Blood Res 2021; 56(3):
Published online September 30, 2021
https://doi.org/10.5045/br.2021.2021045
© The Korean Society of Hematology
Correspondence to : Asral Wirda Ahmad Asnawi, M.D., Ph.D. Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Universiti Sains Islam Malaysia, Persiaran Ilmu, Putra Nilai, Nilai, Negeri Sembilan 71800, Malaysia E-mail: wirda@usim.edu.my
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Background
With the emergence of tyrosine kinase inhibitors and the incorporation of stringent measurable residual disease (MRD) monitoring, risk stratification for BCR-ABL1-positive acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) patients has changed significantly. However, whether this monitoring can replace conventional risk factors in determining whether patients need allogeneic stem cell transplantation is still unclear. This study aimed to determine the impact of BCR-ABL1 monitoring on the outcome of patients with BCR-ABL1-positive ALL after allogeneic stem cell transplantation.
Methods
We retrospectively analyzed the survival outcome of patients with BCR-ABL1-positive ALL based on the quantification of BCR-ABL1 at 3 timepoints: the end of induction (timepoint 1), post-consolidation week 16 (timepoint 2), and the end of treatment for patients who were either transplant-eligible or non-transplant eligible (timepoint 3).
Results
From 2006 to 2018, a total of 96 patients newly diagnosed with BCR-ABL1-positive ALL were treated with chemotherapy and tyrosine kinase inhibitors. Thirty-eight (41.3%) patients achieved complete remission, and 33 patients underwent allogeneic stem cell transplantation. Our data showed that pre-transplant MRD monitoring by real-time quantitative polymerase chain reaction had the highest correlation with survival in patients with BCR-ABL1-positive ALL, especially for those who underwent allogeneic stem cell transplantation.
Conclusion
Patients without MRD pre-transplantation had superior survival compared with those who had MRD, and they had excellent long-term outcomes after allogeneic stem cell transplantation.
Keywords ALL, BCR-ABL1, Philadelphia, Survival, TKI
B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia (B-ALL) is a hematological malignancy in which the bone marrow produces neoplastic lymphoblasts that are committed to the B-cell lineage. The complexity and spectrum of hematological malignancies highlight the importance of clinicopathologic correlation with the availability of ancillary studies [1]. Approximately 20–30% of adult ALLs harbor the Philadelphia chromosome, which produces the
This was a retrospective, single-center, observational study in the Department of Hematology at the Hospital Ampang, Selangor Malaysia, which is a national hematology referral center in Malaysia. A total of 176 patients with B-ALL underwent allogeneic SCT at the Hospital Ampang, Malaysia between 2006 and 2018. All patients diagnosed with
MRD evaluations at 3 different TPs were analyzed: post-induction (TP1), post-consolidation or week 16 (TP2), and end of treatment (TP3).
CMR was defined as the absence of detectable
Continuous variables are summarized using the median and range. Categorical variables are summarized using the count (N) and proportion (%). Differences between subgroups were assessed with t-test, ANOVA, or Kruskal-Wallis test, depending on the sample size and distribution. Associations between categorical variables were analyzed using the chi-square test or Fisher’s exact test. Probabilities of OS and DFS were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method, and differences between subgroups were tested using the log-rank test. The prognostic significance of baseline and transplantation covariates was determined using the Cox proportional hazard regression model. Covariates were selected based on statistical significance in the univariate analysis, which included MRD status and treatment responses. A prognostic factor was considered statistically significant if the
The study included a total of 96 patients (42 males and 54 females) with a median age of 37.5 years (range, 14–69 yr). Eight patients (8.3%) were in the adolescent age group of 12 to 19 years old, and 45 patients (46.9%) were young adults aged 20–39 years. The remaining 43 patients (44.8%) were aged 40 years and above. The most common ethnic group was Malay (50%, N=48), followed by Chinese (38.5%, N=37) and Indian (14%, N=19). Over half of the patients (53.1%) presented with a high white blood cell count (>30×109/L), with a median of 36×109/L. A total of 49 patients received the GMALL/BFM protocol (51%), whereas 47 patients (49%) received the HyperCVAD protocol. Of the 96 patients, 62 received TKIs, mostly imatinib, during chemotherapy and were still receiving TKIs as maintenance therapy at the time of SCT. All patients who underwent SCT received TKIs and chemotherapy (19 received imatinib, 13 received nilotinib, and 1 received dasatinib). Of the 38 patients who underwent SCT, 33 received allogeneic stem cells and 5 received autologous stem cells (Table 1).
Table 1 Baseline clinical characteristics of all patients with
Total (N=96) | Parameter | |||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Age, years | 15–39 (AYA) | 40–59 (adult) | ≥60 (elderly) | |||||||||||||||
N (%) | 53 (55.2) | 38 (39.6) | 5 (5.2) | |||||||||||||||
Median (range) | 37.5 (14–59) | |||||||||||||||||
Sex | Male | Female | ||||||||||||||||
N (%) | 42 (43.8) | 54 (56.3) | ||||||||||||||||
Ethnicity | Malay | Chinese | Indian | Others | ||||||||||||||
N (%) | 48 (50.0) | 37 (38.5) | 9 (9.4) | 2 (2.1) | ||||||||||||||
WCC, at diagnosis | >30×109/L | <30×109/L | ||||||||||||||||
N (%) | 51 (53.1) | 45 (46.9) | ||||||||||||||||
Median (range), ×109/L | 36 (2–500) | |||||||||||||||||
MRD status | TP1 | TP2 | TP3 | |||||||||||||||
≥0.1% | <0.1% | ≥0.1% | <0.1% | ≥0.1% | <0.1% | |||||||||||||
N | 31 | 25 | 25 | 40 | 13 | 36 | ||||||||||||
Missing | 40 | 31 | 47 | |||||||||||||||
Treatment modalities | GMALL/BFM | Hyper-CVAD | TKIs | |||||||||||||||
Yes (2012–2018) | No (2006–2011) | |||||||||||||||||
N (%) | 49 (51) | 47 (49) | 62 (64.6) | 34 (35.4) | ||||||||||||||
Treatment response | Remission post-induction | Overall remission | Relapse | Refractory | Induction death | |||||||||||||
N (%) | 80 (83.3) | 38 (41.3) | 34 (37.0) | 10 (10.9) | 4 (4.3) | |||||||||||||
Transplant | Yes | No | ||||||||||||||||
N (%) | 38 (39.6) (33-Allogeneic; 5-Autologous) | 58 (60.4) |
Values are presented as mean, median (range), or number (%).
Abbreviations: ALL, acute lymphoblastic leukemia; AYA, adolescent and young adult; MRD, measurable residual disease; TKI, tyrosine kinase inhibitor; TP1, timepoint 1; TP2, timepoint 2; TP3, timepoint 3; WCC, white cell count.
A total of 33 patients (34.4%) who completed chemotherapy were transplant-eligible and underwent allogeneic SCT. The median age of transplant recipients was 37 years (range, 15–59 yr). All patients received allografts, with the majority being from a matched-sibling donor (N=27) (Table 2). Most patients (87.9%, N=29) underwent myeloablative conditioning chemotherapy, with a total body irradiation-based protocol being the main conditioning regimen (66.7%). Thirteen patients (44.8%) developed acute graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) and 14 (50.0%) developed chronic GVHD. MRD status based on the pre-transplant
Table 2 Allogeneic stem cell transplant recipient details.
Total (N=33) | Parameter | |||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Age, years | 15–39 (AYA) | 40–59 (adult) | ≥60 (elderly) | |||||||||||||||
N (%) | 20 (60.6) | 13 (39.4) | 0 (0) | |||||||||||||||
Median (range) | 37 (15–59) | |||||||||||||||||
Sex | Male | Female | ||||||||||||||||
N (%) | 16 (48.5) | 17 (51.5) | ||||||||||||||||
Ethnicity | Malay | Chinese | Indian | Others | ||||||||||||||
N (%) | 15 (45.5) | 15 (45.5) | 3 (9.0) | 0 (0) | ||||||||||||||
Disease status at transplant | CR1 | CR>1 | ||||||||||||||||
N (%) | 28 (84.8) | 5 (15.2) | ||||||||||||||||
Pre-transplant | <0.1% | ≥0.1% | ||||||||||||||||
N (%) | 25 (75.8) | 8 (24.2) | ||||||||||||||||
WCC at diagnosis | >30×109/L | <30×109/L | ||||||||||||||||
N (%) | 21 (63.6) | 12 (36.4) | ||||||||||||||||
Median (range), ×109/L | 48 (2–500) | |||||||||||||||||
Blood type mismatch | None | Minor | Major | Bidirectional | ||||||||||||||
N (%) | 25 (75.8) | 4 (12.1) | 3 (9.1) | 1 (3.0) | ||||||||||||||
Gender mismatch (donor-recipient) | Female to male | Male to female | Male to male | Female to female | Missing | |||||||||||||
N (%) | 4 (12.1) | 8 (24.2) | 10 (30.3) | 10 (30.3) | 1 (3.0) | |||||||||||||
CMV status | Recipient negative | Recipient positive | Missing | |||||||||||||||
N (%) | ||||||||||||||||||
Donor negative | 3 (9.1) | 2 (6.1) | 5 (15.1) | |||||||||||||||
Donor positive | 1 (3.0) | 22 (66.7) | ||||||||||||||||
Type of allogeneic transplant | Matched- sibling | Matched- unrelated | Haplo-matched | Cord blood | ||||||||||||||
N (%) | 27 (81.8) | 3 (9.1) | 2 (6.1) | 1 (3.0) | ||||||||||||||
Stem cell source | Peripheral blood | Bone marrow | Umbilical cord | |||||||||||||||
N (%) | 32 (97.0) | 0 | 1 (3.0) | |||||||||||||||
Median stem cell dose (×106/kg) | 5.0 (3.0-11) | |||||||||||||||||
Conditioning regimen | Myeloablative | RIC | TBI-based | Non-TBI | ||||||||||||||
N (%) | 29 (87.9) | 4 (12.1) | 22 (66.7) | 11 (33.3) | ||||||||||||||
Post-transplant response | Remission | Relapse/death | ||||||||||||||||
N (%) | 23 (69.7) | 10 (30.3) | ||||||||||||||||
GVHD | Acute | Chronic | ||||||||||||||||
N (%) | 13 (44.8) | 14 (50.0) | ||||||||||||||||
Grade I 4 | Limited 7 | |||||||||||||||||
Grade II 6 | Extensive 7 | |||||||||||||||||
Grade III 3 | ||||||||||||||||||
Grade IV0 | ||||||||||||||||||
Missing | 4 | 5 | ||||||||||||||||
No GVHD | ||||||||||||||||||
N (%) | 16 (55.2) | 14 (50.0) | ||||||||||||||||
Mortality rate | Alive | Dead | ||||||||||||||||
N (%) | 20 (60.6) | 13 (39.4) | ||||||||||||||||
Relapse/disease progression | 6 | |||||||||||||||||
Infection/transplant-related mortality | 7 |
Values are presented as mean, median (range), or number (%).
Abbreviations: AYA, adolescent and young adult; CR, complete remission; GVHD, graft-versus-host disease; RIC, reduced intensity conditioning; TBI, total body irradiation; GVHD, graft-versus-host disease; WCC, white cell count.
Table 3 Univariable analysis of factors predictive for OS.
Characteristic | All | Transplanted | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
3-year OS (%) | 3-year OS (%) | ||||||
Age group | |||||||
AYA | 39.0 | 0.064 | 52.9 | 0.690 | |||
Adult and elderly | 19.6 | 55.0 | |||||
Sex | |||||||
Male | 33.6 | 0.876 | 54.2 | 0.906 | |||
Female | 26.8 | 52.9 | |||||
WCC at diagnosis | |||||||
>30×109/L | 25.5 | 0.585 | 52.3 | 0.684 | |||
<30×109/L | 35.9 | 63.6 | |||||
MRD status (%) | ≥0.1 | <0.1 | ≥0.1 | <0.1 | |||
TP1 | 36.7 | 36.1 | 0.974 | ||||
TP2 | 23.5 | 53.1 | 0.077 | ||||
TP3 | 11.5 | 65.4 | 0.005 | 25.0 | 73.9 | 0.003 | |
Chemotherapy | |||||||
GMALL/BFM | 25.7 | 0.081 | |||||
Hyper-CVAD | 33.7 | ||||||
TKI | |||||||
Yes (2012–2018) | 33.7 | 0.390 | |||||
No (2006–2011) | 23.5 | ||||||
Transplant | |||||||
Yes | 58.9 | <0.001 | |||||
No | 10.6 | ||||||
Disease status at transplant | |||||||
CR1 | 65.9 | 0.003 | |||||
CR>1 | 16.7 |
Significant
Abbreviations: ALL, acute lymphoblastic leukemia; AYA, adolescent and young adult; CR, complete remission; MRD, measurable residual disease; OS, overall survival; TKI, tyrosine kinase inhibitor; TP1, timepoint 1; TP2, timepoint 2; TP3, timepoint 3; WCC, white cell count.
Table 4 Multivariable analysis of factors predictive of OS and DFS in transplant recipients.
Characteristic | Risk of relapse or death | Risk of death | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
HR | 95% CI | HR | 95% CI | ||||
Pre-transplant | 4.106 | 1.226–13.752 | 0.022 | 4.358 | 1.301–14.597 | 0.017 | |
Transplant in CR>1 | 3.787 | 1.113–11.520 | 0.033 | 4.582 | 1.352–15.528 | 0.016 |
Abbreviations: CI, confidence interval; CR, complete remission; DFS, disease-free survival; HR, hazard ratio; OS, overall survival.
At the time of analysis, 20 patients were alive (60.6%), whereas 13 died (39.4%), as shown in Table 2. With a median follow-up of 25 months, the median OS was not reached. With a median follow-up of 9 months, the median DFS was not reached. Six (46.2%) of 13 patients with MMR experienced relapse, with a median time to relapse of 14 months (range, 8–104). The 2-year, 3-year, and 5-year OS rates were 66.3%, 58.7%, and 53.4%, respectively, and the 2-year, 3-year, and 5-year DFS rates were 63.7%, 59.9%, and 54.5%, respectively (Fig. 1D).
It is widely accepted that MRD monitoring is paramount when considering the best treatment options for patients with
With our low non-relapse mortality rate in matched-sibling donor transplants, it was justifiable to perform SCT in ALL patients with standard risk in CR1, given the significantly higher rate of relapse and lower DFS among patients who did not undergo SCT. This echoed earlier observations of the UKALL/RCOG 2993 studies, which showed significant differences in survival between the transplanted and non-transplanted cohorts, even in ALL patients with standard risk [23], and they did not perform MRD monitoring or identification of high-risk genetic markers. Reports showing successful transplants in CR2 with a curative potential of 25–30% have been reported [24, 25]. However, these reports were highly selective and did not influence decisions against earlier transplants. In our retrospective observation, other factors, such as age, sex, and
We showed that pre-transplant
Patients who achieved CMR at 3 months had better OS and DFS than those who did not, regardless of whether they received chemotherapy or allogeneic SCT. Although there was a trend for better survival among patients treated with chemotherapy, the difference was not statistically significant. However, the relapse rate was higher in the chemotherapy group. The higher non-relapse mortality in patients who underwent allogeneic SCT may have contributed to this discrepancy. Therefore, chemotherapy plus TKIs may be an option for patients who achieve early CMR but are unwilling to undergo SCT.
Relapse or disease progression post-SCT remains a problem [26], as these patients have an extremely poor prognosis. Novel immunotherapies such as inotuzumab and blinatumomab, as well as chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy, have provided an opportunity for patients with relapsed or refractory ALL [25, 27]. Blinatumomab has been shown to eliminate MRD in ALL patients and has led to better survival outcomes post-SCT [28]. In this study, 6 patients with
Our study focused on allogeneic SCT in the largest cohort of adult
In conclusion, end-of-treatment MMR was associated with a lower relapse rate and higher DFS among patients with
This study was approved by the Medical Research and Ethics Committee of the Ministry of Health Malaysia (NMRR-19-2833-47785), with the approval of the Malaysia Director-General of Health. Special thanks to all clinical and laboratory staff of the Haematology Department, Ampang Hospital, for data collection.
No potential conflicts of interest relevant to this article were reported.
Blood Res 2021; 56(3): 175-183
Published online September 30, 2021 https://doi.org/10.5045/br.2021.2021045
Copyright © The Korean Society of Hematology.
Siew Lian Chong1,2, Asral Wirda Ahmad Asnawi1,2, Tze Shin Leong3, Jenq Tzong Tan4, Kian Boon Law5, Siong Leng Hon6, Rui Jeat Fann1,7, Sen Mui Tan1
1Department of Haematology, Hospital Ampang, Selangor, 2Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Universiti Sains Islam Malaysia, Nilai, 3Department of Haematology, Hospital Umum Sarawak, Kuching, 4Department of Medicine, Hospital Taiping, Taiping, 5Institute for Clinical Research, National Institutes of Health (NIH), Shah Alam, 6Department of Medicine, Hospital Melaka, Melaka, 7Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Universiti Tunku Abdul Rahman, Kajang, Malaysia
Correspondence to:Asral Wirda Ahmad Asnawi, M.D., Ph.D. Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Universiti Sains Islam Malaysia, Persiaran Ilmu, Putra Nilai, Nilai, Negeri Sembilan 71800, Malaysia E-mail: wirda@usim.edu.my
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Background
With the emergence of tyrosine kinase inhibitors and the incorporation of stringent measurable residual disease (MRD) monitoring, risk stratification for BCR-ABL1-positive acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) patients has changed significantly. However, whether this monitoring can replace conventional risk factors in determining whether patients need allogeneic stem cell transplantation is still unclear. This study aimed to determine the impact of BCR-ABL1 monitoring on the outcome of patients with BCR-ABL1-positive ALL after allogeneic stem cell transplantation.
Methods
We retrospectively analyzed the survival outcome of patients with BCR-ABL1-positive ALL based on the quantification of BCR-ABL1 at 3 timepoints: the end of induction (timepoint 1), post-consolidation week 16 (timepoint 2), and the end of treatment for patients who were either transplant-eligible or non-transplant eligible (timepoint 3).
Results
From 2006 to 2018, a total of 96 patients newly diagnosed with BCR-ABL1-positive ALL were treated with chemotherapy and tyrosine kinase inhibitors. Thirty-eight (41.3%) patients achieved complete remission, and 33 patients underwent allogeneic stem cell transplantation. Our data showed that pre-transplant MRD monitoring by real-time quantitative polymerase chain reaction had the highest correlation with survival in patients with BCR-ABL1-positive ALL, especially for those who underwent allogeneic stem cell transplantation.
Conclusion
Patients without MRD pre-transplantation had superior survival compared with those who had MRD, and they had excellent long-term outcomes after allogeneic stem cell transplantation.
Keywords: ALL, BCR-ABL1, Philadelphia, Survival, TKI
B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia (B-ALL) is a hematological malignancy in which the bone marrow produces neoplastic lymphoblasts that are committed to the B-cell lineage. The complexity and spectrum of hematological malignancies highlight the importance of clinicopathologic correlation with the availability of ancillary studies [1]. Approximately 20–30% of adult ALLs harbor the Philadelphia chromosome, which produces the
This was a retrospective, single-center, observational study in the Department of Hematology at the Hospital Ampang, Selangor Malaysia, which is a national hematology referral center in Malaysia. A total of 176 patients with B-ALL underwent allogeneic SCT at the Hospital Ampang, Malaysia between 2006 and 2018. All patients diagnosed with
MRD evaluations at 3 different TPs were analyzed: post-induction (TP1), post-consolidation or week 16 (TP2), and end of treatment (TP3).
CMR was defined as the absence of detectable
Continuous variables are summarized using the median and range. Categorical variables are summarized using the count (N) and proportion (%). Differences between subgroups were assessed with t-test, ANOVA, or Kruskal-Wallis test, depending on the sample size and distribution. Associations between categorical variables were analyzed using the chi-square test or Fisher’s exact test. Probabilities of OS and DFS were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method, and differences between subgroups were tested using the log-rank test. The prognostic significance of baseline and transplantation covariates was determined using the Cox proportional hazard regression model. Covariates were selected based on statistical significance in the univariate analysis, which included MRD status and treatment responses. A prognostic factor was considered statistically significant if the
The study included a total of 96 patients (42 males and 54 females) with a median age of 37.5 years (range, 14–69 yr). Eight patients (8.3%) were in the adolescent age group of 12 to 19 years old, and 45 patients (46.9%) were young adults aged 20–39 years. The remaining 43 patients (44.8%) were aged 40 years and above. The most common ethnic group was Malay (50%, N=48), followed by Chinese (38.5%, N=37) and Indian (14%, N=19). Over half of the patients (53.1%) presented with a high white blood cell count (>30×109/L), with a median of 36×109/L. A total of 49 patients received the GMALL/BFM protocol (51%), whereas 47 patients (49%) received the HyperCVAD protocol. Of the 96 patients, 62 received TKIs, mostly imatinib, during chemotherapy and were still receiving TKIs as maintenance therapy at the time of SCT. All patients who underwent SCT received TKIs and chemotherapy (19 received imatinib, 13 received nilotinib, and 1 received dasatinib). Of the 38 patients who underwent SCT, 33 received allogeneic stem cells and 5 received autologous stem cells (Table 1).
Table 1 . Baseline clinical characteristics of all patients with
Total (N=96) | Parameter | |||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Age, years | 15–39 (AYA) | 40–59 (adult) | ≥60 (elderly) | |||||||||||||||
N (%) | 53 (55.2) | 38 (39.6) | 5 (5.2) | |||||||||||||||
Median (range) | 37.5 (14–59) | |||||||||||||||||
Sex | Male | Female | ||||||||||||||||
N (%) | 42 (43.8) | 54 (56.3) | ||||||||||||||||
Ethnicity | Malay | Chinese | Indian | Others | ||||||||||||||
N (%) | 48 (50.0) | 37 (38.5) | 9 (9.4) | 2 (2.1) | ||||||||||||||
WCC, at diagnosis | >30×109/L | <30×109/L | ||||||||||||||||
N (%) | 51 (53.1) | 45 (46.9) | ||||||||||||||||
Median (range), ×109/L | 36 (2–500) | |||||||||||||||||
MRD status | TP1 | TP2 | TP3 | |||||||||||||||
≥0.1% | <0.1% | ≥0.1% | <0.1% | ≥0.1% | <0.1% | |||||||||||||
N | 31 | 25 | 25 | 40 | 13 | 36 | ||||||||||||
Missing | 40 | 31 | 47 | |||||||||||||||
Treatment modalities | GMALL/BFM | Hyper-CVAD | TKIs | |||||||||||||||
Yes (2012–2018) | No (2006–2011) | |||||||||||||||||
N (%) | 49 (51) | 47 (49) | 62 (64.6) | 34 (35.4) | ||||||||||||||
Treatment response | Remission post-induction | Overall remission | Relapse | Refractory | Induction death | |||||||||||||
N (%) | 80 (83.3) | 38 (41.3) | 34 (37.0) | 10 (10.9) | 4 (4.3) | |||||||||||||
Transplant | Yes | No | ||||||||||||||||
N (%) | 38 (39.6) (33-Allogeneic; 5-Autologous) | 58 (60.4) |
Values are presented as mean, median (range), or number (%)..
Abbreviations: ALL, acute lymphoblastic leukemia; AYA, adolescent and young adult; MRD, measurable residual disease; TKI, tyrosine kinase inhibitor; TP1, timepoint 1; TP2, timepoint 2; TP3, timepoint 3; WCC, white cell count..
A total of 33 patients (34.4%) who completed chemotherapy were transplant-eligible and underwent allogeneic SCT. The median age of transplant recipients was 37 years (range, 15–59 yr). All patients received allografts, with the majority being from a matched-sibling donor (N=27) (Table 2). Most patients (87.9%, N=29) underwent myeloablative conditioning chemotherapy, with a total body irradiation-based protocol being the main conditioning regimen (66.7%). Thirteen patients (44.8%) developed acute graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) and 14 (50.0%) developed chronic GVHD. MRD status based on the pre-transplant
Table 2 . Allogeneic stem cell transplant recipient details..
Total (N=33) | Parameter | |||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Age, years | 15–39 (AYA) | 40–59 (adult) | ≥60 (elderly) | |||||||||||||||
N (%) | 20 (60.6) | 13 (39.4) | 0 (0) | |||||||||||||||
Median (range) | 37 (15–59) | |||||||||||||||||
Sex | Male | Female | ||||||||||||||||
N (%) | 16 (48.5) | 17 (51.5) | ||||||||||||||||
Ethnicity | Malay | Chinese | Indian | Others | ||||||||||||||
N (%) | 15 (45.5) | 15 (45.5) | 3 (9.0) | 0 (0) | ||||||||||||||
Disease status at transplant | CR1 | CR>1 | ||||||||||||||||
N (%) | 28 (84.8) | 5 (15.2) | ||||||||||||||||
Pre-transplant | <0.1% | ≥0.1% | ||||||||||||||||
N (%) | 25 (75.8) | 8 (24.2) | ||||||||||||||||
WCC at diagnosis | >30×109/L | <30×109/L | ||||||||||||||||
N (%) | 21 (63.6) | 12 (36.4) | ||||||||||||||||
Median (range), ×109/L | 48 (2–500) | |||||||||||||||||
Blood type mismatch | None | Minor | Major | Bidirectional | ||||||||||||||
N (%) | 25 (75.8) | 4 (12.1) | 3 (9.1) | 1 (3.0) | ||||||||||||||
Gender mismatch (donor-recipient) | Female to male | Male to female | Male to male | Female to female | Missing | |||||||||||||
N (%) | 4 (12.1) | 8 (24.2) | 10 (30.3) | 10 (30.3) | 1 (3.0) | |||||||||||||
CMV status | Recipient negative | Recipient positive | Missing | |||||||||||||||
N (%) | ||||||||||||||||||
Donor negative | 3 (9.1) | 2 (6.1) | 5 (15.1) | |||||||||||||||
Donor positive | 1 (3.0) | 22 (66.7) | ||||||||||||||||
Type of allogeneic transplant | Matched- sibling | Matched- unrelated | Haplo-matched | Cord blood | ||||||||||||||
N (%) | 27 (81.8) | 3 (9.1) | 2 (6.1) | 1 (3.0) | ||||||||||||||
Stem cell source | Peripheral blood | Bone marrow | Umbilical cord | |||||||||||||||
N (%) | 32 (97.0) | 0 | 1 (3.0) | |||||||||||||||
Median stem cell dose (×106/kg) | 5.0 (3.0-11) | |||||||||||||||||
Conditioning regimen | Myeloablative | RIC | TBI-based | Non-TBI | ||||||||||||||
N (%) | 29 (87.9) | 4 (12.1) | 22 (66.7) | 11 (33.3) | ||||||||||||||
Post-transplant response | Remission | Relapse/death | ||||||||||||||||
N (%) | 23 (69.7) | 10 (30.3) | ||||||||||||||||
GVHD | Acute | Chronic | ||||||||||||||||
N (%) | 13 (44.8) | 14 (50.0) | ||||||||||||||||
Grade I 4 | Limited 7 | |||||||||||||||||
Grade II 6 | Extensive 7 | |||||||||||||||||
Grade III 3 | ||||||||||||||||||
Grade IV0 | ||||||||||||||||||
Missing | 4 | 5 | ||||||||||||||||
No GVHD | ||||||||||||||||||
N (%) | 16 (55.2) | 14 (50.0) | ||||||||||||||||
Mortality rate | Alive | Dead | ||||||||||||||||
N (%) | 20 (60.6) | 13 (39.4) | ||||||||||||||||
Relapse/disease progression | 6 | |||||||||||||||||
Infection/transplant-related mortality | 7 |
Values are presented as mean, median (range), or number (%)..
Abbreviations: AYA, adolescent and young adult; CR, complete remission; GVHD, graft-versus-host disease; RIC, reduced intensity conditioning; TBI, total body irradiation; GVHD, graft-versus-host disease; WCC, white cell count..
Table 3 . Univariable analysis of factors predictive for OS..
Characteristic | All | Transplanted | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
3-year OS (%) | 3-year OS (%) | ||||||
Age group | |||||||
AYA | 39.0 | 0.064 | 52.9 | 0.690 | |||
Adult and elderly | 19.6 | 55.0 | |||||
Sex | |||||||
Male | 33.6 | 0.876 | 54.2 | 0.906 | |||
Female | 26.8 | 52.9 | |||||
WCC at diagnosis | |||||||
>30×109/L | 25.5 | 0.585 | 52.3 | 0.684 | |||
<30×109/L | 35.9 | 63.6 | |||||
MRD status (%) | ≥0.1 | <0.1 | ≥0.1 | <0.1 | |||
TP1 | 36.7 | 36.1 | 0.974 | ||||
TP2 | 23.5 | 53.1 | 0.077 | ||||
TP3 | 11.5 | 65.4 | 0.005 | 25.0 | 73.9 | 0.003 | |
Chemotherapy | |||||||
GMALL/BFM | 25.7 | 0.081 | |||||
Hyper-CVAD | 33.7 | ||||||
TKI | |||||||
Yes (2012–2018) | 33.7 | 0.390 | |||||
No (2006–2011) | 23.5 | ||||||
Transplant | |||||||
Yes | 58.9 | <0.001 | |||||
No | 10.6 | ||||||
Disease status at transplant | |||||||
CR1 | 65.9 | 0.003 | |||||
CR>1 | 16.7 |
Significant
Abbreviations: ALL, acute lymphoblastic leukemia; AYA, adolescent and young adult; CR, complete remission; MRD, measurable residual disease; OS, overall survival; TKI, tyrosine kinase inhibitor; TP1, timepoint 1; TP2, timepoint 2; TP3, timepoint 3; WCC, white cell count..
Table 4 . Multivariable analysis of factors predictive of OS and DFS in transplant recipients..
Characteristic | Risk of relapse or death | Risk of death | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
HR | 95% CI | HR | 95% CI | ||||
Pre-transplant | 4.106 | 1.226–13.752 | 0.022 | 4.358 | 1.301–14.597 | 0.017 | |
Transplant in CR>1 | 3.787 | 1.113–11.520 | 0.033 | 4.582 | 1.352–15.528 | 0.016 |
Abbreviations: CI, confidence interval; CR, complete remission; DFS, disease-free survival; HR, hazard ratio; OS, overall survival..
At the time of analysis, 20 patients were alive (60.6%), whereas 13 died (39.4%), as shown in Table 2. With a median follow-up of 25 months, the median OS was not reached. With a median follow-up of 9 months, the median DFS was not reached. Six (46.2%) of 13 patients with MMR experienced relapse, with a median time to relapse of 14 months (range, 8–104). The 2-year, 3-year, and 5-year OS rates were 66.3%, 58.7%, and 53.4%, respectively, and the 2-year, 3-year, and 5-year DFS rates were 63.7%, 59.9%, and 54.5%, respectively (Fig. 1D).
It is widely accepted that MRD monitoring is paramount when considering the best treatment options for patients with
With our low non-relapse mortality rate in matched-sibling donor transplants, it was justifiable to perform SCT in ALL patients with standard risk in CR1, given the significantly higher rate of relapse and lower DFS among patients who did not undergo SCT. This echoed earlier observations of the UKALL/RCOG 2993 studies, which showed significant differences in survival between the transplanted and non-transplanted cohorts, even in ALL patients with standard risk [23], and they did not perform MRD monitoring or identification of high-risk genetic markers. Reports showing successful transplants in CR2 with a curative potential of 25–30% have been reported [24, 25]. However, these reports were highly selective and did not influence decisions against earlier transplants. In our retrospective observation, other factors, such as age, sex, and
We showed that pre-transplant
Patients who achieved CMR at 3 months had better OS and DFS than those who did not, regardless of whether they received chemotherapy or allogeneic SCT. Although there was a trend for better survival among patients treated with chemotherapy, the difference was not statistically significant. However, the relapse rate was higher in the chemotherapy group. The higher non-relapse mortality in patients who underwent allogeneic SCT may have contributed to this discrepancy. Therefore, chemotherapy plus TKIs may be an option for patients who achieve early CMR but are unwilling to undergo SCT.
Relapse or disease progression post-SCT remains a problem [26], as these patients have an extremely poor prognosis. Novel immunotherapies such as inotuzumab and blinatumomab, as well as chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy, have provided an opportunity for patients with relapsed or refractory ALL [25, 27]. Blinatumomab has been shown to eliminate MRD in ALL patients and has led to better survival outcomes post-SCT [28]. In this study, 6 patients with
Our study focused on allogeneic SCT in the largest cohort of adult
In conclusion, end-of-treatment MMR was associated with a lower relapse rate and higher DFS among patients with
This study was approved by the Medical Research and Ethics Committee of the Ministry of Health Malaysia (NMRR-19-2833-47785), with the approval of the Malaysia Director-General of Health. Special thanks to all clinical and laboratory staff of the Haematology Department, Ampang Hospital, for data collection.
No potential conflicts of interest relevant to this article were reported.
Table 1 . Baseline clinical characteristics of all patients with
Total (N=96) | Parameter | |||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Age, years | 15–39 (AYA) | 40–59 (adult) | ≥60 (elderly) | |||||||||||||||
N (%) | 53 (55.2) | 38 (39.6) | 5 (5.2) | |||||||||||||||
Median (range) | 37.5 (14–59) | |||||||||||||||||
Sex | Male | Female | ||||||||||||||||
N (%) | 42 (43.8) | 54 (56.3) | ||||||||||||||||
Ethnicity | Malay | Chinese | Indian | Others | ||||||||||||||
N (%) | 48 (50.0) | 37 (38.5) | 9 (9.4) | 2 (2.1) | ||||||||||||||
WCC, at diagnosis | >30×109/L | <30×109/L | ||||||||||||||||
N (%) | 51 (53.1) | 45 (46.9) | ||||||||||||||||
Median (range), ×109/L | 36 (2–500) | |||||||||||||||||
MRD status | TP1 | TP2 | TP3 | |||||||||||||||
≥0.1% | <0.1% | ≥0.1% | <0.1% | ≥0.1% | <0.1% | |||||||||||||
N | 31 | 25 | 25 | 40 | 13 | 36 | ||||||||||||
Missing | 40 | 31 | 47 | |||||||||||||||
Treatment modalities | GMALL/BFM | Hyper-CVAD | TKIs | |||||||||||||||
Yes (2012–2018) | No (2006–2011) | |||||||||||||||||
N (%) | 49 (51) | 47 (49) | 62 (64.6) | 34 (35.4) | ||||||||||||||
Treatment response | Remission post-induction | Overall remission | Relapse | Refractory | Induction death | |||||||||||||
N (%) | 80 (83.3) | 38 (41.3) | 34 (37.0) | 10 (10.9) | 4 (4.3) | |||||||||||||
Transplant | Yes | No | ||||||||||||||||
N (%) | 38 (39.6) (33-Allogeneic; 5-Autologous) | 58 (60.4) |
Values are presented as mean, median (range), or number (%)..
Abbreviations: ALL, acute lymphoblastic leukemia; AYA, adolescent and young adult; MRD, measurable residual disease; TKI, tyrosine kinase inhibitor; TP1, timepoint 1; TP2, timepoint 2; TP3, timepoint 3; WCC, white cell count..
Table 2 . Allogeneic stem cell transplant recipient details..
Total (N=33) | Parameter | |||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Age, years | 15–39 (AYA) | 40–59 (adult) | ≥60 (elderly) | |||||||||||||||
N (%) | 20 (60.6) | 13 (39.4) | 0 (0) | |||||||||||||||
Median (range) | 37 (15–59) | |||||||||||||||||
Sex | Male | Female | ||||||||||||||||
N (%) | 16 (48.5) | 17 (51.5) | ||||||||||||||||
Ethnicity | Malay | Chinese | Indian | Others | ||||||||||||||
N (%) | 15 (45.5) | 15 (45.5) | 3 (9.0) | 0 (0) | ||||||||||||||
Disease status at transplant | CR1 | CR>1 | ||||||||||||||||
N (%) | 28 (84.8) | 5 (15.2) | ||||||||||||||||
Pre-transplant | <0.1% | ≥0.1% | ||||||||||||||||
N (%) | 25 (75.8) | 8 (24.2) | ||||||||||||||||
WCC at diagnosis | >30×109/L | <30×109/L | ||||||||||||||||
N (%) | 21 (63.6) | 12 (36.4) | ||||||||||||||||
Median (range), ×109/L | 48 (2–500) | |||||||||||||||||
Blood type mismatch | None | Minor | Major | Bidirectional | ||||||||||||||
N (%) | 25 (75.8) | 4 (12.1) | 3 (9.1) | 1 (3.0) | ||||||||||||||
Gender mismatch (donor-recipient) | Female to male | Male to female | Male to male | Female to female | Missing | |||||||||||||
N (%) | 4 (12.1) | 8 (24.2) | 10 (30.3) | 10 (30.3) | 1 (3.0) | |||||||||||||
CMV status | Recipient negative | Recipient positive | Missing | |||||||||||||||
N (%) | ||||||||||||||||||
Donor negative | 3 (9.1) | 2 (6.1) | 5 (15.1) | |||||||||||||||
Donor positive | 1 (3.0) | 22 (66.7) | ||||||||||||||||
Type of allogeneic transplant | Matched- sibling | Matched- unrelated | Haplo-matched | Cord blood | ||||||||||||||
N (%) | 27 (81.8) | 3 (9.1) | 2 (6.1) | 1 (3.0) | ||||||||||||||
Stem cell source | Peripheral blood | Bone marrow | Umbilical cord | |||||||||||||||
N (%) | 32 (97.0) | 0 | 1 (3.0) | |||||||||||||||
Median stem cell dose (×106/kg) | 5.0 (3.0-11) | |||||||||||||||||
Conditioning regimen | Myeloablative | RIC | TBI-based | Non-TBI | ||||||||||||||
N (%) | 29 (87.9) | 4 (12.1) | 22 (66.7) | 11 (33.3) | ||||||||||||||
Post-transplant response | Remission | Relapse/death | ||||||||||||||||
N (%) | 23 (69.7) | 10 (30.3) | ||||||||||||||||
GVHD | Acute | Chronic | ||||||||||||||||
N (%) | 13 (44.8) | 14 (50.0) | ||||||||||||||||
Grade I 4 | Limited 7 | |||||||||||||||||
Grade II 6 | Extensive 7 | |||||||||||||||||
Grade III 3 | ||||||||||||||||||
Grade IV0 | ||||||||||||||||||
Missing | 4 | 5 | ||||||||||||||||
No GVHD | ||||||||||||||||||
N (%) | 16 (55.2) | 14 (50.0) | ||||||||||||||||
Mortality rate | Alive | Dead | ||||||||||||||||
N (%) | 20 (60.6) | 13 (39.4) | ||||||||||||||||
Relapse/disease progression | 6 | |||||||||||||||||
Infection/transplant-related mortality | 7 |
Values are presented as mean, median (range), or number (%)..
Abbreviations: AYA, adolescent and young adult; CR, complete remission; GVHD, graft-versus-host disease; RIC, reduced intensity conditioning; TBI, total body irradiation; GVHD, graft-versus-host disease; WCC, white cell count..
Table 3 . Univariable analysis of factors predictive for OS..
Characteristic | All | Transplanted | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
3-year OS (%) | 3-year OS (%) | ||||||
Age group | |||||||
AYA | 39.0 | 0.064 | 52.9 | 0.690 | |||
Adult and elderly | 19.6 | 55.0 | |||||
Sex | |||||||
Male | 33.6 | 0.876 | 54.2 | 0.906 | |||
Female | 26.8 | 52.9 | |||||
WCC at diagnosis | |||||||
>30×109/L | 25.5 | 0.585 | 52.3 | 0.684 | |||
<30×109/L | 35.9 | 63.6 | |||||
MRD status (%) | ≥0.1 | <0.1 | ≥0.1 | <0.1 | |||
TP1 | 36.7 | 36.1 | 0.974 | ||||
TP2 | 23.5 | 53.1 | 0.077 | ||||
TP3 | 11.5 | 65.4 | 0.005 | 25.0 | 73.9 | 0.003 | |
Chemotherapy | |||||||
GMALL/BFM | 25.7 | 0.081 | |||||
Hyper-CVAD | 33.7 | ||||||
TKI | |||||||
Yes (2012–2018) | 33.7 | 0.390 | |||||
No (2006–2011) | 23.5 | ||||||
Transplant | |||||||
Yes | 58.9 | <0.001 | |||||
No | 10.6 | ||||||
Disease status at transplant | |||||||
CR1 | 65.9 | 0.003 | |||||
CR>1 | 16.7 |
Significant
Abbreviations: ALL, acute lymphoblastic leukemia; AYA, adolescent and young adult; CR, complete remission; MRD, measurable residual disease; OS, overall survival; TKI, tyrosine kinase inhibitor; TP1, timepoint 1; TP2, timepoint 2; TP3, timepoint 3; WCC, white cell count..
Table 4 . Multivariable analysis of factors predictive of OS and DFS in transplant recipients..
Characteristic | Risk of relapse or death | Risk of death | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
HR | 95% CI | HR | 95% CI | ||||
Pre-transplant | 4.106 | 1.226–13.752 | 0.022 | 4.358 | 1.301–14.597 | 0.017 | |
Transplant in CR>1 | 3.787 | 1.113–11.520 | 0.033 | 4.582 | 1.352–15.528 | 0.016 |
Abbreviations: CI, confidence interval; CR, complete remission; DFS, disease-free survival; HR, hazard ratio; OS, overall survival..
Alireza Sadeghi, Somayeh Sadeghi, Mohammad Saleh Peikar, Maryam Yazdi, Mehran Sharifi, Safie Ghafel, Farzin Khorvash, Behrooz Ataei, Mohammad Reza Safavi, Elahe Nasri
Blood Res 2023; 58(2): 91-98Fatıma Ceren Tuncel, Istemi Serin, Sacide Pehlivan, Yasemin Oyaci, Mustafa Pehlivan
Blood Res 2022; 57(4): 250-255Stephanie Wo, Hannah Levavi, John Mascarenhas, Marina Kremyanskaya, Shyamala Navada, Michal Bar-Natan, Sara S. Kim
Blood Res 2022; 57(2): 135-143