Search

60% (6/10) with I BCR-ABL i SP like sp CGFs showed MRD positivity compared to 41.1% (23/56) of I BCR-ABL1 i SP pos sp B-ALLs. Summary of the diagnostic approach used to detect BCR-ABL1-like B-acute lymphoblastic leukemia associated chimeric gene fusions (BCR-ABL-like CGFs). I BCR-ABL1 i -like or Philadelphia chromosome-like B-acute lymphoblastic leukemia/lymphoma ( I BCR-ABL1 i SP like sp B-ALL) initially described based on gene expression profiles (GEP) is characterized by the presence of tyrosine-kinase inhibitor (TKI) targetable chimeric gene fusions (CGF), the spectrum of which is yet to be fully elucidated. The higher frequency of MRD positivity compared to I BCR-ABL1 i SP pos sp group (60% vs. 41%) can be explained by the inclusion of TKIs in treatment of I BCR-ABL1 i SP pos sp cases. [Extracted from the article]

Lenalidomide maintenance after frontline chemo-immunotherapy (CIT) in chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) has not been standard due to the availability of novel therapies, though these remain out of reach for most in low-middle income countries. This single-center, open-label study randomized CLL patients (non-deletion 17p) after frontline therapy to lenalidomide maintenance (dose-escalated 2.5–10mg, 20/28 days per cycle for six months) or observation (2:1 allocation). Forty patients were included over 2018–2020. At a median follow-up of 22 months, median progression-free survival (PFS) with lenalidomide was not significantly different than observation (26 vs. 18 months, p = 0.4). Patients with minimal residual disease >10−2 had a trend toward better PFS with lenalidomide (19 vs. 7 months, p = 0.07). Grade 3 neutropenia was seen in 16.7% of patients on lenalidomide. Quality of life was comparable between the two arms. Low dose, fixed duration lenalidomide maintenance is not an effective strategy after frontline CIT in CLL. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The need for prognostication in chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) is felt due to the heterogeneous clinical course of CLL, to counsel the patients, tailor follow-up, and to guide treatment decisions. There were predominantly CLL patients on wait and watch in our cohort compared to patients in the CLL-IPI cohort (48% I vs. i 19%, I p i <.0001). The CLL-IPI incorporating comprehensive patient data from prospective clinical trials were proposed in 2016 by a group of international CLL experts to be the standard of care in reporting of clinical trials and clinical practice. [Extracted from the article]