|
|||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Prepublished online as a Blood First Edition Paper on April 17, 2002; DOI 10.1182/blood-2002-01-0006.
CLINICAL OBSERVATIONS, INTERVENTIONS, AND THERAPEUTIC TRIALS
From the Departments of Hematology-Oncology, Pathology,
Biostatistics, St Jude Children's Research Hospital; and the
University of Tennessee, Memphis, TN.
Early clearance of leukemic cells is a favorable prognostic
indicator in childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL). However, identification of residual leukemic cells by their morphologic features
is subjective and lacks sensitivity. To improve estimates of leukemia
clearance, we applied flow cytometric techniques capable of detecting 1 leukemic cell in 10 000 or more normal cells and prospectively
measured residual leukemia in bone marrow samples collected on day 19 of remission-induction chemotherapy from 248 children with newly
diagnosed ALL. In 134 samples (54.0%), we identified at least 0.01%
leukemic cells (0.01%-< 0.1% in 51 samples [20.6%], 0.1%-< 1%
in 36 [14.5%], and Treatment outcome in children with acute
lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) is determined by the collective effect of
cellular drug resistance, degree of leukemia cell infiltration into
pharmacologic sanctuaries, pharmacodynamic profile, and inherited
pharmacogenetic features of each patient.1-4 Measurements
of any of these variables has prognostic value in childhood ALL, but
none predict the course of the disease with absolute
precision.5-7
The rate of clearance of leukemic cells from peripheral blood and
bone marrow is a reflection of the cumulative effects of leukemia and
host factors and should be a valuable indicator of treatment outcome.
Indeed, the presence of circulating lymphoblasts after 1 week of
single-agent or multiagent remission-induction therapy8-12
and the detection of blast cells in the bone marrow by using
morphologic criteria during remission-induction
therapy13-15 predict a higher incidence of relapse.
However, the morphologic features of leukemic lymphoblasts resemble
those of normal lymphoid cells, and measurements of residual leukemia
by morphologic analysis are inherently subjective and
imprecise.16-18 Thus, a considerable proportion of
patients with an apparently good early response according to
morphologic criteria subsequently relapse.19
In a effort to improve the assessment of early response, we applied
flow cytometric techniques based on the identification of
immunophenotypes expressed by leukemic cells but not normal cells.20 These techniques are capable of detecting 1 leukemic cell in 104 or more normal cells20,21
(a degree of sensitivity currently achievable in at least 90% of
children with ALL) and have proved to be useful in monitoring minimal
residual disease (MRD) during clinical remission.22,23
Patients
Treatment protocol
Morphologic and flow cytometric assessments of residual leukemia For morphologic analyses of residual leukemia, bone marrow aspirates collected on day 19 of remission-induction therapy were smeared and slides stained with Wright-Giemsa stain. Slides were observed by at least 2 expert morphologists and the percentage of lymphoblasts was recorded. For flow cytometric studies of residual disease, an aliquot of the same bone marrow aspirate was placed in preservative-free heparin and mononuclear cells were separated on a density step (AccuPrep; Nycomed, Oslo, Norway). Leukemia-associated immunophenotypes (found on leukemic cells but not on normal bone marrow cells) were determined by multivariable flow cytometry, with various combinations of monoclonal antibodies or heterologous antisera conjugated to fluorescein isothiocyanate, phycoerythrin, peridinin chlorophyll protein, and allophycocyanin.20 The marker combinations currently used for monitoring residual disease in our laboratory are shown in Table 1. With the use of 4-color flow cytometry20 and the introduction of new markers (eg, CD58),29 we successfully studied more than 90% of patients (103 of 112) in the most recent cohort. Matched nonreactive fluorochrome-conjugated antibodies served as controls. The staining procedure was described previously.20 For each case, marker combinations allowing identification of 1 leukemic cell/104 normal nucleated bone marrow cells or more were selected at diagnosis and then applied during clinical remission.20 In the early part of the study, we used a FACScan flow cytometer with Lysis II or Cell Quest software but switched later to a dual laser-FACScalibur flow cytometer with Cell Quest software (all from Becton Dickinson, San Jose, CA).
The flow cytometry protocol used for detection of MRD was described in detail previously.20 In all samples, we acquired data from all mononuclear cells in each test tube (> 1 × 105). Flow cytometric data were recorded within 24 hours after sample collection and processing, with the observer having no knowledge of the patient's clinical status or diagnostic features, except for immunophenotype. To compare percentages of leukemic lymphoblasts derived from flow cytometry (obtained from preparations of mononuclear cells) and percentages estimated by morphologic assessment (obtained from smears of whole marrow), we recalculated the latter after excluding segmented leukocytes from the counts. Statistical analysis Differences in the distribution of clinical and biologic presenting features according to level of residual disease on day 19 were compared by using exact 2 and Fisher exact tests.
Because of the multiple presenting features (13) with which residual
disease status was compared, only associations with a P
value lower than .004 (a P value of .05 divided by 13) were
deemed significant. The cumulative incidence of ALL relapse was
estimated after adjustment for other competing risks (ie, second
malignant disease and death while in remission), as described by
Kalbfleisch and Prentice,30 and compared by using Grays
test.31 The cut-off date for follow-up observations was
November 30, 2001. Among the 110 patients included in the correlative
studies with treatment outcome, 91 are alive; 84 patients (92%) had
complete follow-up information within 1 year of the analysis, and 90 (99%) had complete follow-up data within 1.5 years. To assess the
prognostic value of different levels of MRD after adjustment for
competing prognostic factors, we stratified the data by treatment and
then separately for clinical and biologic presenting features. Patients who underwent hematopoietic stem cell transplantation were followed until they had a relapse or a competing event or until their last follow-up date.
Determination of leukemia cell clearance by flow cytometry We prospectively measured the percentage of residual leukemic cells among bone marrow mononuclear cells collected on day 19 of remission-induction chemotherapy from 248 children with newly diagnosed ALL. In 134 patients (54.0%), at least 0.01% leukemic cells were identified by flow cytometry (Figure 1). Among these patients, levels of leukemia were 0.01% to less than 0.1% in 51 patients (20.6%), 0.1% to less than 1% in 36 (14.5%) and 1% or more in 47 (19.0%). In the remaining 114 patients, leukemic cells were below the limit of detection of our technique (0.01%).
Residual leukemia by flow cytometry on day 19 was not significantly
related to age, sex, race, leukocyte count, CNS status, or National
Cancer Institute risk status (Table 2).
Among cellular features, rates of detection did not differ
significantly in comparisons based on cell lineage, ploidy, or the
presence of t(4;11) or MLL gene rearrangements, t(1;19) or
E2A/PBX1 transcripts, or TEL/AML1 transcripts.
There was, however, a remarkable association between detection of
residual leukemia and the Philadelphia (Ph) chromosome: all 7 patients
with this prognostically unfavorable abnormality had positive findings
(median percentage of leukemic cells, 3.47%; range, 0.71% to 10.78%;
P < .0001).
Correlation between flow cytometric and morphologic measurements of residual disease Of the 248 bone marrow samples studied by flow cytometry on day 19 of remission-induction therapy, 32 (12.9%) had leukemic lymphoblasts identifiable by morphologic analysis. In 21 of these samples (8.5%), lymphoblasts represented at least 5% of bone marrow mononuclear cells; in 11, the proportion of lymphoblasts ranged from 1% to 4% (Figure 2). In all the 32 morphologically positive samples, at least 0.01% cells expressing leukemia-specific immunophenotypes were detected by flow cytometry. Correlation between morphologic and flow cytometric findings was generally good in samples with at least 5% cells with lymphoblast morphologic features; in 19 of 21 samples, more than 1% leukemic cells were counted by flow cytometry. Discrepancies between morphologic and flow cytometric evaluations were wider among the 11 samples with 1% to 4% lymphoblasts on morphologic analysis (Figure 2).
Among the 216 samples without leukemic lymphoblasts recognizable by their morphologic features, 114 (52.8%) did not have detectable cells expressing leukemia-associated immunophenotypes. In the remaining 102 samples, however, leukemic lymphoblasts were detected by flow cytometry. Residual levels of disease in these samples ranged from 0.01% to 16% (median, 0.1%; Figure 2). Of note, in the 2 samples with 9% and 16% leukemic cells on flow cytometry, the morphologic analysis revealed only apparently mature normal lymphocytes (9% and 45%, respectively). Leukemic cell clearance on day 19 and treatment outcome To examine the prognostic effect of lymphoblast clearance assessed by flow cytometry, we analyzed treatment outcome in 110 children treated within a single program of chemotherapy (Total XIIIB) in which MRD status was not used for risk assignment. The 5-year cumulative incidence of relapse or failure to achieve clinical remission in patients with no detectable leukemic cells on day 19 (n = 51) was 6.0% ± 3.4%, whereas it was 32.8% ± 6.5% in the 59 patients with positive findings (P < .001; Figure 3A). Notably, 2 of the 3 relapses that occurred in the group with negative findings were extramedullary. The third (hematologic) relapse in this group occurred 11 months after cessation of therapy. In contrast, 10 of the 14 relapses in the group with positive results on day 19 were hematologic, and 7 of these occurred during treatment. This group also included all 4 patients who did not achieve clinical remission within the scheduled 6-week remission-induction therapy.
Next, we determined whether higher levels of residual disease were associated with a higher risk of treatment failure. Patients with at least 1% leukemic cells (n = 26) fared worse: the 5-year cumulative incidence of relapse or failure to achieve remission was 40.8% ± 10.6%, and all 4 patients with remission failure were in this group (Figure 3B). However, lower levels of residual disease were not proportionally related to risk of failure in this analysis: the incidence of relapse or failure to achieve remission in the 14 patients with 0.1% to less than 1% residual disease was 14.3% ± 9.7%, whereas that in the 19 patients with 0.01% to less than 0.1% residual disease was 33.2% ± 11.7% (Figure 3B). Prognostic importance of leukemic cell clearance and other prognostic factors of childhood ALL Bone marrow status on day 19 as assessed by flow cytometry remained a significant prognostic factor after adjustment for known prognostic factors of childhood ALL, such as age, leukocyte counts, immunophenotype, ploidy, t(4;11) or MLL gene rearrangements, Ph chromosome, and TEL/AML1. Moreover, bone marrow status indicated by flow cytometry on day 19 was a significant predictor of relapse in a subgroup of patients that excluded those with high-risk leukemia indicated by presenting criteria (age < 1 year, n = 6; Ph chromosome, n = 5; P = .0026; Figure 4A).
Residual leukemic cells detected by morphologic assessment after 2 weeks of remission-induction therapy have been reported to be associated with treatment outcome.19 In our series, 16 of 110 patients had at least 5% leukemic cells identified by morphologic analysis, the standard cut-off value for identifying high-risk patients by this criterion. The 5-year cumulative incidence of relapse or failure to achieve remission in these patients was 47.9% ± 14.8%, whereas the incidence of relapse in the 94 patients with less than 5% blasts was 15.5% ± 3.9% (P = .0037). It was previously observed that patients with less than 1% blasts on morphologic analysis may have a superior outcome.15 In our series, 86 patients met this criterion, but their incidence of relapse remained relatively high (13.4% ± 3.8%) and the group included one patient who did not have remission. To determine whether flow cytometric measurements of residual disease on day 19 provided more information than that provided by standard morphologic analysis, we focused our analysis on the 86 patients with completely negative morphologic findings (< 1% blasts) on day 19. Fifty of the 86 patients had residual leukemia levels below 0.01% on flow cytometry. These patients had a significantly lower cumulative incidence of relapse at 5 years than the 36 patients with 0.01% leukemic cells or greater by flow cytometry (P = .024; Figure 4B), a group that included a patient who had not achieved morphologic remission by day 46 after the scheduled remission-induction treatment. Leukemic cell clearance on day 19 and MRD during clinical remission We previously found that measurements of MRD using flow cytometry at the end of remission induction (day 46 after diagnosis) provide a strong and independent prediction of treatment outcome.23 We observed, however, that relapse still occurred in approximately 10% of patients with negative MRD findings at this time. To test whether earlier measurements of residual disease (ie, on day 19) could better identify patients with excellent treatment outcome, we analyzed the group of patients who were negative for MRD (< 0.01% leukemic cells by flow cytometry) at the end of remission-induction therapy. Of the 110 patients included in our series, 106 achieved complete morphologic remission and 74 were also MRD negative at this time. Measurements of leukemic cell clearance on day 19 were helpful in identifying a subset of patients with an excellent treatment outcome. Forty-eight of the 74 patients negative for MRD at the end of induction had less than 0.01% leukemic cells on day 19, and these patients had a cumulative incidence of relapse that was significantly lower than that in the 26 patients with detectable leukemic cells on day 19 (P = .03; Figure 4C).Table 3 shows the relation between
residual disease measured on day 19 and subsequent findings of MRD
during clinical remission in the same cohort of patients. Patients with
less than 0.01% leukemic cells on day 19 who were studied during
continuation therapy were generally MRD negative (< 0.01%), with
2 exceptions: one patient who had detectable MRD (0.02%) at the
end of remission induction but subsequently became MRD negative and
remains in continuous complete remission 27 months off therapy and one
patient who had conversion to MRD positivity (0.01%) in week 56, 7 months before clinical relapse. Among patients with detectable residual leukemia on day 19, 50.9% were MRD positive at the end of remission induction; MRD positivity was found in 28.6%, 2.4%, and 7.0% of these patients at weeks 14, 32, and 56, respectively, of continuation therapy.
We found that approximately half of children with ALL achieve a profound clearance of leukemic cells (< 0.01% leukemic cells among bone marrow mononuclear cells) after only 2 to 3 weeks of remission-induction chemotherapy. These patients have an excellent treatment outcome and their likelihood of remaining in continuous complete remission approaches 95%. The probability of relapse in patients with detectable residual disease at this time point is significantly higher, particularly for those with 1% or greater leukemic lymphoblasts among bone marrow mononuclear cells. Notably, 6 of the 7 patients with the Ph chromosome were among this group, a finding that highlights the resistance of leukemic cells with this karyotype to conventional antileukemic drugs. Elucidation of the clinical importance of the intermediate levels of residual leukemia (0.01% to less than 1%) on day 19 will probably require additional study of a larger number of patients. Although relapse rates were higher among patients with detectable residual leukemia below the 1% levels than among those with no detectable disease, we did not observe a linear relation between levels of residual disease and risk of relapse in this group. An important question raised by these results is whether flow cytometric measurements of residual disease provide information beyond that provided by conventional morphologic assessment of treatment response. The results of our analysis restricted to patients with completely negative morphologic findings (ie, those with no identifiable lymphoblasts) indicate that flow cytometry does indeed provide additional information. Among this group of patients, those who had less than 0.01% leukemic cells according to the flow cytometric criteria had a significantly better treatment outcome. In general, our results are in concordance with those reported by Panzer-Grumayer et al32 in a series of 68 children with ALL in whom treatment response was studied on day 15 by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) amplification of antigen receptor genes. However, there was a difference in the proportions of children who achieved the lowest levels of MRD: 14 of 68 (21%) in the series of Panzer-Grumayer et al and 114 of 248 (46%) in ours. Because the level of residual leukemic cells used to define maximum leukemic cell clearance was similar in the 2 studies (1 in 104), this difference cannot be ascribed to a different sensitivity of the 2 assessment techniques. Rather, it may be attributable to differences in chemotherapy or to the inability of PCR methods to distinguish between viable and apoptotic leukemic cells. The flow cytometric methods used in our study can make this distinction readily.20 They are also rapid and easily applicable in most cancer centers, a feature that should facilitate their incorporation in treatment protocols. In our study, sensitive flow cytometric analyses (ie, those capable of detecting 1 leukemic cell among 10 000 or more normal bone marrow cells) were applicable to approximately 75% of all patients with newly diagnosed ALL during the time span of the study, which began in 1994. However, more recent improvements in flow cytometric methods, including the use of 4-color analysis and the introduction of new markers of leukemia,29 currently allow us to study at least 90% of patients with the desired levels of sensitivity, even in regenerating bone marrow with a high proportion of normal lymphoid progenitors or "hematogones."33,34 Because of the lower background level of hematogones, residual disease in bone marrow samples collected on day 19 is typically more evident than in bone marrow samples collected after a pause in chemotherapy or when the patient is off treatment. Assuming that the total leukemic burden at diagnosis is on average 1012 leukemic cells,16 a leukemic cell level below 0.01% should correspond to a leukemia burden of less than 108 total leukemic cells. Thus, in patients with no residual leukemic cells detectable by flow cytometry, a cytoreduction in excess of 4 logs is likely to have occurred. We found that such massive response occurs in nearly half of the children with newly diagnosed ALL after 2 to 3 weeks of remission-induction chemotherapy and that it is associated with an excellent treatment outcome. Patients with early and profound cytoreductions may therefore become candidates for future studies designed to test less intense and hence less toxic regimens of chemotherapy.
We thank Peixin Liu and Mo Mehrpooya for technical assistance and Yinmei Zhou for assistance with the statistical analysis.
Submitted January 30, 2002; accepted February 26, 2002.
Prepublished online as Blood First Edition Paper, April 17, 2002; DOI 10.1182/blood-2002-01-0006.
Supported by grants CA60419, CA21765, and CA20180 from the National Cancer Institute, by the Rizzo Memorial Grant from the Leukemia Research Foundation, and by the American Lebanese Syrian Associated Charities.
The publication costs of this article were defrayed in part by page charge payment. Therefore, and solely to indicate this fact, this article is hereby marked "advertisement" in accordance with 18 U.S.C. section 1734.
Reprints: Dario Campana, Department of Hematology-Oncology, St Jude Children's Research Hospital, 332 North Lauderdale, Memphis, TN 38105; e-mail: dario.campana{at}stjude.org.
1.
Kaspers GJ, Veerman AJ, Pieters R, et al.
In vitro cellular drug resistance and prognosis in newly diagnosed childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia.
Blood.
1997;90:2723-2729
2.
Mahmoud HH, Rivera GK, Hancock ML, et al.
Low leukocyte counts with blast cells in cerebrospinal fluid of children with newly diagnosed acute lymphoblastic leukemia.
N Engl J Med.
1993;329:314-319
3.
Evans WE, Relling MV, Rodman JH, Crom WR, Boyett JM, Pui CH.
Conventional compared with individualized chemotherapy for childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia.
N Engl J Med.
1998;338:499-505
4.
Evans WE, Relling MV.
Pharmacogenomics: translating functional genomics into rational therapeutics.
Science.
1999;286:487-491 5. Felix CA, Lange BJ, Chessells JM. Pediatric Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia: Challenges and Controversies in 2000. American Society of Hematology Education Program Washington, DC: American Society of Hematology; 2000:285-302. 6. Pui CH, Sallan S, Relling MV, Masera G, Evans WE. International Childhood Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia Workshop: Sausalito, CA, 30 November-1 December 2000. Leukemia. 2001;15:707-715[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve].
7.
Pui CH, Campana D, Evans WE.
Childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia 8. Riehm H, Reiter A, Schrappe M, et al. Corticosteroid-dependent reduction of leukocyte count in blood as a prognostic factor in acute lymphoblastic leukemia in childhood (therapy study ALL-BFM 83) [In German]. Klin Padiatr. 1987;199:151-160[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve].
9.
Gajjar A, Ribeiro R, Hancock ML, et al.
Persistence of circulating blasts after 1 week of multiagent chemotherapy confers a poor prognosis in childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia.
Blood.
1995;86:1292-1295 10. Lilleyman JS, Gibson BE, Stevens RF, et al. Clearance of marrow infiltration after 1 week of therapy for childhood lymphoblastic leukaemia: clinical importance and the effect of daunorubicin. The Medical Research Council's Working Party on Childhood Leukaemia. Br J Haematol. 1997;97:603-606[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve].
11.
Schrappe M, Arico M, Harbott J, et al.
Philadelphia chromosome-positive (Ph+) childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia: good initial steroid response allows early prediction of a favorable treatment outcome.
Blood.
1998;92:2730-2741
12.
Dordelmann M, Reiter A, Borkhardt A, et al.
Prednisone response is the strongest predictor of treatment outcome in infant acute lymphoblastic leukemia.
Blood.
1999;94:1209-1217 13. Miller DR, Coccia PF, Bleyer WA, et al. Early response to induction therapy as a predictor of disease-free survival and late recurrence of childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia: a report from the Childrens Cancer Study Group. J Clin Oncol. 1989;7:1807-1815[Abstract].
14.
Steinherz PG, Gaynon PS, Breneman JC, et al.
Cytoreduction and prognosis in acute lymphoblastic leukemia 15. Sandlund JT, Harrison P, Rivera GK, et al. Persistence of lymphoblasts in bone marrow on day 15 and day 22-25 of remission induction predicts a dismal treatment outcome in children with acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Blood. 2002;100:__-__.
16.
Campana D, Pui CH.
Detection of minimal residual disease in acute leukemia: methodologic advances and clinical significance.
Blood.
1995;85:1416-1434 17. Pui CH, Campana D. New definition of remission in childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Leukemia. 2000;14:783-785[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]. 18. Szczepanski T, Orfao A, van der Velden VH, San Miguel JF, van Dongen JJ. Minimal residual disease in leukaemia patients. Lancet Oncol. 2001;2:409-417[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]. 19. Gaynon PS, Desai AA, Bostrom BC, et al. Early response to therapy and outcome in childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia: a review. Cancer. 1997;80:1717-1726[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]. 20. Campana D, Coustan-Smith E. Detection of minimal residual disease in acute leukemia by flow cytometry. Cytometry. 1999;38:139-152[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]. 21. Neale GA, Coustan-Smith E, Pan Q, et al. Tandem application of flow cytometry and polymerase chain reaction for comprehensive detection of minimal residual disease in childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Leukemia. 1999;13:1221-1226[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]. 22. Coustan-Smith E, Behm FG, Sanchez J, et al. Immunological detection of minimal residual disease in children with acute lymphoblastic leukaemia. Lancet. 1998;351:550-554[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve].
23.
Coustan-Smith E, Sancho J, Hancock ML, et al.
Clinical importance of minimal residual disease in childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia.
Blood.
2000;96:2691-2696 24. Campana D, Behm FG. Immunophenotyping of leukemia. J Immunol Methods. 2000;243:59-75[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]. 25. Raimondi SC, Mathew S, Pui CH. Cytogenetics as a diagnostic aid for childhood hematological disorders. Conventional cytogenetic techniques, fluorescence in situ hybridization, comparative genomic hybridization. In: Hanausek M,Walaszek Z, eds. Methods in Molecular Biology. Totowa, NJ: Humana Press; 1998:209-227. 26. Scurto P, Hsu RM, Kane JR, et al. A multiplex RT-PCR assay for the detection of chimeric transcripts encoded by the risk-stratifying translocations of pediatric acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Leukemia. 1998;12:1994-2005[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve].
27.
Pui CH, Rivera GK, Hancock ML, et al.
Risk-adapted treatment for ALL
28.
Pui CH, Mahmoud HH, Rivera GK, et al.
Early intensification of intrathecal chemotherapy virtually eliminates central nervous system relapse in children with acute lymphoblastic leukemia.
Blood.
1998;92:411-415
29.
Chen JS, Coustan-Smith E, Suzuki T, et al.
Identification of novel markers for monitoring minimal residual disease in acute lymphoblastic leukemia.
Blood.
2001;97:2115-2120 30. Kalbfleisch JD, Prentice RL. The Statistical Analysis of Failure Time Data. New York, NY: John Wiley; 1980. 31. Gray RJ. A class of K-sample tests for comparing the cumulative incidence of a competing risk. Ann Stat. 1988;16:1141-1154[CrossRef].
32.
Panzer-Grumayer ER, Schneider M, Panzer S, Fasching K, Gadner H.
Rapid molecular response during early induction chemotherapy predicts a good outcome in childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia.
Blood.
2000;95:790-794
33.
Rimsza LM, Larson RS, Winter SS, et al.
Benign hematogone-rich lymphoid proliferations can be distinguished from B-lineage acute lymphoblastic leukemia by integration of morphology, immunophenotype, adhesion molecule expression, and architectural features.
Am J Clin Pathol.
2000;114:66-75
34.
McKenna RW, Washington LT, Aquino DB, Picker LJ, Kroft SH.
Immunophenotypic analysis of hematogones (B-lymphocyte precursors) in 662 consecutive bone marrow specimens by 4-color flow cytometry.
Blood.
2001;98:2498-2507
© 2002 by The American Society of Hematology.
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
|
 |
|
  T. Muzzafar, L. J. Medeiros, S. A. Wang, A. Brahmandam, D. A. Thomas, and J. L. Jorgensen Aberrant Underexpression of CD81 in Precursor B-Cell Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia: Utility in Detection of Minimal Residual Disease by Flow Cytometry Am J Clin Pathol, November 1, 2009; 132(5): 692 - 698. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 G. Basso, M. Veltroni, M. G. Valsecchi, M. N. Dworzak, R. Ratei, D. Silvestri, A. Benetello, B. Buldini, O. Maglia, G. Masera, et al. Risk of Relapse of Childhood Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia Is Predicted By Flow Cytometric Measurement of Residual Disease on Day 15 Bone Marrow J. Clin. Oncol., November 1, 2009; 27(31): 5168 - 5174. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
C.-H. Pui Toward a Total Cure for Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia J. Clin. Oncol., November 1, 2009; 27(31): 5121 - 5123. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 C. A. Scrideli, J. G. Assumpcao, M. A. Ganazza, M. Araujo, S. R. Toledo, M. L. M. Lee, E. Delbuono, A. S. Petrilli, R. P. Queiroz, A. Biondi, et al. A simplified minimal residual disease polymerase chain reaction method at early treatment points can stratify children with acute lymphoblastic leukemia into good and poor outcome groups Haematologica, June 1, 2009; 94(6): 781 - 789. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. Irving, J. Jesson, P. Virgo, M. Case, L. Minto, L. Eyre, N. Noel, U. Johansson, M. Macey, L. Knotts, et al. Establishment and validation of a standard protocol for the detection of minimal residual disease in B lineage childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia by flow cytometry in a multi-center setting; Haematologica, June 1, 2009; 94(6): 870 - 874. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
F. Tucci and M. Arico Treatment of pediatric acute lymphoblastic leukemia Haematologica, August 1, 2008; 93(8): 1124 - 1128. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 M. J. Borowitz, M. Devidas, S. P. Hunger, W. P. Bowman, A. J. Carroll, W. L. Carroll, S. Linda, P. L. Martin, D. J. Pullen, D. Viswanatha, et al. Clinical significance of minimal residual disease in childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia and its relationship to other prognostic factors: a Children's Oncology Group study Blood, June 15, 2008; 111(12): 5477 - 5485. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
C. Oudot, M.-F. Auclerc, V. Levy, R. Porcher, C. Piguet, Y. Perel, V. Gandemer, M. Debre, C. Vermylen, B. Pautard, et al. Prognostic Factors for Leukemic Induction Failure in Children With Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia and Outcome After Salvage Therapy: The FRALLE 93 Study J. Clin. Oncol., March 20, 2008; 26(9): 1496 - 1503. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. C. Rawstron, A. Orfao, M. Beksac, L. Bezdickova, R. A. Brooimans, H. Bumbea, K. Dalva, G. Fuhler, J. Gratama, D. Hose, et al. Report of the European Myeloma Network on multiparametric flow cytometry in multiple myeloma and related disorders Haematologica, March 1, 2008; 93(3): 431 - 438. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. L. Fuster, M. Bermudez, A. Galera, M. E. Llinares, D. Calle, and F. J. Ortuno Imatinib mesylate in combination with chemotherapy in four children with de novo and advanced stage Philadelphia chromosome-positive acute lymphoblastic leukemia Haematologica, December 1, 2007; 92(12): 1723 - 1724. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
C. Flotho, E. Coustan-Smith, D. Pei, C. Cheng, G. Song, C.-H. Pui, J. R. Downing, and D. Campana A set of genes that regulate cell proliferation predicts treatment outcome in childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia Blood, August 15, 2007; 110(4): 1271 - 1277. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
F. R. Appelbaum, D. Rosenblum, R. J. Arceci, W. L. Carroll, P. P. Breitfeld, S. J. Forman, R. A. Larson, S. J. Lee, S. B. Murphy, S. O'Brien, et al. End points to establish the efficacy of new agents in the treatment of acute leukemia Blood, March 1, 2007; 109(5): 1810 - 1816. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
T. Raff, N. Gokbuget, S. Luschen, R. Reutzel, M. Ritgen, S. Irmer, S. Bottcher, H.-A. Horst, M. Kneba, D. Hoelzer, et al. Molecular relapse in adult standard-risk ALL patients detected by prospective MRD monitoring during and after maintenance treatment: data from the GMALL 06/99 and 07/03 trials Blood, February 1, 2007; 109(3): 910 - 915. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 A. Reiter Diagnosis and Treatment of Childhood Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma Hematology, January 1, 2007; 2007(1): 285 - 296. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
H. M. Lazarus and S. Luger Which Patients with Adult Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia Should Undergo a Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation? Case-Based Discussion Hematology, January 1, 2007; 2007(1): 444 - 452. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
C. Flotho, E. Coustan-Smith, D. Pei, S. Iwamoto, G. Song, C. Cheng, C.-H. Pui, J. R. Downing, and D. Campana Genes contributing to minimal residual disease in childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia: prognostic significance of CASP8AP2 Blood, August 1, 2006; 108(3): 1050 - 1057. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
E. Coustan-Smith, R. C. Ribeiro, P. Stow, Y. Zhou, C.-H. Pui, G. K. Rivera, F. Pedrosa, and D. Campana A simplified flow cytometric assay identifies children with acute lymphoblastic leukemia who have a superior clinical outcome Blood, July 1, 2006; 108(1): 97 - 102. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 B. K. Zehentner, W. Fritschle, T. Stelzer, K. M. Ghirardelli, K. Hunter, C. Wentzel, R. Bennington, C. L. Hansen, D. Myerson, M. Kalnoski, et al. Minimal Disease Detection and Confirmation in Hematologic Malignancies: Combining Cell Sorting with Clonality Profiling Clin. Chem., March 1, 2006; 52(3): 430 - 437. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. Bruggemann, T. Raff, T. Flohr, N. Gokbuget, M. Nakao, J. Droese, S. Luschen, C. Pott, M. Ritgen, U. Scheuring, et al. Clinical significance of minimal residual disease quantification in adult patients with standard-risk acute lymphoblastic leukemia Blood, February 1, 2006; 107(3): 1116 - 1123. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
T. Haferlach, A. Kohlmann, S. Schnittger, M. Dugas, W. Hiddemann, W. Kern, and C. Schoch Global approach to the diagnosis of leukemia using gene expression profiling Blood, August 15, 2005; 106(4): 1189 - 1198. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
S. J. Laughton, L. J. Ashton, E. Kwan, M. D. Norris, M. Haber, and G. M. Marshall Early Responses to Chemotherapy of Normal and Malignant Hematologic Cells Are Prognostic in Children With Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia J. Clin. Oncol., April 1, 2005; 23(10): 2264 - 2271. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
C.-H. Pui, J. T. Sandlund, D. Pei, D. Campana, G. K. Rivera, R. C. Ribeiro, J. E. Rubnitz, B. I. Razzouk, S. C. Howard, M. M. Hudson, et al. Improved outcome for children with acute lymphoblastic leukemia: results of Total Therapy Study XIIIB at St Jude Children's Research Hospital Blood, November 1, 2004; 104(9): 2690 - 2696. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 N. J. Winick, W. L. Carroll, and S. P. Hunger Childhood Leukemia -- New Advances and Challenges N. Engl. J. Med., August 5, 2004; 351(6): 601 - 603. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
C.-H. Pui, M. Schrappe, R. C. Ribeiro, and C. M. Niemeyer Childhood and Adolescent Lymphoid and Myeloid Leukemia Hematology, January 1, 2004; 2004(1): 118 - 145. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M.-B. Vidriales, J. J. Perez, M. C. Lopez-Berges, N. Gutierrez, J. Ciudad, P. Lucio, L. Vazquez, R. Garcia-Sanz, M. C. del Canizo, J. Fernandez-Calvo, et al. Minimal residual disease in adolescent (older than 14 years) and adult acute lymphoblastic leukemias: early immunophenotypic evaluation has high clinical value Blood, June 15, 2003; 101(12): 4695 - 4700. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 J Moppett, G A A Burke, C G Steward, A Oakhill, and N J Goulden The clinical relevance of detection of minimal residual disease in childhood acute lymphoblastic leukaemia J. Clin. Pathol., April 1, 2003; 56(4): 249 - 253. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
W. L. Carroll, D. Bhojwani, D.-J. Min, E. Raetz, M. Relling, S. Davies, J. R. Downing, C. L. Willman, and J. C. Reed Pediatric Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia Hematology, January 1, 2003; 2003(1): 102 - 131. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
E. Coustan-Smith, J. Sancho, M. L. Hancock, B. I. Razzouk, R. C. Ribeiro, G. K. Rivera, J. E. Rubnitz, J. T. Sandlund, C.-H. Pui, and D. Campana Use of peripheral blood instead of bone marrow to monitor residual disease in children with acute lymphoblastic leukemia Blood, September 18, 2002; 100(7): 2399 - 2402. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
 |
 |
|||||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
||
| Copyright © 2002 by American Society of Hematology Online ISSN: 1528-0020 | |||||||||
Top
Abstract
Introduction
1% in 47 [19.0%]). Among 110 children
treated within a single chemotherapy program, the 5-year mean ± SE cumulative incidence of relapse or failure to achieve remission was
32.2% ± 6.5% for the 59 patients with 0.01% residual leukemic cells
or greater on day 19 and 6.0% ± 3.4% for the 51 patients with less
than 0.01% leukemic cells (P < .001). The prognostic
value of day-19 bone marrow status defined by flow cytometry was
superior to that defined by morphologic studies and remained
significant after adjustment for other clinical and biologic variables.
Lack of detectable leukemic cells on day 19 was more closely associated
with relapse-free survival than was lack of detectable residual disease
at the end of remission induction (day 46). Thus, approximately half of
the children with ALL achieve profound clearance of leukemic cells
after 2 to 3 weeks of remission-induction chemotherapy, and these
patients have an excellent treatment outcome.
(Blood. 2002;100:52-58)
, CD19
current status and future perspectives.
Lancet Oncol.
2001;2:597-607