Blood online
Home About Blood Authors Subscriptions Permission Advertising Public Access contact us
 

 
Advanced
Current Issue
First Edition
Future Articles
Archives
Submit to Blood
Search
American Society of Hematology
Meeting Abstracts
Email Alerts
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Right arrow Rights and Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via CrossRef
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Rowe, J. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Rowe, J. M.
Related Collections
Right arrowRelated Article in Blood Online
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?

arrow to previous article Previous Article  |  Table of Contents  |  Next Article next article arrow

InsideBlood
Blood, 1 July 2003, Vol. 102, No. 1, pp. 1

Secondary leukemia or unfavorable leukemia?

Secondary leukemia usually describes a myeloid leukemia that follows treatment with chemotherapy or radiation or an exposure to any leukemogen. Smith and colleagues (page 43) describe a remarkable series, spanning 3 decades, of 306 consecutive patients with therapy-related myeloid leukemia. The majority of these patients had deletions in chromosomes 5 or 7 or t(11q23). These data have elegantly emphasized the predominant abnormalities in secondary leukemia and the expected latency period for each cytogenetic subtype. This paper confirms the poor prognosis for patients with secondary leukemia, revealing a dismal long-term outcome that is identical to acute myeloid leukemia (AML) patients with similar unfavorable cytogenetics who have not been previously exposed to leukemogens (Slovak et al, Blood. 2000;96:4075-4083). Other reports also indicate a similarity when known prognostic determinants such as morphology, immunophenotyping, and multidrug resistance (MDR) are considered (Leith et al, Blood. 1997;89:3323-3329).

This raises several issues. First, does the diagnosis of secondary leukemia confer a worse prognosis other than being a surrogate for a particular cytogenetic subtype? Despite a recent analysis from the Medical Research Council (MRC) in Britain suggesting an independent poor prognosis for patients with therapy-related leukemia (Goldstone et al, ASH 44th annual meeting, abstract 322, Blood. 2002;100:88a), there is no convincing evidence that this is a true biologic phenomenon other than a poorer prognosis related to antecedent disease and prior therapy. Furthermore, several reports indicate that patients with more favorable cytogenetics who have secondary leukemias have a prognosis that is similar to patients with de novo AML, with the same balanced translocations. Second, there are no data that secondary leukemias respond better to any combination, during induction or post-remission therapy, than to the standard therapy offered to AML patients with similar cytogenetic and other biologic prognostic factors. We may all be better served by focusing exclusively on the biology of a particular leukemia rather than a further subcategorization based on previous events in a patient's history.

--- Jacob M. Rowe
Rambam Medical Center and Technion, Haifa, Israel


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?

Related Article in Blood Online:

Clinical-cytogenetic associations in 306 patients with therapy-related myelodysplasia and myeloid leukemia: the University of Chicago series
Sonali M. Smith, Michelle M. Le Beau, Dezheng Huo, Theodore Karrison, Ronald M. Sobecks, John Anastasi, James W. Vardiman, Janet D. Rowley, and Richard A. Larson
Blood 2003 102: 43-52. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]



This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
J. Clin. Pathol.Home page
S A Burchill
Micrometastases in neuroblastoma: are they clinically important?
J. Clin. Pathol., January 1, 2004; 57(1): 14 - 20.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Right arrow Rights and Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via CrossRef
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Rowe, J. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Rowe, J. M.
Related Collections
Right arrowRelated Article in Blood Online
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?

 click for free articles
home about blood authors subscriptions permissions advertising public access contact us
  Copyright © 2003 by American Society of Hematology         Online ISSN: 1528-0020