BACKGROUND:Patients with Down syndrome (DS) and standard risk (SR) acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL-DS) are reported to have inferior event free (EFS) and overall survival (OS) compared to patients without DS (ALL-NDS). PROCEDURE: We compared the prevalence of favorable and unfavorable clinical and biologic features, toxicity and outcome within the ALL-DS and ALL-NDS cohorts of 2,174 eligible patients with SR-ALL enrolled on CCG-1952. RESULTS: Fifty-nine patients (3%) had ALL-DS. DS patients were less likely to have either favorable (hyperdiploidy, triple trisomy of chromosomes 4, 10, and 17, TEL-AML1 rearrangement) or unfavorable (T-cell ALL, hypodiploidy, adverse translocations) biologic features. Toxicity occurred significantly more often and number of days hospitalized was significantly greater in ALL-DS than in ALL-NDS. ALL-DS patients had an inferior 4-year EFS compared to the NDS cohort. However, EFS was equivalent when the comparison excluded ALL-NDS with favorable biologic features. OS was significantly inferior for ALL-DS. CONCLUSIONS: The absence of favorable biologic features within ALL-DS contributes to the difference in EFS previously observed between DS and NDS SR-ALL cohorts. (c) 2004 Wiley-Liss, Inc.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND:Patients with Down syndrome (DS) and standard risk (SR) acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL-DS) are reported to have inferior event free (EFS) and overall survival (OS) compared to patients without DS (ALL-NDS). PROCEDURE: We compared the prevalence of favorable and unfavorable clinical and biologic features, toxicity and outcome within the ALL-DS and ALL-NDS cohorts of 2,174 eligible patients with SR-ALL enrolled on CCG-1952. RESULTS: Fifty-nine patients (3%) had ALL-DS. DS patients were less likely to have either favorable (hyperdiploidy, triple trisomy of chromosomes 4, 10, and 17, TEL-AML1 rearrangement) or unfavorable (T-cell ALL, hypodiploidy, adverse translocations) biologic features. Toxicity occurred significantly more often and number of days hospitalized was significantly greater in ALL-DS than in ALL-NDS. ALL-DS patients had an inferior 4-year EFS compared to the NDS cohort. However, EFS was equivalent when the comparison excluded ALL-NDS with favorable biologic features. OS was significantly inferior for ALL-DS. CONCLUSIONS: The absence of favorable biologic features within ALL-DS contributes to the difference in EFS previously observed between DS and NDS SR-ALL cohorts. (c) 2004 Wiley-Liss, Inc.
Authors: Kelly W Maloney; William L Carroll; Andrew J Carroll; Meenakshi Devidas; Michael J Borowitz; Paul L Martin; Jeanette Pullen; James A Whitlock; Cheryl L Willman; Naomi J Winick; Bruce M Camitta; Stephen P Hunger Journal: Blood Date: 2010-05-04 Impact factor: 22.113
Authors: Elizabeth G Salazar; Yimei Li; Brian T Fisher; Susan R Rheingold; Julie Fitzgerald; Alix E Seif; Yuan-Shung Huang; Rochelle Bagatell; Richard Aplenc Journal: Br J Haematol Date: 2016-05-10 Impact factor: 6.998
Authors: Yousif Matloub; Karen R Rabin; Lingyun Ji; Meenakshi Devidas; Johann Hitzler; Xinxin Xu; Bruce C Bostrom; Linda C Stork; Naomi Winick; Julie M Gastier-Foster; Nyla A Heerema; Eileen Stonerock; William L Carroll; Stephen P Hunger; Paul S Gaynon Journal: Blood Adv Date: 2019-06-11