Search

At the ISAC 2000 Congress, the Clinical Cytometry Society organized a meeting of international experts to reach consensus on the minimum number of antibodies required for a full evaluation of hematologic and lymphoid neoplasias. A questionnaire was distributed prior to the meeting to numerous experts from US and European institutions and 13 responses were received. At the meeting, 25 individuals, including most of those who returned responses, participated in the discussions and voted on the issues presented. In chronic lymphoproliferative disorders (CLD), 9 antibodies (anti-CD5, CD19, kappa, lambda, CD3, CD20, CD23, CD10, and CD45) were deemed essential for initial evaluation by 75% of the participants. There was near unanimity that additional markers (selected from CD22, FMC7, CD11c, CD103, CD38, CD25, CD79b and heavy chains for B-cell disorders, and CD4, CD7, CD8, CD2, CD56, CD16, TCRa/b, and TCRg/d for T-cell disorders) would be needed to fully characterize CLD, although not every marker would be useful in all cases. Tissue lymphomas were believed to be similar to CLD, needing a minimum of 12--16 markers. However, for some cases, CD30, bcl-2, TdT, CD71, CD1a, and CD34 were cited as useful by the participants. Markers mentioned for plasma cell disorders included kappa, lambda, CD38, CD45, CD56, CD19, CD20, CD138, and heavy chains. Of 17 voting participants, 16 agreed that between 5 to 8 markers would be essential reagents for plasma cell disorders. For acute leukemia (AL), 10 markers (CD10, CD19, CD13, CD33, CD34, CD45, CD7, CD14, CD3, and HLADR) were considered essential by 75% of participants for initial characterization of the leukemia lineage. Most (75%) agreed that at least one more B (CD20, CD22, CD79a, IgM), T (CD1a, CD2, CD4, CD5, CD8), myeloid (CD11b, CD15, CD64, CD117, myeloperoxidase), erythroid (CD36, CD71, glycophorin A), and megakaryocytic (CD41, CD61) reagents should be included in the essential panel. However, there was no agreement as to which was optimal. Thus, approximately 13--15 of those reagents would be considered essential in all cases of AL, whereas others (CD16, CD56, CDw65, TdT, and cytoplasmic CD3) were mentioned as useful in some cases. Almost all voting participants believed that the appropriate number of markers for complete characterization of AL would average 20--24. The majority of the responders (11 of 13) indicated that fewer reagents could be used in monitoring or staging patients with previously characterized disease, but not all ventured a specific number of reagents. From the above results, we conclude that the phenotypic analysis of hematologic and lymphoid neoplasia requires a rather extensive panel of reagents. Supplementary reagents might even be necessary if they prove to become relevant for diagnostic purposes. Reducing the number of antibodies could significantly compromise the diagnostic accuracy, appropriate monitoring, or therapy of these disorders.

To further evaluate the activity of topotecan (TPT) in acute leukemia, TPT was administered (2.1 mg/m2/day for 5 days by continuous i.v. infusion) to adult patients with previously untreated acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) with high-risk features (13 patients) or relapsed ALL (1 patient). Patients achieving a partial response or significant hematological improvement received a second course. All patients subsequently received standard treatment for ALL. Because complete response was achieved in only 1 of 14 patients, the study was terminated prematurely. An additional patient achieved minimal response, and a third patient normalized her hemogram despite ongoing leukemia in the marrow. Overall, six patients had significant hematological improvement (normalization of platelet and/or absolute neutrophil count). Two patients expired due to infections during induction chemotherapy. The primary nonhematological toxicities were mucositis and diarrhea. Exposure to TPT did not appear to influence the response to subsequent standard chemotherapy. The mean steady-state TPT plasma concentration, 16.1+/-1 nM, overlapped the range of LD90 values of primary human leukemia specimens. Cellular topo I content varied over a 3-fold range, encompassing levels found previously in relapsed patients. No relationship was found between topo I expression and markers of cellular proliferation or response to therapy. In contrast, low expression of the apoptosis inhibitor Bcl-2 was associated with response to TPT therapy. TPT has significant, albeit modest, single-agent activity against high-risk adult ALL. This study demonstrates the feasibility of evaluating promising new therapeutic agents in untreated patients with acute leukemia at high risk for failure with conventional therapy.

Background The aim of this study was to assess whether minimal residual disease (MRD) at the end of induction front-line treatment can serve as a surrogate endpoint for event-free survival (EFS) in childhood B-lineage acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Methods The analysis was based on individual data of 4830 patients from two large phase III trials that asked a randomized question on the effect of different corticosteroids (dexamethasone vs prednisone) during induction chemotherapy on EFS. The association between MRD classified in three ordered categories [negative = 0, low positive = (>0 and Results MRD at the end of induction was a poor surrogate for treatment effect on EFS at the trial level, with Rtrial2 = 0.09 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.00 to 0.29), whereas at the individual level it was strongly associated with EFS, with an odds ratio of 3.90 (95% CI = 3.35 to 4.44) of failure for patients with higher compared with lower MRD levels. Additional sensitivity and relevant subgroup analyses confirmed these findings at both trial- and patient-level association. Conclusions Although MRD is a robust biomarker highly predictive of outcome for individual patients, clinicians and regulatory bodies should be cautious in using early MRD response in the context of complex multiagent acute lymphoblastic leukemia therapy as an early surrogate endpoint to predict the effect of a randomized treatment intervention on long-term EFS.