Transcript Document
Acute Leukemias in Children SOBOPE Educação Continuada em Onco-Hematologia Pediátrica Childhood Cancer Epidemiology 3,250 new cases/year US 2,400 are ALL 32% of all cancers 17% first year 46% between 2 and 3 years 9% in adolescence Leukemia is more common in whites Predisposing Factors Genetic Syndromes • Down syndrome – 10-20 times increased incidence leukemia – 600 times in megakaryoblastic type • • • • • • • • Fanconi Anemia Bloom syndrome Neurofibromatosis Schwachman syndrome Ataxia Telangiectasia Klinefelter syndrome Li-Fraumeni syndrome Haplo-insufficiency of the AML-1 gene Predisposing Factors • Familial aggregation – Concordance in Twins • • • • High birth weight Ionizing radiation Non-ionizing radiation (EMF) Alcohol consumption/cigarette smoking • Natural occurring flavanoids M G2 S Nonproliferation Compartment G0 G1 Cell Death Loss Transactivation RHD PST NM Repression PST NHR1 PST Repression NHR3 NHR2 RHD PST NHR1 WRPY-Grocho interaction domain ETO NHR4 PST Zn finger hydrophobic heptad repeat AML1-ETO AML1 TA t(8;21)(q22;q22) PST NHR3 NHR2 NHR4 PST Impaired Differentiation X CBF N-CoR p300 AML-1 TGT/GGT Ets myb C/EBP CBF AML-1 TGT/GGT Multistep Origin of Leukemia Normal cell, one genetic mutation may not impair cell function Normal cell, no mutation Normal cell, no mutation Malignant cell, resulting from accumulation of several mutations Pathogenesis Proliferation Kinases BCR-ABL c-KIT FLT3 Differentiation Transcriptional Core Binding MLL RAR Leukemia Birth 15 years Greaves M. BMJ 324: 283, 2002 Methods to Investigate Leukemia Heterogeneity • Conventional techniques – Morphology – Cytochemistry • • • • • Immunophenotyping Conventional Cytogenetics Molecular genetics Gene expression Protein expression Diagnosis Morphology, cytochemistry, immunophenotype and cytogenetic Leukemia Acute vs. Chronic Lymphoid vs. Myeloid Morphology/Cytochemistry Lymph Myelo Mono MPO + - ANB + Megak - - ANA +, diffuse +, granular Blood Cells Immunophenotype Classification - ALL Immunophenotype Frequency (%) Early pre-B 57 Pre-B 25 Transitional 1 B-cell 2 T-cell 15 Classification - ALL Ploidy Hypodiploid Diploid Pseudodiploid Hyperdiploid Near tetraploid Frequency (%) 7 8 42 42 1 Treatment Results of Selected Contemporary Clinical Trials of Childhood ALL Study AIEOP 91 BFM 90 CCG 1800 COALL 92 DFCI 91-01 NOPHO III SJCRH XIIIB Year 1991-95 1990-95 1989-95 1992-97 1991-95 1992-98 1994-98 No. 1194 2178 5121 538 377 1143 247 % 5-yr EFS (SE) 71 (1) 78 (1) 75 (1) 77 (2) 83 (2) 78 (1) 81 (3) Chemotherapy in ALL Drugs Mercaptopurine Methotrexate Prednisone Dexamethasone Cyclophosphamide Vincristine Cytarabine Asparaginase Daunorubicin Etoposide Teniposide Years approved in US 1953 1953 1955 1958 1959 1964 1969 1978 1979 1983 1990 Principles of Treatment in ALL • Risk-directed therapy • Early intensification of chemotherapy − Systemic and intrathecal − Consolidation/intensification − Early reinduction • Extended continuation treatment − Dose intensity of antimetabolites − Dexamethasone/vincristine pulses Total XV: Risk Classification Schema T-lineage B-lineage t(9;22)/BCR-ABL WBC <50 X 109/L & age 1 to 9.9 years, DNA index 1.16, or TEL-AML1 WBC 50 X 109/L, Age 10 years, CNS leukemia, Testicular leukemia, MLL rearrangement, t(1;19)/E2A-PBX1 <45 chromosomes Minimal residual leukemia detection at remission date 1% High-risk ~5% <0.01% Low-risk ~45% Minimal residual leukemia detection at remission date 0.01% to 1% 1% 0.01% to <1% Standard-risk ~50% Pui, Campana, Evans Lancet Oncology 2001 Risk-Directed Therapy in ALL Risk Group Low Standard High Proportion of Patients Treatment 45% Antimetabolite-based 50% Intensive multiagent 5% Allogeneic transplant Remission Induction Rate With 2 Drugs Combination CR (%) Study Pred + VCR 95 93 83 83 SJCRH VII CALGB-7111 SWOG 7420 Pred +Dexa CALGB-7111 Remission Induction Rate With 3 Drugs Combination CR (%) Study Pred + VCR + Asp 90 83 80 93 92 84 SJCRH VIII CCSG 101/143 CALGB-7111 Pred + VCR + Dauno PARIS 06-LA-66 SJCRH IX GATLA 10-LAA-72 Remission Induction Rate With 4 Drugs Combination CR (%) Study Pred + VCR + Dauno + Asp 96 BFM 70-76/76-79 Pred + VCR + Dauno + Cyclo 91 CCSG 141 Delayed Intensification (Not Intensive Induction) Improved Outcome for Standard-Risk ALL CCG 105 (1983-1988) 1.00 .80 .60 .40 Delayed Intensification (N = 312) Intensive Induction/Consolidation/ Delayed Intensification (N = 318) Intensive Induction/Consolidation (N = 314) Standard (N = 313) .20 P = .001 3 6 9 12 15 Time From Randomization (years) Gaynon et al. Leukemia, 2000 Is L-Asparaginase necessary? Asparaginase Doses* No. 5-year EFS SE† 25 > 25 43 309 73% 7% 90% 2% * weekly dosage of E Coli asparaginase at 25,000 I.U./m2 † P < 0.01 Asparaginase Intolerance Conferred a Poor Prognosis in DFC1 91-01 Protocol Erwinia Asparaginase Is Less Efficacious Than E. Coli Asparaginase Given at the Same Dose (10,000 U/m2 Twice a Week x 8) During Induction Duval et al Blood 99:1134-9, 2002 Remission Induction Rates of Contemporary Clinical Trials Study Year No. Induction rates (%) 1774 98.2 AIEOP/BFM 2000- 2000 1992-97 538 98.7 COALL 92 1991-96 467 99 DCLSG ALL 8 1991-95 386 98 DFCI 91-01 1989-98 2065 97.8 EORTC 58881 1992-98 1143 98.4 NOPHO III 1991-98 412 98.3 SJCRH XIII 1992-95 347 96 TCCSG L92-13 1990-97 2090 99 UKALL XI Consolidation POG 9005: DFS According to Methotrexate Dosage High-dose (n=349) 100 79% ± 7% 80 60 65% ± 8% Low-dose (n=350) 40 P = 0.013 20 0 0 1 2 3 Years from CR Date 4 5 6 High-Dose Methotrexate (5g/m2) Improves Outcome of T-cell ALL in POG 9404 Study* % 3-year EFS (No. of Patient) No HDMTX With HDMTX 66 8 (152) 85 7 (149) 56 10 (87) 84 9 (84) T-cell ALL T-cell ALL + WBC>50x109/L T-NHL 88 12 (69) * Backbone of DFCI protocol 87 10 (71) Double Reinduction (Intensification) Improved Outcome of Intermediate-Risk ALL Lange et al Blood 99:825-33, 2002 Double Reinduction (Protocol II) Improved Outcome of High-Risk ALL* AIEOP ALL95 Study *PPR, delayed remission, t(9;22), t(4;11) in infants Aricó et al Blood 100:420-6, 2002 Maintenance Chemotherapy Continuous administration without extended rest periods • Abrogating repair and recovery of slowly proliferating endothelial cells (leukemia has angiogenic phase) • Effective regimens featuring continuous treatment (e.g. DFCI, CCG augmented BFM) • Ineffective regimens featuring interrupted therapy (e.g. Total XH, BFM90-HRG, POG-T3) Metabolism and Elimination of MTX and MP Genetic Polymorphism of TPMT 10 wt/wt 8 6 4 wt/m 6MP Dosage 2 500 TPMT Alleles m/m 0 0 5 10 15 20 25 H1 30 ATG TPMT Activity 250 H2 • Dose adjustments to avoid toxicity • Molecular mechanisms ATG H 3A ATG 25 0 m/m wt/m wt/wt Wt/Mut G460A A719C H 3C • Molecular diagnosis Wt/Wt G238C ATG A719G [>6 additional alleles] Mut/Mut 293 bp 207 bp 86 bp ACCI: – + – + – + Krynetski andEvans AmJHumGen63(1):11-6, 1998 Total XII: Event-Free Survival According to TPMT Status Dexamethasone Improves Outcome Study CALBG 7111 (1971-74) CCG 1922 (1993-95) No. % CNS relapse Patients Dex Pred 493 14.3 25.6 1060 3.1 7.1 %5-year EFS Dex Pred — — 85 81 Can Continuation Treatment be Shortened? • Tokyo CCSG L92-13 Study (1992-1995) • Treatment duration 52 weeks • Treatment outcome Overall (N=347) B-lineage Standard-risk (N=193) High-risk (N=94) T-lineage Standard-risk (N=10) High-risk (N=31) • Overall Survival 81.0 2.1% at 5 yr % 5-yr EFS 63.4 2.7 67.8 3.4 56.7 5.4 77.1 14.4 53.6 10.1 Toyoda Y et al. J Clin Oncol 18:1508, 2000 CNS Status According to CSF Findings in St. Jude Study XI Status CNS 1 CNS 2 CNS 3 Findings No blast <5 WBC/mm3 with blasts ≥5 WBC/mm3 with blasts Patients (%) 291(83) 42(12) 18(5) Mahmoud et al. N Engl J Med, 329:314-9, 1993 Study XI: DFS by CSF Findings Probability 1 0.8 CNS 1 75% ± 4% 0.6 Overall 72% ± 4% CNS 2 53% ± 15% CNS 3 49% ± 14% 0.4 0.2 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 Years From Complete Remission 6 7 CNS Relapse Rate According to CNS Status Study Patient Group CNS1 POG 8602 B-lineage 5.3% CCG 105 Intermediate-risk6.5% BFM 95 All 3.5% EORTC 58881 All 8.1% CCG 1800/1900 All 3.9% CNS2 11.6% 11.8% 10% 15.7% 7.7% Impact of Traumatic Lumbar Punctures • • • • Traumatic LP defined as ≥10 RBCs/mm3 546 children with ALL 2 consecutive St. Jude trials (XI and XII) 2 sequential LPs performed −First: diagnosis −Second: instillation of first intrathecal chemotherapy (1-2 days later) Gajjar et al. Blood, 96:3381-4, 2000. Studies XI and XII: EFS According to CNS Status 100 Probability % 80 CNS 1 (n = 301) p < 0.001 60 Traumatic with blasts x 2 (n = 26) 40 CNS 3 (n = 16) 20 0 2 4 6 8 10 Years From Diagnosis 12 14 16 Risk Factors for Traumatic/Bloody Lumbar Puncture • Traumatic LP defined as ≥10 RBCs/mm3 − Platelet count <100 x 109/L − Inexperienced practitioner − Lumbar puncture within 2 weeks of prior LP • Unmodifiable − Black race − Age < 1 year − Early treatment era Howard et al. JAMA, 288:2001-7, 2002 Current St. Jude Approach to CNS-Directed Therapy • Transfuse thrombocytopenic patients at diagnosis • Deep sedation or anesthesia • Most experienced clinician to give IT therapy • Additional IT therapy for CNS 2, CNS 3 and traumatic with blast status • Elimination of cranial irradiation Transplantation in Childhood ALL Newly Diagnosed Relapse Philadelphia Chromosome T-cell t(4;11)/MLL-AF4 Very early marrow (<18 mo) High-risk T-cell Early marrow (>18 mo, < 6 mo off therapy) Hypodiploidy <45 Very early combined (<18 mo) Disease-free Survival of Complete Responders with Ph+ ALL Chemotherapy vs Transplantation No of Patients Hazard Ratio Treatment Total Failed (95% CI) P-value Chemotherapy 147 123 1.0 Autologous transplant 25 19 1.1 (0.7-1.8) 0.66 MRD transplant 38 12 0.3 (0.2-0.5) <0.001 MUD transplant 21 13 1.3 (0.7-2.4) 0.40 Other transplant 16 9 0.8 (0.4-1.5) 0.45 Proportion DFS of high-risk T-cell ALL – BFM 90-95 1.0 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 P=0.01 0.0 0 1 2 67%±8% 34%±4% 3 4 5 6 Transplant (n=37) Chemotherapy (n=144) 7 8 Years From Remission 9 10 11 12 Survival of Complete Responders with t(4;11) Chemotherapy vs Transplantation Treatment Chemotherapy Autologous transplant MRD transplant MUD transplant Other transplant Any transplant No. of Patients Total Deaths 174 104 10 4 15 9 14 8 17 14 56 35 Hazard Ratio (95% CI) P value 1.0 0.71 0.83 (0,1.67) 0.26 1.48 (0.47, 2.48) 0.78 1.90 (0.11,3.27) 0.078 2.54 (1.15, 3.92) 0.008 1.76 (1.08, 2.45) 0.004 DFS and Survival in t(4;11) ALL Chemotherapy vs MRD Transplantation 1 0.9 0.8 0.7 Survival 0.6 Chemotherapy Transplantation 0.5 0.4 Chemotherapy 0.3 Transplantation Disease-free survival 0.2 0.1 0 0 0.38 1 3 5 7 9 11 Years from Start of Therapy 13 15 17 Summary - Transplant • Matched-related transplant is indicated for Philadelphia chromosome-positive ALL • Matched-related transplant or matchedunrelated transplant improves outcome of high risk T-cell ALL • Transplant does not appear to benefit t(4;11) ALL • Studies are needed to determine if transplant is effective for B-lineage late responders or those with severe hypodiploidy Improving Cure Rates in Childhood Leukemia • Refinement of Current Therapy – Maximum Efficacy, Minimum Toxicity • • • • Individualization of Dosage Improving Risk Classification Development of New Cancer Drugs Understanding the Mechanism of Disease Evans WE and Relling MV, Science 286:487-91, 1999 SEER – AML survival – 5 years (%) http://seer.cancer.gov/Publications/CSR1973_1998/child.pdf Disease 83-85 86-88 89-91 92-97 Hodgkin 88.2 89.3 93.5 93.1 ALL 66.7 75.4 77.3 82.8 CNS Tumors 63.1 65.6 64.3 69.5 AML 34.4 31.7 38.5 41.1 Induction Study No. Ara-C Dauno Other MRC10 286 1,000 150 POG 8821 649 5,000 225 6-TG VP16 6-TG CCG S 2891 I BFM93 294 295 471 800 1,600 1,400 Aust/NZ 102 160 700 700 80 VP/Dex/ 6-TG 60 180 VP16 Idar 36 150 6-TG Idar 36 HD Ara-c CR (%) 89 93 85 74 78 82 95 92 Induction - Summary • Intensive blocks of therapy • Cytarabine dosage of at least 1.0 g or 10 days of exposure • Daunomycin total dosage of at least 100 mg/m2/day – Minimum infusion time of at least 90 minutes • Etoposide benefit has not been established • No benefit of mitoxantrone or idarubicin over daunorubicin • Supportive care is of paramount Post-Remission • Chemotherapy – Intensity – Number of courses – Maintenance • Stem Cell Transplantation – Autologous • Purged – Allogeneic • Related • Unrelated Post-Remission Summary • Consolidation is necessary –Intensive blocks –Drugs (?) –Number (?) • Maintenance is not necessary Lessons from the Past Stem Cell Transplantation • Study CCG-2891 –To compare two induction (intensified and standard) regimens Woods et al. Blood 87:4979, 1996 –To compare three strategies of post-remission therapy • Allogeneic HSCT •Woods Autologous HSCT et al. Blood 97:56, 2001 –Busulfan/Cyclophosphamide Allogeneic HSCT Intensive Chemotherapy Autologous HSCT Woods W. Blood 97:56-62, 2001 Estimates of Survival - 8 years Allo HSCT Auto HSCT Int Chemo No. (537) 181 177 179 DFS 55% ± 9% 42% ± 8% 47% ± 8% Chemo (336) 113 115 108 DFS 66% ± 9% 48% ± 9% 53% ± 10% Woods W. Blood 97:56-62, 2001 MRC 10 Preparative treatment for both allogeneic and autologous HSCT was Cyclo 120 mg/kg and TBI Burnett A et al. Lancet 351: 700, 1998 MRC-10: Risk of relapse in all patients Burnett A et al Lancet 351: 700, 1998 MRC-10: Survival in all patients Burnett A et al Lancet 351: 700, 1998 Autologous Bone Marrow Transplantation • 31 consecutive patients with AML • 24 entered the autologous BMT • Preparatory regimen: Melphalan 140 mg/m2/d Tiedeman, K. Blood 82:3730-3738, 1993 HSC Transplantation Summary • HLA-matched sibling donor HSCT is recommended for children with standard or high-risk AML • HLA-matched unrelated donor HSCT acceptable for high-risk patients • Alternative donors (haploidentical) and autologous should be investigated • TBI-free regimens should be considered Central Nervous SystemDirected Therapy • St. Jude Study AML-97 – Triple IT MTX/HC/Ara-C x 4, – CNS + at diagnosis: triple IT every week until clear and then with each cycle (N=8) – DFS ~ 50% • No isolated CNS relapse • BFM-93 – IT Ara-C x 4 – Cranial radiation 18 Gy (children > 3 years) – No report on CNS relapses Central Nervous SystemDirected Therapy • UK MRC-10 – Triple IT MTX/HC/Ara-C x 4 – CNS + at diagnosis: triple IT every week until clear and then with each cycle (N=8). Craniospinal radiotherapy (24Gy/12Gy) – No isolated CNS relapse; 4 combined • Australian/NZ – IT MTX x 5 – No radiation CNS-directed therapy Summary • No randomized studies – Type of drugs – Radiation • Chemotherapy likely to suffice • Radiotherapy – Overt CNS – Chloromas Risk-directed therapyAML • Intensive Chemotherapy –favorable cytogenetics • t(8;21), t(9;11), inv(16) • Down Syndrome • ATRA –Progranulocytic leukemia Risk-directed therapy- AML • Bone Marrow Transplantation –High-risk groups • -7, -5q, trisomy 8 • Failure to achieve remission after 1-2 courses of chemotherapy AML in DOWN SYNDROME • Predominant form of leukemia in DS children under the age of 4 years • M7 is the most common FAB type • Favorable translocations are rare • Common history of myodysplasia • Adverse effect on survival by BMT • Excellent prognosis on standard AML treatment