between 10 and 20%.[53,77-79] Of note, in patients transplanted in CR2, or not in remission RIC regimen seems to have a limited benefit.[53,80]
In conclusion, these results, even if did not allow definitive conclusions, due to the absence of randomized clinical trial comparing RIC vs MAC, suggest that RIC could be a reasonable therapeutic option for ALL patients not eligible for MAC.
Is there Evidence about the Optimal Donor Cell Source?
Matched related donors are the ideal choice for alloHSCT due to lower incidence and severity of GVHD, but only about 30% of patients who need a transplant have an identical sibling donor. Advances in high-resolution human leukocyte antigen (HLA) typing and improvements in GVHD prophylaxis have made possible the use of alternative donor sources of stem cells, including matched unrelated, cord blood and haploidentical donor. According to a retrospective analysis of the IBMTR registry, in 672 ALL patients a similar incidence of relapse and NRM was observed after alloHSCT from both matched unrelated (MUD) and matched related donors, with an OS approximately of 50% at 5 years.[81] Recent retrospective studies comparing unrelated with sibling donors confirmed comparable outcomes: Kiehl et al. reported no significant difference in 5 years DFS in 221 patients in CR1 who underwent MUD vs sibling donor transplant (45% vs 42%, respectively)[82] and a larger study of 1139 patients[83] showed no significant difference between related and unrelated alloHSCT (at 4 years OS 65% vs 62% in related vs unrelated, respectively p=0.19).
For patients without MUD donors, the use of unrelated cord blood (UCB) and haploidentical donor are under clinical investigations. According to IBMTR registry data of 150 UCB transplants, of which 45 in patients with ALL, OS was 26% in UCB compared to 35% in MUD, with a higher TRM.[84] The EBMT and eurocord data showed similar results between UCB group (including 53 patients with ALL of 98) and MUD group (including 267 ALL patients of 584) in terms of OS, NRM and relapse rate.[85] Several recent small studies confirmed encouraging results with the use of UCB reporting no significant difference in OS and DFS between patients who underwent a UCB vs. MUD transplantation.[86-88] Finally, a very recent study, comparing outcomes of 116 UCB transplants with 686 unrelated adult donor, found that the survival of UCB graft recipients at 3 years (44%) was similar to that of recipients of matched or mismatched unrelated adult donor grafts (44% and 43%, respectively).[89] The use of haploidentical HSCT should be still considered an experimental procedure. Early results obtained with an ex vivo T cell depletion approach showed dismal results.[90] More recently, and in a pediatric setting, more attractive results have been reported; it has been supposed that the different laboratory procedures for ex vivo T cell depletion or the use of post- transplantation cyclophosphamide could be responsible for these better results.[91-93]
In general, the results of the above discussed studies demonstrate the feasibility of alloHSCT from alternative source of stem cells. In particular, the use of UCB should be considered a valid alternative source of stem cells for adults with ALL in the absence of an identical sibling donor or MUD. However, further studies specifically designed to test prospectively whether or not alternative cell sources are effective and safe for adult ALL need to be developed.
Conclusions
Adult ALL is a heterogeneous disease for which alloHSCT is an effective consolidation therapy. The non-relapse mortality of alloHSCT remains significantly high compared with that of conventional chemotherapy; thus, one of the main challenges in the care of ALL is to establish a more precise prognostic definition for selection of patients at higher risk for relapse to make better therapeutic decisions. In this context, a risk-adapted strategy is critical, and the use of MRD has shown promising results in establishing more precise prognostic definitions of patients at highest risk for relapse. MRD status must also be considered after alloHSCT for deciding additional treatments to prevent relapse. In Ph+ ALL, the introduction of TKI pre and post alloHSCT appears to improve outcomes significantly and, in the absence of specifically designed clinical trials, it remains the most effective post-remission therapy for this HR ALL. An appropriate timing for alloHSCT is crucial to obtain better results, given that the prognosis of relapsed ALL is very poor, and the possibility of achieving CR2 is uncertain. Thus, in most patients HLA typing should be performed at diagnosis for considering transplant options early during the treatment. The development of RIC regimens and the possibility of using alternative sources of stem cells, such as MUD and UCB grafts, facilitate the possibility of transplant in a wider range of patients, including those without a family donor and also elderly patients and those with comorbidities. Balancing the risks of relapse rate against the potential adverse effects of alloHSCT, in Figure 1 we summarized our suggestions for treatment of adult ALL. As discussed in this review, our strategy was also derived from observational databases and small retrospective single Institution experience, therefore, it is subject of debate. Further prospective clinical studies are needed to obtain definitive and reliable data and, considering the low incidence of ALL in adults, these efforts should probably be made within collaborative multicenter studies.
Figure 1. Summary of our suggestions for the treatment of adult acute lymphoblastic leukemia. |
References
- Thomas X, Boiron JM, Huguet F, Dombret H, Bradstock
K, Vey N, Kovacsovics T, Delannoy A, Fegueux N, Fenaux P, Stamatoullas
A, Vernant JP, Tournilhac O, Buzyn A, Reman O, Charrin C, Boucheix C,
Gabert J, Lheritier V, Fiere D. Outcome of treatment in adults with
acute lymphoblastic leukemia: analysis of the LALA-94 trial. J Clin
Oncol. 2004; 22: 4075-4086.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2004.10.050 PMid:15353542
- Kantarjian H, Thomas D, O'Brien S, Cortes J, Giles F, Jeha S,
Bueso-Ramos CE, Pierce S, Shan J, Koller C, Beran M, Keating M,
Freireich EJ. Long-term follow-up results of hyperfractionated
cyclophosphamide, vincristine, doxorubicin, and dexamethasone
(Hyper-CVAD), a dose-intensive regimen, in adult acute lymphocytic
leukemia. Cancer. 2004; 101: 2788-2801.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cncr.20668 PMid:15481055
-
Gokbuget N, Hoelzer D, Arnold R, Bohme A, Bartram CR, Freund M, Ganser
A, Kneba M, Langer W, Lipp T, Ludwig WD, Maschmeyer G, Rieder H, Thiel
E, Weiss A, Messerer D. Treatment of Adult ALL according to protocols
of the German Multicenter Study Group for Adult ALL (GMALL). Hematol
Oncol Clin North Am. 2000; 14: 1307-1325.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0889-8588(05)70188-X
-
Rowe JM, Buck G, Burnett AK, Chopra R, Wiernik PH, Richards SM, Lazarus
HM, Franklin IM, Litzow MR, Ciobanu N, Prentice HG, Durrant J, Tallman
MS, Goldstone AH. Induction therapy for adults with acute lymphoblastic
leukemia: results of more than 1500 patients from the international ALL
trial: MRC UKALL XII/ECOG E2993. Blood. 2005; 106: 3760-3767.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1182/blood-2005-04-1623 PMid:16105981
-
Bassan R, Hoelzer D. Modern therapy of acute lymphoblastic leukemia. J
Clin Oncol. 2011; 29: 532-543.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2010.30.1382 PMid:21220592
-
Hoelzer D, Thiel E, Loffler H, Buchner T, Ganser A, Heil G, Koch P,
Freund M, Diedrich H, Ruhl H, et al. Prognostic factors in a
multicenter study for treatment of acute lymphoblastic leukemia in
adults. Blood. 1988; 71: 123-131. PMid:3422030
-
Goldstone AH, Richards SM, Lazarus HM, Tallman MS, Buck G, Fielding AK,
Burnett AK, Chopra R, Wiernik PH, Foroni L, Paietta E, Litzow MR, Marks
DI, Durrant J, McMillan A, Franklin IM, Luger S, Ciobanu N, Rowe JM. In
adults with standard-risk acute lymphoblastic leukemia, the greatest
benefit is achieved from a matched sibling allogeneic transplantation
in first complete remission, and an autologous transplantation is less
effective than conventional consolidation/maintenance chemotherapy in
all patients: final results of the International ALL Trial (MRC UKALL
XII/ECOG E2993). Blood. 2008; 111: 1827-1833.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1182/blood-2007-10-116582 PMid:18048644
-
Huguet F, Leguay T, Raffoux E, Thomas X, Beldjord K, Delabesse E,
Chevallier P, Buzyn A, Delannoy A, Chalandon Y, Vernant JP,
Lafage-Pochitaloff M, Chassevent A, Lheritier V, Macintyre E, Bene MC,
Ifrah N, Dombret H. Pediatric-inspired therapy in adults with
Philadelphia chromosome-negative acute lymphoblastic leukemia: the
GRAALL-2003 study. J Clin Oncol. 2009; 27: 911- 918. http://dx.doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2008.18.6916 PMid:19124805
-
Bassan R, Spinelli O, Oldani E, Intermesoli T, Tosi M, Peruta B, Rossi
G, Borlenghi E, Pogliani EM, Terruzzi E, Fabris P, Cassibba V,
Lambertenghi-Deliliers G, Cortelezzi A, Bosi A, Gianfaldoni G, Ciceri
F, Bernardi M, Gallamini A, Mattei D, Di Bona E, Romani C, Scattolin
AM, Barbui T, Rambaldi A. Improved risk classification for
risk-specific therapy based on the molecular study of minimal residual
disease (MRD) in adult acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL). Blood. 2009;
113: 4153-4162.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1182/blood-2008-11-185132 PMid:19141862
-
Maury S, Huguet F, Leguay T, Lacombe F, Maynadie M, Girard S, de
Labarthe A, Kuhlein E, Raffoux E, Thomas X, Chevallier P, Buzyn A,
Delannoy A, Chalandon Y, Vernant JP, Rousselot P, Macintyre E, Ifrah N,
Dombret H, Bene MC. Adverse prognostic significance of CD20 expression
in adults with Philadelphia chromosome-negative B-cell precursor acute
lymphoblastic leukemia. Haematologica.2010; 95: 324-328. http://dx.doi.org/10.3324/haematol.2009.010306 PMid:19773266 PMCid:PMC2817037
- Marks DI, Paietta EM,
Moorman AV, Richards SM, Buck G, DeWald G, Ferrando A, Fielding AK,
Goldstone AH, Ketterling RP, Litzow MR, Luger SM, McMillan AK,
Mansour MR, Rowe JM, Tallman MS,
Lazarus HM. T-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia in adults: clinical
features, immunophenotype, cytogenetics, and outcome from the large
randomized prospective trial (UKALL XII/ECOG 2993). Blood. 2009; 114:
5136-5145. http://dx.doi.org/10.1182/blood-2009-08-231217 PMid:19828704 PMCid:PMC2792210
-
Moorman AV, Harrison CJ, Buck GA, Richards SM, Secker- Walker LM,
Martineau M, Vance GH, Cherry AM, Higgins RR, Fielding AK, Foroni L,
Paietta E, Tallman MS, Litzow MR, Wiernik PH, Rowe JM, Goldstone AH,
Dewald GW. Karyotype is an independent prognostic factor in adult acute
lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL): analysis of cytogenetic data from
patients treated on the Medical Research Council (MRC) UKALLXII/Eastern
Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) 2993 trial. Blood. 2007; 109:
3189-3197. http://dx.doi.org/10.1182/blood-2006-10-051912 PMid:17170120
- Rowe
JM. Prognostic factors in adult acute lymphoblastic leukaemia. Br J
Haematol. 2010; 150: 389-405. PMid:20573154
- Pui
CH, Evans WE. Acute lymphoblastic leukemia. N Engl J Med. 1998;
339:
605-615.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1056/NEJM199808273390907 PMid:9718381
-
Takeuchi J, Kyo T, Naito K, Sao H, Takahashi M, Miyawaki S, Kuriyama K,
Ohtake S, Yagasaki F, Murakami H, Asou N, Ino T, Okamoto T, Usui N,
Nishimura M, Shinagawa K, Fukushima T, Taguchi H, Morii T, Mizuta S,
Akiyama H, Nakamura Y, Ohshima T, Ohno R. Induction therapy by frequent
administration of doxorubicin with four other drugs, followed by
intensive consolidation and maintenance therapy for adult acute
lymphoblastic leukemia: the JALSG-ALL93 study. Leukemia. 2002; 16:
1259-1266. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/sj.leu.2402526 PMid:12094249
-
Hunault M, Harousseau JL, Delain M, Truchan-Graczyk M, Cahn JY, Witz F,
Lamy T, Pignon B, Jouet JP, Garidi R, Caillot D, Berthou C, Guyotat D,
Sadoun A, Sotto JJ, Lioure B, Casassus P, Solal-Celigny P,
Stalnikiewicz L, Audhuy B, Blanchet O, Baranger L, Bene MC, Ifrah N.
Better outcome of adult acute lymphoblastic leukemia after early
genoidentical allogeneic bone marrow transplantation (BMT) than after
late high-dose therapy and autologous BMT: a GOELAMS trial. Blood.
2004; 104: 3028- 3037. http://dx.doi.org/10.1182/blood-2003-10-3560 PMid:15256423
-
Ribera JM, Oriol A, Bethencourt C, Parody R, Hernandez-Rivas JM, Moreno
MJ, del Potro E, Torm M, Rivas C, Besalduch J, Sanz MA, Ortega JJ.
Comparison of intensive chemotherapy, allogeneic or autologous stem
cell transplantation as post-remission treatment for adult patients
with high-risk acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Results of the PETHEMA
ALL-93 trial. Haematologica. 2005; 90: 1346-1356. PMid:16219571
-
Sebban C, Lepage E, Vernant JP, Gluckman E, Attal M, Reiffers J, Sutton
L, Racadot E, Michallet M, Maraninchi D, et al. Allogeneic bone marrow
transplantation in adult acute lymphoblastic leukemia in first complete
remission: a comparative study. French Group of Therapy of Adult Acute
Lymphoblastic Leukemia. J Clin Oncol. 1994; 12: 2580-2587. PMid:7989932
-
Attal M, Blaise D, Marit G, Payen C, Michallet M, Vernant JP, Sauvage
C, Troussard X, Nedellec G, Pico J, et al. Consolidation treatment of
adult acute lymphoblastic leukemia: a prospective, randomized trial
comparing allogeneic versus autologous bone marrow transplantation and
testing the impact of recombinant interleukin-2 after autologous bone
marrow transplantation. BGMT Group. Blood. 1995; 86: 1619-1628. PMid:7632972
-
Doney K, Fisher LD, Appelbaum FR, Buckner CD, Storb R, Singer J, Fefer
A, Anasetti C, Beatty P, Bensinger W, et al. Treatment of adult acute
lymphoblastic leukemia with allogeneic bone marrow transplantation.
Multivariate analysis of factors affecting acute graft-versus-host
disease, relapse, and relapse-free survival. Bone Marrow Transplant.
1991; 7: 453-459. PMid:1873592
-
Blume KG, Forman SJ, Snyder DS, Nademanee AP, O'Donnell MR, Fahey JL,
Krance RA, Sniecinski IJ, Stock AD, Findley DO, et al. Allogeneic bone
marrow transplantation for acute lymphoblastic leukemia during first
complete remission. Transplantation. 1987; 43: 389-392. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/00007890-198703000-00014 PMid:3547796
-
Chao NJ, Forman SJ, Schmidt GM, Snyder DS, Amylon MD, Konrad PN,
Nademanee AP, O'Donnell MR, Parker PM, Stein AS, et al. Allogeneic bone
marrow transplantation for high-risk acute lymphoblastic leukemia
during first complete remission. Blood. 1991; 78: 1923-1927.
PMid:1912575
-
Jamieson CH, Amylon MD, Wong RM, Blume KG. Allogeneic hematopoietic
cell transplantation for patients with high-risk acute lymphoblastic
leukemia in first or second complete remission using fractionated
total-body irradiation and high-dose etoposide: a 15- year experience.
Exp Hematol. 2003; 31: 981-986. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0301-472X(03)00231-5
-
Labar B, Suciu S, Zittoun R, Muus P, Marie JP, Fillet G, Peetermans M,
Stryckmans P, Willemze R, Feremans W, Jaksic B, Bourhis JH, Burghouts
JP, de Witte T. Allogeneic stem cell transplantation in acute
lymphoblastic leukemia and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma for patients
<or=50 years old in first complete remission: results of
the EORTC ALL-3 trial. Haematologica. 2004; 89: 809-817. PMid:15257932
-
Yanada M, Matsuo K, Suzuki T, Naoe T. Allogeneic hematopoietic stem
cell transplantation as part of postremission therapy improves survival
for adult patients with high-risk acute lymphoblastic leukemia: a
metaanalysis. Cancer. 2006; 106: 2657-2663.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cncr.21932 PMid:16703597
-
Ram R, Gafter-Gvili A, Vidal L, Paul M, Ben-Bassat I, Shpilberg O,
Raanani P. Management of adult patients with acute lymphoblastic
leukemia in first complete remission: systematic review and
meta-analysis. Cancer. 2010; 116: 3447-3457.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cncr.25136 PMid:20564092
-
Pidala J, Djulbegovic B, Anasetti C, Kharfan-Dabaja M, Kumar A.
Allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation for adult acute
lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) in first complete remission. Cochrane
Database Syst Rev. 2011: CD008818. PMid:21975786
-
Gupta V, Richards S, Rowe J. Allogeneic, but not autologous,
hematopoietic cell transplantation improves survival only among younger
adults with acute lymphoblastic leukemia in first remission: an
individual patient data meta-analysis. Blood. 2013; 121: 339-350.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1182/blood-2012-07-445098 PMid:23165481
-
Mancini M, Scappaticci D, Cimino G, Nanni M, Derme V, Elia L, Tafuri A,
Vignetti M, Vitale A, Cuneo A, Castoldi G, Saglio G, Pane F, Mecucci C,
Camera A, Specchia G, Tedeschi A, Di Raimondo F, Fioritoni G, Fabbiano
F, Marmont F, Ferrara F, Cascavilla N, Todeschini G, Nobile F, Kropp
MG, Leoni P, Tabilio A, Luppi M, Annino L, Mandelli F, Foa R. A
comprehensive genetic classification of adult acute lymphoblastic
leukemia (ALL): analysis of the GIMEMA 0496 protocol. Blood. 2005; 105:
3434- 3441. http://dx.doi.org/10.1182/blood-2004-07-2922 PMid:15650057
-
Bassan R, Pogliani E, Casula P, Rossi G, Fabris P, Morandi S,
Lambertenghi-Deliliers G, Vespignani M, Lerede T, Rambaldi A, Borleri
G, Spedini P, Cortelezzi A, Izzi T, Coser P, Broccia G, Corneo G,
Barbui T. Risk-oriented postremission strategies in adult acute
lymphoblastic leukemia: prospective confirmation of anthracycline
activity in standard-risk class and role of hematopoietic stem cell
transplants in high-risk groups. Hematol J. 2001; 2: 117-126.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/sj.thj.6200091 PMid:11424004
-
Cave H, van der Werff ten Bosch J, Suciu S, Guidal C, Waterkeyn C,
Otten J, Bakkus M, Thielemans K, Grandchamp B, Vilmer E. Clinical
significance of minimal residual disease in childhood acute
lymphoblastic leukemia. European Organization for Research and
Treatment of Cancer--Childhood Leukemia Cooperative Group. N
Engl J Med. 1998; 339: 591-598. http://dx.doi.org/10.1056/NEJM199808273390904 PMid:9718378
-
van Dongen JJ, Seriu T, Panzer-Grumayer ER, Biondi A, Pongers- Willemse
MJ, Corral L, Stolz F, Schrappe M, Masera G, Kamps WA, Gadner H, van
Wering ER, Ludwig WD, Basso G, de Bruijn MA, Cazzaniga G, Hettinger K,
van der Does-van den Berg A, Hop WC, Riehm H, Bartram CR. Prognostic
value of minimal residual disease in acute lymphoblastic leukaemia in
childhood. Lancet. 1998; 352: 1731-1738.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(98)04058-6
- Bruggemann M, Raff T,
Flohr T, Gokbuget N, Nakao M, Droese J, Luschen S, Pott C, Ritgen
M, Scheuring U, Horst HA, Thiel E, Hoelzer D,
Bartram CR, Kneba M. Clinical significance of minimal residual disease
quantification in adult patients with standard-risk acute lymphoblastic
leukemia. Blood. 2006; 107: 1116-1123. http://dx.doi.org/10.1182/blood-2005-07-2708 PMid:16195338
-
Holowiecki J, Krawczyk-Kulis M, Giebel
S, Jagoda K, Stella- Holowiecka B, Piatkowska-Jakubas
B, Paluszewska M, Seferynska I, Lewandowski K, Kielbinski M, Czyz A,
Balana-Nowak A, Krol M, Skotnicki AB,
Jedrzejczak WW, Warzocha K, Lange A,
Hellmann A. Status of minimal residual disease after induction
predicts outcome in both standard and high-risk Ph-negative adult acute
lymphoblastic leukaemia. The Polish Adult Leukemia Group ALL 4-2002 MRD
Study. Br J Haematol. 2008; 142: 227-237.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2141.2008.07185.x PMid:18492099
-
Patel B, Rai L, Buck G, Richards SM, Mortuza Y, Mitchell W, Gerrard G,
Moorman AV, Duke V, Hoffbrand AV, Fielding AK, Goldstone AH, Foroni L.
Minimal residual disease is a significant predictor
of treatment failure in
non T-lineage adult acute
lymphoblastic leukaemia: final results of
the international trial UKALL XII/ECOG2993.
Br J Haematol. 2010; 148: 80-89.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2141.2009.07941.x PMid:19863538
-
Bruggemann M, Schrauder A, Raff T, Pfeifer H, Dworzak M, Ottmann OG,
Asnafi V, Baruchel A, Bassan R, Benoit Y, Biondi A, Cave H, Dombret H,
Fielding AK, Foa R, Gokbuget N, Goldstone AH, Goulden N, Henze G,
Hoelzer D, Janka-Schaub GE, Macintyre EA, Pieters R, Rambaldi A, Ribera
JM, Schmiegelow K, Spinelli O, Stary J, von Stackelberg A, Kneba M,
Schrappe M, van Dongen JJ. Standardized MRD quantification in European
ALL trials: proceedings of the Second International Symposium on MRD
assessment in Kiel, Germany, 18-20 September 2008. Leukemia. 2010; 24:
521-535. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/leu.2009.268
PMid:20033054
-
Gokbuget N, Kneba M, Raff T, Trautmann H, Bartram CR, Arnold R, Fietkau
R, Freund M, Ganser A, Ludwig WD, Maschmeyer G, Rieder H, Schwartz S,
Serve H, Thiel E, Bruggemann M, Hoelzer D. Adult patients with acute lymphoblastic leukemia and molecular
failure display a poor prognosis and are candidates for stem cell
transplantation and targeted therapies. Blood. 2012; 120: 1868-
1876. http://dx.doi.org/10.1182/blood-2011-09-377713
PMid:22442346
-
Ribera JM, Oriol A, Morgades M, Montesinos P, Sarra J, Gonzalez-Campos
J, Brunet S, Tormo M, Fernandez-Abellan P, Guardia R, Bernal MT, Esteve
J, Barba P, Moreno MJ, Bermudez A, Cladera A, Escoda L, Garcia-Boyero
R, Del Potro E, Bergua J, Amigo ML, Grande C, Rabunal MJ,
Hernandez-Rivas JM, Feliu E. Treatment of High-Risk Philadelphia
Chromosome-Negative Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia in Adolescents and
Adults According to Early Cytologic Response and Minimal Residual
Disease After Consolidation Assessed by Flow Cytometry: Final Results
of the PETHEMA ALL-AR-03 Trial. J Clin Oncol. 2014;32:1595-1604. http://dx.doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2013.52.2425 PMid:24752047
-
Fielding AK, Rowe JM, Richards SM, Buck G, Moorman AV, Durrant IJ,
Marks DI, McMillan AK, Litzow MR, Lazarus HM, Foroni L, Dewald G,
Franklin IM, Luger SM, Paietta E, Wiernik PH, Tallman MS, Goldstone AH.
Prospective outcome data on 267 unselected adult patients with
Philadelphia chromosome-positive acute lymphoblastic leukemia confirms
superiority of allogeneic transplantation over chemotherapy in the
pre-imatinib era: results from the International ALL Trial MRC
UKALLXII/ECOG2993. Blood. 2009; 113: 4489-4496.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1182/blood-2009-01-199380 PMid:19244158
-
Thomas DA, Faderl S, Cortes J, O'Brien S, Giles FJ, Kornblau SM,
Garcia-Manero G, Keating MJ, Andreeff M, Jeha S, Beran M, Verstovsek S,
Pierce S, Letvak L, Salvado A, Champlin R, Talpaz M, Kantarjian H.
Treatment of Philadelphia chromosome-positive acute lymphocytic
leukemia with hyper-CVAD and imatinib mesylate. Blood. 2004; 103: 4396-4407.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1182/blood-2003-08-2958 PMid:14551133
-
Ravandi F, Jorgensen JL, Thomas DA, O'Brien S, Garris R, Faderl S,
Huang X, Wen S, Burger JA, Ferrajoli A, Kebriaei P, Champlin RE, Estrov
Z, Challagundla P, Wang SA, Luthra R, Cortes JE, Kantarjian HM.
Detection of MRD may predict the outcome of patients with Philadelphia
chromosome-positive ALL treated with tyrosine kinase inhibitors plus chemotherapy. Blood. 2013; 122:
1214-1221. http://dx.doi.org/10.1182/blood-2012-11-466482
PMid:23836561 PMCid:PMC3976223
-
Bassan R, Rossi G, Pogliani EM, Di Bona E, Angelucci E, Cavattoni I,
Lambertenghi-Deliliers G, Mannelli F, Levis A, Ciceri F, Mattei D,
Borlenghi E, Terruzzi E, Borghero C, Romani C, Spinelli O, Tosi M,
Oldani E, Intermesoli T, Rambaldi A. Chemotherapy-phased imatinib
pulses improve long-term outcome of adult patients with Philadelphia
chromosome-positive acute lymphoblastic leukemia: Northern Italy
Leukemia Group protocol 09/00. J Clin Oncol. 2010; 28: 3644-3652.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2010.28.1287 PMid:20606084
-
Fielding AK, Rowe JM, Buck G, Foroni L, Gerrard G, Litzow MR, Lazarus
H, Luger SM, Marks DI, McMillan AK, Moorman AV, Patel B, Paietta E,
Tallman MS, Goldstone AH. UKALLXII/ECOG2993: addition of imatinib to a
standard treatment regimen enhances long-term outcomes in Philadelphia
positive acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Blood. 2014; 123: 843-850.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1182/blood-2013-09-529008 PMid:24277073
-
Vignetti M, Fazi P, Cimino G, Martinelli G, Di Raimondo F,
Ferrara F, Meloni G, Ambrosetti A, Quarta G, Pagano L, Rege- Cambrin G,
Elia L, Bertieri R, Annino L, Foa R, Baccarani M, Mandelli F. Imatinib
plus steroids induces complete remissions and prolonged survival in
elderly Philadelphia chromosome-positive patients with acute
lymphoblastic leukemia without additional chemotherapy: results of the
Gruppo Italiano Malattie Ematologiche dell'Adulto (GIMEMA) LAL0201-B
protocol. Blood. 2007; 109: 3676-3678.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1182/blood-2006-10-052746 PMid:17213285
-
Foa R, Vitale A, Vignetti M, Meloni G, Guarini A, De Propris MS, Elia
L, Paoloni F, Fazi P, Cimino G, Nobile F, Ferrara F, Castagnola C, Sica
S, Leoni P, Zuffa E, Fozza C, Luppi M, Candoni A, Iacobucci I, Soverini
S, Mandelli F, Martinelli G, Baccarani M. Dasatinib as first-line
treatment for adult patients with Philadelphia chromosome-positive
acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Blood. 2011; 118: 6521-6528. http://dx.doi.org/10.1182/blood-2011-05-351403 PMid:21931113
-
Ottmann O, Dombret H, Martinelli G, Simonsson B, Guilhot F, Larson RA,
Rege-Cambrin G, Radich J, Hochhaus A, Apanovitch AM, Gollerkeri A,
Coutre S. Dasatinib induces rapid hematologic and cytogenetic responses
in adult patients with Philadelphia chromosome positive acute
lymphoblastic leukemia with resistance or intolerance to imatinib:
interim results of a phase 2 study. Blood. 2007; 110: 2309-2315.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1182/blood-2007-02-073528 PMid:17496201
-
Cortes JE, Talpaz M, Kantarjian H. Ponatinib in Philadelphia
chromosome-positive leukemias. N Engl J Med. 2014; 370: 577.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1056/NEJMc1315234 PMid:24499221
- de Labarthe A,
Rousselot P, Huguet-Rigal F, Delabesse E, Witz F, Maury
S, Rea D, Cayuela JM, Vekemans MC, Reman O, Buzyn A, Pigneux A,
Escoffre M, Chalandon Y, MacIntyre E, Lheritier V, Vernant JP, Thomas
X, Ifrah N, Dombret H. Imatinib combined with induction or
consolidation chemotherapy in patients with de novo Philadelphia
chromosome-positive acute lymphoblastic leukemia: results of the
GRAAPH-2003 study. Blood. 2007; 109: 1408-1413.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1182/blood-2006-03-011908 PMid:17062730
-
Yanada M, Takeuchi J, Sugiura I, Akiyama H, Usui N, Yagasaki F,
Kobayashi T, Ueda Y, Takeuchi M, Miyawaki S, Maruta A, Emi N, Miyazaki
Y, Ohtake S, Jinnai I, Matsuo K, Naoe T, Ohno R. High complete
remission rate and promising outcome by combination of imatinib and
chemotherapy for newly diagnosed BCR-ABL-positive acute lymphoblastic
leukemia: a phase II study by the Japan Adult Leukemia Study Group. J
Clin Oncol. 2006; 24: 460-466. http://dx.doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2005.03.2177 PMid:16344315
-
Lee S, Kim YJ, Min CK, Kim HJ, Eom KS, Kim DW, Lee JW, Min WS, Kim CC.
The effect of first-line imatinib interim therapy on the outcome of
allogeneic stem cell transplantation in adults with newly diagnosed
Philadelphia chromosome-positive acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Blood.
2005; 105: 3449-3457. http://dx.doi.org/10.1182/blood-2004-09-3785 PMid:15657178
-
Mizuta S, Matsuo K, Nishiwaki S, Imal K, Kanamori H,Ohashi K, Fukuda
T, Ohnishi K, Miyamura K, Takahashi S, Onizuka M, Atsuta Y, Suzuki R,
Morishima Y, Kato K, Sakamaki H, Tanaka J . Pre-transplant
administration of imatinib for allo-HSCT in patients with
BCR-AL-positive acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Blood
2014;123;2325-32. doi: 10.1182/blood-2013-11-538728
PMID:24591204
-
Pfeiferr H, Wassmann B, Bethge W, Dengler J, Bornhauser M, Stadler M,
Beelen D, Vucinic V, Burmeister T, Stelljes M, Faul C, Dreger P, Kiani
A, Schafer-Eckart K, Schwerdtfeger R, Lange E, Kubuschok B, Horst HA,
Gramatzki M, Bruck P, Serve H, Hoelzer D, Gokbuget N, Ottmann OG.
Randomized comparison of prophylactic and minimal residual
disease-triggered imatinib after allogeneic stem cell transplantation
for BCR-ABL1-positive acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Leukemia. 2013; 27:
1254-1262. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/leu.2012.352 PMid:23212150
-
Ram R, Storb R, Sandmaier BM, Maloney DG, Woolfrey A, Flowers ME, Maris
MB, Laport GG, Chauncey TR, Lange T, Langston AA, Storer B, Georges GE.
Non-myeloablative conditioning with allogeneic hematopoietic cell
transplantation for the treatment of high-risk acute lymphoblastic
leukemia. Haematologica. 2011; 96: 1113-1120.
http://dx.doi.org/10.3324/haematol.2011.040261 PMid:21508120
PMCid:PMC3148904
-
Brissot, M. Labopin, M. Beckers, G. Socie, L. Volin, A. Rambaldi, J.
Finke, S. Lenhoff, N. Kröger, G. Ossenkopple, C. Craddock, I.
Yakoub-Agha, G. Gurman, N. Russell, V. Koza, J. Cornelissen, J. Esteve,
Mohty M. Tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) improve outcome of
allogeneic haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HCST) for
Philadelphia chromosome acute lymphoblastic leukaemia (Ph+ALL) in fi
rst complete remission (CR1): a study from the ALWP of EBMT. Bone
Marrow Transplant. 2013; 48: S2.
-
Spinelli O, Peruta B, Tosi M, Guerini V, Salvi A, Zanotti MC, Oldani E,
Grassi A, Intermesoli T, Mico C, Rossi G, Fabris P,
Lambertenghi-Deliliers G, Angelucci E, Barbui T, Bassan R, Rambaldi A.
Clearance of minimal residual disease after allogeneic stem cell
transplantation and the prediction of the clinical outcome of adult
patients with high-risk acute lymphoblastic leukemia.
Haematologica. 2007; 92: 612-618.
http://dx.doi.org/10.3324/haematol.10965 PMid:17488684
-
Sramkova L, Muzikova K, Fronkova E, Krejci O, Sedlacek P, Formankova R,
Mejstrikova E, Stary J, Trka J. Detectable minimal residual disease
before allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation predicts
extremely poor prognosis in children with acute lymphoblastic leukemia.
Pediatr Blood Cancer. 2007; 48: 93- 100.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pbc.20794 PMid:16521130
-
Bar M, Wood BL, Radich JP, Doney KC, Woolfrey AE, Delaney C, Appelbaum
FR, Gooley TA. Impact of Minimal Residual Disease, Detected by Flow
Cytometry, on Outcome of Myeloablative Hematopoietic Cell
Transplantation for Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia. Leukemia Research and
Treatment. 2014; 2014: Doi:10.1155/2014/421723. http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/421723
-
Bachanova V, Burke MJ, Yohe S, Cao Q, Sandhu K, Singleton TP, Brunstein
CG, Wagner JE, Verneris MR, Weisdorf DJ. Unrelated Cord Blood
Transplantation in Adult and Pediatric Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia:
Effect of Minimal Residual Disease on Relapse and Survival. Biology of
Blood and Marrow Transplant. 2012; 18: 963-968.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bbmt.2012.02.012
PMid:22430088 PMCid:PMC3631589
-
Topp MS, Kufer P, Gokbuget N, Goebeler M, Klinger M, Neumann S, Horst
HA, Raff T, Viardot A, Schmid M, Stelljes M, Schaich M, Degenhard E,
Kohne-Volland R, Bruggemann M, Ottmann O, Pfeifer H, Burmeister T,
Nagorsen D, Schmidt M, Lutterbuese R, Reinhardt C, Baeuerle PA, Kneba
M, Einsele H, Riethmuller G, Hoelzer D, Zugmaier G, Bargou RC. Targeted
therapy with the T-cell-engaging antibody blinatumomab of
chemotherapy-refractory minimal residual disease in B-lineage acute
lymphoblastic leukemia patients results in high response rate and
prolonged leukemia-free survival. J Clin Oncol. 2011; 29:
2493-2498. http://dx.doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2010.32.7270
PMid:21576633
-
Jabbour E, Kantarjian H, Thomas D, Ravandi F, Cortes J, Hoehn D,
Pemmaraju N, Kadia T, Garris R, Garcia-Manero G, Borthakur G, Wierda W,
O'Brien S. Phase II study of combination of HyperCVAD with ponatinib in
front line therapy of patients (PTS) with Philadelphia chromosome (PH)
positive acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL). Haematologica. 2014; 99:
S724.
-
Fielding AK, Richards SM, Chopra R, Lazarus HM, Litzow MR, Buck G,
Durrant IJ, Luger SM, Marks DI, Franklin IM, McMillan AK, Tallman MS,
Rowe JM, Goldstone AH. Outcome of 609 adults after relapse
of acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL); an MRC UKALL12/ECOG 2993 study.
Blood. 2007; 109: 944-950.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1182/blood-2006-05-018192
PMid:17032921
-
Reman O, Buzyn A, Lheritier V, Huguet F, Kuentz M, Stamatoullas A,
Delannoy A, Fegueux N, Miclea JM, Boiron JM, Vernant JP, Gardin C,
Hacini M, Georges M, Fiere D, Thomas X. Rescue therapy combining
intermediate-dose cytarabine with amsacrine and etoposide in relapsed
adult acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Hematol J. 2004; 5: 123-129. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/sj.thj.6200353 PMid:15048062
-
Kozlowski P, Astrom M, Ahlberg L, Bernell P, Hulegardh E, Hagglund H,
Karlsson K, Markuszewska-Kuczymska A, Tomaszewska-Toporska B, Smedmyr
B, Hallbook H. High curability via intensive reinduction chemotherapy
and stem cell transplantation in young adults with relapsed acute
lymphoblastic leukemia in Sweden 2003-2007. Haematologica. 2012; 97:
1414- 1421. http://dx.doi.org/10.3324/haematol.2011.057851
PMid:22511497 PMCid:PMC3436244
-
Doney K, Hagglund H, Leisenring W, Chauncey T, Appelbaum FR, Storb R.
Predictive factors for outcome of allogeneic hematopoietic cell
transplantation for adult acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Biol Blood
Marrow Transplant. 2003; 9: 472-481.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1083-8791(03)00149-6
-
Topp MS, Gokbuget N, Zugmaier G, Degenhard E, Goebeler ME, Klinger M,
Neumann SA, Horst HA, Raff T, Viardot A, Stelljes M, Schaich M,
Kohne-Volland R, Bruggemann M, Ottmann OG, Burmeister T, Baeuerle PA,
Nagorsen D, Schmidt M, Einsele H, Riethmuller G, Kneba M, Hoelzer D,
Kufer P, Bargou RC. Long- term follow-up of hematologic relapse-free
survival in a phase 2 study of blinatumomab in patients with MRD in
B-lineage ALL. Blood. 2012; 120: 5185-5187.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1182/blood-2012-07-441030 PMid:23024237
-
Kantarjian H, Thomas D, Jorgensen J, Kebriaei P, Jabbour E, Rytting M,
York S, Ravandi F, Garris R, Kwari M, Faderl S, Cortes J, Champlin R,
O'Brien S. Results of inotuzumab ozogamicin, a CD22 monoclonal
antibody, in refractory and relapsed acute lymphocytic leukemia.
Cancer. 2013; 119: 2728- 2736. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cncr.28136 PMid:23633004
PMCid:PMC3720844
-
Thomas E, Storb R, Clift RA, Fefer A, Johnson FL, Neiman PE, Lerner KG,
Glucksberg H, Buckner CD. Bone-marrow transplantation (first of two
parts). N Engl J Med. 1975; 292: 832- 843. http://dx.doi.org/10.1056/NEJM197504172921605 PMid:234595
-
Thomas ED, Storb R, Clift RA, Fefer A, Johnson L, Neiman PE, Lerner KG,
Glucksberg H, Buckner CD. Bone-marrow transplantation (second of two
parts). N Engl J Med. 1975; 292: 895-902. http://dx.doi.org/10.1056/NEJM197504242921706 PMid:235092
-
Carreras E, Bertz H, Arcese W, Vernant JP, Tomas JF, Hagglund H,
Bandini G, Esperou H, Russell J, de la Rubia J, Di Girolamo G, Demuynck
H, Hartmann O, Clausen J, Ruutu T, Leblond V, Iriondo A, Bosi A,
Ben-Bassat I, Koza V, Gratwohl A, Apperley JF. Incidence and outcome of
hepatic veno-occlusive disease after blood or marrow transplantation: a
prospective cohort study of the European Group for Blood and Marrow
Transplantation. European Group for Blood and Marrow Transplantation
Chronic Leukemia Working Party. Blood. 1998; 92: 3599-3604. PMid:9808553
-
Shi-Xia X, Xian-Hua T, Hai-Qin X, Bo F, Xiang-Feng T. Total body
irradiation plus cyclophosphamide versus busulphan with
cyclophosphamide as conditioning regimen for patients with leukemia
undergoing allogeneic stem cell transplantation: a meta- analysis. Leuk
Lymphoma. 2010; 51: 50-60. http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/10428190903419130
PMid:20055658
-
Tang W, Wang L, Zhao WL, Chen YB, Shen ZX, Hu J. Intravenous
busulfan-cyclophosphamide as a preparative regimen before allogeneic
hematopoietic stem cell transplantation for adult patients with acute
lymphoblastic leukemia. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2011;
17:1555-1561. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bbmt.2011.04.003 PMid:21549217
-
Blume KG, Forman SJ, O'Donnell MR, Doroshow JH, Krance RA, Nademanee
AP, Snyder DS, Schmidt GM, Fahey JL, Metter GE, et al. Total body
irradiation and high-dose etoposide: a new preparatory regimen for bone
marrow transplantation in patients with advanced hematologic
malignancies. Blood. 1987; 69: 1015-1020. PMid:3548841
-
Blume KG, Kopecky KJ, Henslee-Downey JP, Forman SJ, Stiff PJ, LeMaistre
CF, Appelbaum FR. A prospective randomized comparison of total body
irradiation-etoposide versus busulfan- cyclophosphamide as preparatory
regimens for bone marrow transplantation in patients with leukemia who
were not in first remission: a Southwest Oncology Group study. Blood.
1993; 81: 2187-2193. PMid:8471778
-
Marks DI, Forman SJ, Blume KG, Perez WS, Weisdorf DJ, Keating A, Gale
RP, Cairo MS, Copelan EA, Horan JT, Lazarus HM, Litzow MR, McCarthy PL,
Schultz KR, Smith DD, Trigg ME, Zhang MJ, Horowitz MM. A comparison of
cyclophosphamide and total body irradiation with etoposide and total
body irradiation as conditioning regimens for patients undergoing
sibling allografting for acute lymphoblastic leukemia in first or
second complete remission. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2006; 12:
438-453. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bbmt.2005.12.029 PMid:16545728
-
Mohty M, Labopin M, Volin L, Gratwohl A, Socie G, Esteve J, Tabrizi R,
Nagler A, Rocha V. Reduced-intensity versus conventional myeloablative
conditioning allogeneic stem cell transplantation for patients with
acute lymphoblastic leukemia: a retrospective study from the European
Group for Blood and Marrow Transplantation. Blood. 2010; 116:
4439-4443.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1182/blood-2010-02-266551 PMid:20716774
-
Marks DI, Wang T, Perez WS, Antin JH, Copelan E, Gale RP, George B,
Gupta V, Halter J, Khoury HJ, Klumpp TR, Lazarus HM, Lewis VA, McCarthy
P, Rizzieri DA, Sabloff M, Szer J, Tallman MS, Weisdorf DJ. The outcome
of full-intensity and reduced-intensity conditioning matched sibling or
unrelated donor transplantation in adults with Philadelphia
chromosome-negative acute lymphoblastic leukemia in first and second
complete remission. Blood. 2010; 116:366-374.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1182/blood-2010-01-264077 PMid:20404137
PMCid:PMC2913452
- Stein AS, Palmer JM,
O'Donnell MR, Kogut NM, Spielberger RT, Slovak ML,
Tsai NC, Senitzer D, Snyder DS, Thomas SH, Forman SJ. Reduced-intensity
conditioning followed by peripheral blood stem cell transplantation for
adult patients with high-risk acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Biol Blood
Marrow Transplant. 2009; 15: 1407-1414.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bbmt.2009.07.003
PMid:19822300 PMCid:PMC2795637
-
Cho BS, Lee S, Kim YJ, Chung NG, Eom KS, Kim HJ, Min CK, Cho SG, Kim
DW, Lee JW, Min WS, Kim CC. Reduced-intensity conditioning allogeneic
stem cell transplantation is a potential therapeutic approach for
adults with high-risk acute lymphoblastic leukemia in remission:
results of a prospective phase 2 study. Leukemia. 2009; 23: 763-1770.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/leu.2009.102 PMid:19440217
-
Bachanova V, Verneris MR, DeFor T, Brunstein CG, Weisdorf DJ. Prolonged
survival in adults with acute lymphoblastic leukemia after
reduced-intensity conditioning with cord blood or sibling donor
transplantation. Blood. 2009; 113: 2902-2905.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1182/blood-2008-10-184093 PMid:19179301
-
Arnold R, Massenkeil G, Bornhauser M, Ehninger G, Beelen DW, Fauser AA,
Hegenbart U, Hertenstein B, Ho AD, Knauf W, Kolb HJ, Kolbe K, Sayer HG,
Schwerdtfeger R, Wandt H, Hoelzer D. Nonmyeloablative stem cell
transplantation in adults with high-risk ALL may be effective in early
but not in advanced disease. Leukemia. 2002; 16: 2423-2428. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/sj.leu.2402712 PMid:12454748
-
Ringden O, Pavletic SZ, Anasetti C, Barrett AJ, Wang T, Wang D, Antin
JH, Di Bartolomeo P, Bolwell BJ, Bredeson C, Cairo MS, Gale RP, Gupta
V, Hahn T, Hale GA, Halter J, Jagasia M, Litzow MR, Locatelli F, Marks
DI, McCarthy PL, Cowan MJ, Petersdorf EW, Russell JA, Schiller GJ,
Schouten H, Spellman S, Verdonck LF, Wingard JR, Horowitz MM, Arora M.
The graft-versus- leukemia effect using matched unrelated donors is not
superior to HLA-identical siblings for hematopoietic stem cell
transplantation. Blood. 2009; 113: 3110-3118.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1182/blood-2008-07-163212 PMid:19059878 PMCid:PMC2662650
-
Kiehl MG, Kraut L, Schwerdtfeger R, Hertenstein B, Remberger M, Kroeger
N, Stelljes M, Bornhaeuser M, Martin H, Scheid C, Ganser A, Zander AR,
Kienast J, Ehninger G, Hoelzer D, Diehl V, Fauser AA, Ringden O.
Outcome of allogeneic hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation in adult
patients with acute lymphoblastic leukemia: no difference in related
compared with unrelated transplant in first complete remission. J Clin
Oncol. 2004; 22: 2816-2825. http://dx.doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2004.07.130 PMid:15254049
-
Nishiwaki S, Inamoto Y, Sakamaki H, Kurokawa M, Iida H, Ogawa H, Fukuda
T, Ozawa Y, Kobayashi N, Kasai M, Mori T, Iwato K, Yoshida T, Onizuka
M, Kawa K, Morishima Y, Suzuki R, Atsuta Y, Miyamura K. Allogeneic stem
cell transplantation for adult Philadelphia chromosome-negative acute
lymphocytic leukemia: comparable survival rates but different risk
factors between related and unrelated transplantation in first complete
remission. Blood. 2010; 116:4368-4375.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1182/blood-2010-02-269571 PMid:20664060
-
Laughlin MJ, Eapen M, Rubinstein P, Wagner JE, Zhang MJ, Champlin RE,
Stevens C, Barker JN, Gale RP, Lazarus HM, Marks DI, van Rood JJ,
Scaradavou A, Horowitz MM. Outcomes after transplantation of cord blood
or bone marrow from unrelated donors in adults with leukemia. N Engl J
Med. 2004; 351: 2265- 2275. http://dx.doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa041276
PMid:15564543
-
Rocha V, Labopin M, Sanz G, Arcese W, Schwerdtfeger R, Bosi A, Jacobsen
N, Ruutu T, de Lima M, Finke J, Frassoni F, Gluckman E. Transplants of
umbilical-cord blood or bone marrow from unrelated donors in adults
with acute leukemia. N Engl J Med. 2004; 351: 2276-2285. http://dx.doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa041469 PMid:15564544
-
Tomblyn MB, Arora M, Baker KS, Blazar BR, Brunstein CG, Burns LJ, DeFor
TE, Dusenbery KE, Kaufman DS, Kersey JH, MacMillan ML, McGlave PB,
Miller JS, Orchard PJ, Slungaard A, Tomblyn MR, Vercellotti GM,
Verneris MR, Wagner JE, Weisdorf DJ. Myeloablative hematopoietic cell
transplantation for acute lymphoblastic leukemia: analysis of graft
sources and long-term outcome. J Clin Oncol. 2009; 27: 3634-3641.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2008.20.2960 PMid:19581540 PMCid:PMC2720079
-
Ferra C, Sanz J, de la Camara R, Sanz G, Bermudez A, Valcarcel D,
Rovira M, Serrano D, Caballero D, Espigado I, Morgades M, Heras I,
Solano C, Duarte R, Barrenetxea C, Garcia-Noblejas A, Diez-Martin JL,
Iriondo A, Carreras E, Sierra J, Sanz MA, Ribera JM. Unrelated
transplantation for poor-prognosis adult acute lymphoblastic leukemia:
long-term outcome analysis and study of the impact of hematopoietic
graft source. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2010; 16:
957-966. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bbmt.2010.02.003 PMid:20144909
-
Atsuta Y, Suzuki R, Nagamura-Inoue T, Taniguchi S, Takahashi S, Kai S,
Sakamaki H, Kouzai Y, Kasai M, Fukuda T, Azuma H, Takanashi M, Okamoto
S, Tsuchida M, Kawa K, Morishima Y, Kodera Y, Kato
S. Disease-specific analyses of unrelated
cord blood transplantation compared with unrelated bone marrow
transplantation in adult patients with acute leukemia. Blood. 2009;
113: 1631-1638. http://dx.doi.org/10.1182/blood-2008-03-147041
PMid:19104080
-
Marks DI, Woo KA, Zhong X, Appelbaum FR, Bachanova V, Barker JN,
Brunstein CG, Gibson J, Kebriaei P, Lazarus HM, Olsson R, Perales MA,
Pidala J, Savani B, Rocha V, Eapen M. Unrelated umbilical cord blood
transplant for adult acute lymphoblastic leukemia in first and second
complete remission: a comparison with allografts from adult unrelated
donors. Haematologica. 2014; 99: 322-328.
http://dx.doi.org/10.3324/haematol.2013.094193 PMid:24056817
PMCid:PMC3912963
-
Ciceri F, Labopin M, Aversa F, Rowe JM, Bunjes D, Lewalle P, Nagler A,
Di Bartolomeo P, Lacerda JF, Lupo Stanghellini MT, Polge E, Frassoni F,
Martelli MF, Rocha V. A survey of fully haploidentical hematopoietic
stem cell transplantation in adults with high-risk acute
leukemia: a risk factor analysis of outcomes for patients in remission
at transplantation. Blood. 2008; 112: 3574-3581. http://dx.doi.org/10.1182/blood-2008-02-140095 PMid:18606875
-
Federmann B, Bornhauser M, Meisner C, Kordelas L, Beelen DW, Stuhler G,
Stelljes M, Schwerdtfeger R, Christopeit M, Behre G, Faul C, Vogel W,
Schumm M, Handgretinger R, Kanz L, Bethge WA. Haploidentical allogeneic
hematopoietic cell transplantation in adults using CD3/CD19 depletion
and reduced intensity conditioning: a phase II study. Haematologica.
2012; 97: 1523- 1531. http://dx.doi.org/10.3324/haematol.2011.059378
PMid:22491731 PMCid:PMC3487553
-
Brunstein CG, Fuchs EJ, Carter SL, Karanes C, Costa LJ, Wu J, Devine
SM, Wingard JR, Aljitawi OS, Cutler CS, Jagasia MH, Ballen KK, Eapen M,
O'Donnell PV. Alternative donor transplantation after reduced intensity
conditioning: results of parallel phase 2 trials using partially
HLA-mismatched related bone marrow or unrelated double umbilical
cord blood grafts. Blood. 2011; 118: 282-288.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1182/blood-2011-03-344853 PMid:21527516 PMCid:PMC3138683
-
Luznik L, O'Donnell PV, Symons HJ, Chen AR, Leffell MS, Zahurak M,
Gooley TA, Piantadosi S, Kaup M, Ambinder RF, Huff CA, Matsui W,
Bolanos-Meade J, Borrello I, Powell JD, Harrington E, Warnock S,
Flowers M, Brodsky RA, Sandmaier BM, Storb RF, Jones RJ, Fuchs EJ.
HLA-haploidentical bone marrow transplantation for hematologic
malignancies using nonmyeloablative conditioning and high-dose,
posttransplantation cyclophosphamide. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant.
2008; 14: 641- 650. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bbmt.2008.03.005 PMid:18489989
PMCid:PMC2633246