BACKGROUND: About 70-80 percent of patients with acute myeloid leukemia enter complete remission, but at least half of these patients who achieve remission go on to relapse. Improved treatment is likely to come from increasing the time to relapse, especially for younger patients. With the vastly increasing number of targeted therapies there is a strong need for short-term end-points to efficiently test such therapies for further pursuance. Minimal residual disease assessment may offer such an end-point since it is a strong independent prognostic factor. As proof of principle we examined this concept for FLT3-ITD status at diagnosis. DESIGN AND METHODS: We determined FLT3-ITD status in bone marrow samples from 196 patients with newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia. The frequencies of residual leukemic cells of these 196 patients were assessed in 267 follow-up bone marrow samples using immunophenotypic assessment of minimal residual disease. RESULTS: The median frequency of residual leukemic cells after the first cycle of chemotherapy was 8.5-fold higher in patients with FLT3-ITD than in those with wild type FLT3. Such a difference translates into differences in survival, even if other potentially outcome-modulating mutations, such as NPM1, KIT, NRAS, KRAS, FLT3-exon 20 and PTPN11 are included in the analysis. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that it could be possible to study the efficacy of FLT3 inhibitors using the level of minimal residual disease as a short-term end-point.
BACKGROUND: About 70-80 percent of patients with acute myeloid leukemia enter complete remission, but at least half of these patients who achieve remission go on to relapse. Improved treatment is likely to come from increasing the time to relapse, especially for younger patients. With the vastly increasing number of targeted therapies there is a strong need for short-term end-points to efficiently test such therapies for further pursuance. Minimal residual disease assessment may offer such an end-point since it is a strong independent prognostic factor. As proof of principle we examined this concept for FLT3-ITD status at diagnosis. DESIGN AND METHODS: We determined FLT3-ITD status in bone marrow samples from 196 patients with newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia. The frequencies of residual leukemic cells of these 196 patients were assessed in 267 follow-up bone marrow samples using immunophenotypic assessment of minimal residual disease. RESULTS: The median frequency of residual leukemic cells after the first cycle of chemotherapy was 8.5-fold higher in patients with FLT3-ITD than in those with wild type FLT3. Such a difference translates into differences in survival, even if other potentially outcome-modulating mutations, such as NPM1, KIT, NRAS, KRAS, FLT3-exon 20 and PTPN11 are included in the analysis. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that it could be possible to study the efficacy of FLT3 inhibitors using the level of minimal residual disease as a short-term end-point.
Authors: A Venditti; F Buccisano; G Del Poeta; L Maurillo; A Tamburini; C Cox; A Battaglia; G Catalano; B Del Moro; L Cudillo; M Postorino; M Masi; S Amadori Journal: Blood Date: 2000-12-01 Impact factor: 22.113
Authors: N Feller; G J Schuurhuis; M A van der Pol; G Westra; G W D Weijers; A van Stijn; P C Huijgens; G J Ossenkoppele Journal: Leukemia Date: 2003-01 Impact factor: 11.528
Authors: M A van der Pol; N Feller; G J Ossenkoppele; G W D Weijers; A H Westra; A van Stijn; H J Broxterman; G J Schuurhuis Journal: Leukemia Date: 2003-08 Impact factor: 11.528
Authors: J F San Miguel; A Martínez; A Macedo; M B Vidriales; C López-Berges; M González; D Caballero; M A García-Marcos; F Ramos; J Fernández-Calvo; M J Calmuntia; J Diaz-Mediavilla; A Orfao Journal: Blood Date: 1997-09-15 Impact factor: 22.113
Authors: J Cloos; B F Goemans; C J Hess; J W van Oostveen; Q Waisfisz; S Corthals; D de Lange; N Boeckx; K Hählen; D Reinhardt; U Creutzig; G J Schuurhuis; Ch M Zwaan; G J L Kaspers Journal: Leukemia Date: 2006-04-27 Impact factor: 11.528
Authors: Christian Thiede; Christine Steudel; Brigitte Mohr; Markus Schaich; Ulrike Schäkel; Uwe Platzbecker; Martin Wermke; Martin Bornhäuser; Markus Ritter; Andreas Neubauer; Gerhard Ehninger; Thomas Illmer Journal: Blood Date: 2002-06-15 Impact factor: 22.113
Authors: M A van der Pol; J M Pater; N Feller; A H Westra; A van Stijn; G J Ossenkoppele; H J Broxterman; G J Schuurhuis Journal: Leukemia Date: 2001-10 Impact factor: 11.528
Authors: Francis J Giles; Alison T Stopeck; Lewis R Silverman; Jeffrey E Lancet; Maureen A Cooper; Alison L Hannah; Julie M Cherrington; Anne-Marie O'Farrell; Helene A Yuen; Sharianne G Louie; Weiru Hong; Jorge E Cortes; Srdan Verstovsek; Maher Albitar; Susan M O'Brien; Hagop M Kantarjian; Judith E Karp Journal: Blood Date: 2003-03-20 Impact factor: 22.113
Authors: N Feller; M A van der Pol; A van Stijn; G W D Weijers; A H Westra; B W Evertse; G J Ossenkoppele; G J Schuurhuis Journal: Leukemia Date: 2004-08 Impact factor: 11.528
Authors: Jens Tiesmeier; Carsten Müller-Tidow; Annette Westermann; Andreas Czwalinna; Mandy Hoffmann; Jürgen Krauter; Gerhard Heil; Arnold Ganser; Hubert Serve; Walter Verbeek Journal: Leuk Res Date: 2004-10 Impact factor: 3.156
Authors: Mark J Levis; Alexander E Perl; Jessica K Altman; Christopher D Gocke; Erkut Bahceci; Jason Hill; Chaofeng Liu; Zhiyi Xie; Andrew R Carson; Valerie McClain; Timothy T Stenzel; Jeffrey E Miller Journal: Blood Adv Date: 2018-04-24
Authors: Ellen Weisberg; Rosemary Barrett; Qingsong Liu; Richard Stone; Nathanael Gray; James D Griffin Journal: Drug Resist Updat Date: 2009-05-20 Impact factor: 18.500
Authors: Jessica K Altman; Alexander E Perl; Jason E Hill; Matt Rosales; Erkut Bahceci; Mark J Levis Journal: Cancer Med Date: 2020-12-19 Impact factor: 4.452