Clinical outcome of therapy-related acute myeloid leukemia patients. Real-life experience in a University Hospital and a Cancer Center in France.
clinical outcome
real-life management
therapy-related AML
Journal
Cancer medicine
ISSN: 2045-7634
Titre abrégé: Cancer Med
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101595310
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
08 2023
08 2023
Historique:
revised:
17
06
2023
received:
13
01
2023
accepted:
27
06
2023
medline:
15
9
2023
pubmed:
7
8
2023
entrez:
7
8
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
t-AML occurs after a primary malignancy treatment and retains a poor prognosis. To determine the impact of primary malignancies, therapeutic strategies, and prognostic factors on clinical outcomes of t-AML. A total of 112 adult patients were included in this study. Fifty-Five patients received intensive chemotherapy (IC), 33 non-IC, and 24 best supportive care. At t-AML diagnosis, 42% and 44% of patients presented an unfavorable karyotype and unfavorable 2010 ELN risk profile, respectively. Among treated patients (n = 88), 43 (49%) achieved complete remission: four out of 33 (12%) and 39 out of 55 (71%) in non-IC and IC groups, respectively. With a median follow-up of 5.5 months, the median overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) for the whole population were 9 months and 6.3 months, respectively, and for the 88 treated patients 13.5 months and 8.2 months, respectively. Univariate analysis on OS and DFS showed a significant impact of high white blood cells (WBC) and blast counts at diagnosis, unfavorable karyotype and ELN classification. Multivariate analysis showed a negative impact of WBC count at diagnosis and a positive impact of chemotherapy on OS and DFS in the whole population. It also showed a negative impact of previous auto-HCT and high WBC count on OS and DFS and of IC on OS in treated patients which disappeared when we considered only confounding variables (age, previous cancers, marrow blasts, and 2010 ELN classification). In a pair-matched analysis comparing IC treated t-AML with de novo AML, there was no difference of OS and DFS between the two populations. We showed, in this study that t-AML patients with unfavorable features represented almost half of the population. Best outcomes obtained in patients receiving IC must be balanced by known confounding variables and should be improved by using new innovative agents and therapeutic strategies.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
t-AML occurs after a primary malignancy treatment and retains a poor prognosis.
AIMS
To determine the impact of primary malignancies, therapeutic strategies, and prognostic factors on clinical outcomes of t-AML.
RESULTS
A total of 112 adult patients were included in this study. Fifty-Five patients received intensive chemotherapy (IC), 33 non-IC, and 24 best supportive care. At t-AML diagnosis, 42% and 44% of patients presented an unfavorable karyotype and unfavorable 2010 ELN risk profile, respectively. Among treated patients (n = 88), 43 (49%) achieved complete remission: four out of 33 (12%) and 39 out of 55 (71%) in non-IC and IC groups, respectively. With a median follow-up of 5.5 months, the median overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) for the whole population were 9 months and 6.3 months, respectively, and for the 88 treated patients 13.5 months and 8.2 months, respectively. Univariate analysis on OS and DFS showed a significant impact of high white blood cells (WBC) and blast counts at diagnosis, unfavorable karyotype and ELN classification. Multivariate analysis showed a negative impact of WBC count at diagnosis and a positive impact of chemotherapy on OS and DFS in the whole population. It also showed a negative impact of previous auto-HCT and high WBC count on OS and DFS and of IC on OS in treated patients which disappeared when we considered only confounding variables (age, previous cancers, marrow blasts, and 2010 ELN classification). In a pair-matched analysis comparing IC treated t-AML with de novo AML, there was no difference of OS and DFS between the two populations.
CONCLUSION
We showed, in this study that t-AML patients with unfavorable features represented almost half of the population. Best outcomes obtained in patients receiving IC must be balanced by known confounding variables and should be improved by using new innovative agents and therapeutic strategies.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37548369
doi: 10.1002/cam4.6322
pmc: PMC10501294
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
16929-16944Informations de copyright
© 2023 The Authors. Cancer Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Références
N Engl J Med. 2005 Apr 14;352(15):1529-38
pubmed: 15829534
Blood. 2015 Feb 26;125(9):1367-76
pubmed: 25550361
J Clin Oncol. 2018 Sep 10;36(26):2684-2692
pubmed: 30024784
Best Pract Res Clin Haematol. 2019 Mar;32(1):104-113
pubmed: 30927969
Blood. 2003 Jul 1;102(1):43-52
pubmed: 12623843
Blood. 2018 Apr 19;131(16):1846-1857
pubmed: 29311096
Best Pract Res Clin Haematol. 2011 Dec;24(4):523-6
pubmed: 22127315
Blood. 2017 Jan 26;129(4):424-447
pubmed: 27895058
Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2021 May;48(5):1390-1398
pubmed: 33247328
N Engl J Med. 2020 Aug 13;383(7):617-629
pubmed: 32786187
Blood Cancer Discov. 2020 Jul;1(1):32-47
pubmed: 32924016
Blood. 2022 Sep 22;140(12):1345-1377
pubmed: 35797463
Blood. 2011 Feb 17;117(7):2137-45
pubmed: 21127174
Blood Adv. 2021 Oct 26;5(20):4140-4148
pubmed: 34492705
Leuk Lymphoma. 2015 Apr;56(4):1012-9
pubmed: 25048874
Lancet Oncol. 2014 Mar;15(3):333-42
pubmed: 24525202
Br J Haematol. 2009 Jun;145(5):598-605
pubmed: 19344426
Haematologica. 2020 Mar;105(3):e98-e101
pubmed: 31413096
Mediterr J Hematol Infect Dis. 2018 Jan 01;10(1):e2018005
pubmed: 29326802
Leukemia. 2002 Dec;16(12):2366-78
pubmed: 12454741
Oncotarget. 2017 Mar 7;8(45):79126-79136
pubmed: 29108292
Chem Biol Interact. 2010 Mar 19;184(1-2):50-7
pubmed: 19958752
Eur J Haematol. 2010 Sep;85(3):217-26
pubmed: 20456491
Leukemia. 2008 May;22(5):951-5
pubmed: 18273044
Blood. 2010 Jan 21;115(3):453-74
pubmed: 19880497
Nat Genet. 2020 Nov;52(11):1219-1226
pubmed: 33106634
Blood. 1999 Sep 1;94(5):1814-9
pubmed: 10477708
Blood. 2021 Sep 2;138(9):749-757
pubmed: 33876223
Cancer Biol Ther. 2013 Dec;14(12):1077-88
pubmed: 24025414
J Clin Oncol. 2021 May 10;39(14):1584-1594
pubmed: 33449813
Haematologica. 2023 Apr 01;108(4):1015-1025
pubmed: 36005563
Nature. 2015 Feb 26;518(7540):552-555
pubmed: 25487151
Blood. 2023 Mar 2;141(9):1087-1091
pubmed: 36574363
J Clin Oncol. 2013 Feb 10;31(5):592-8
pubmed: 23295809
J Clin Oncol. 2019 May 20;37(15):1277-1284
pubmed: 30892988
Onco Targets Ther. 2018 Sep 17;11:5909-5915
pubmed: 30271175
Front Oncol. 2020 Jan 22;9:1380
pubmed: 32038992
Sci Rep. 2021 Dec 2;11(1):23284
pubmed: 34857802
Bone Marrow Transplant. 2023 Jul;58(7):769-776
pubmed: 37012415
Blood Adv. 2022 Feb 22;6(4):1278-1295
pubmed: 34794172
Lancet Haematol. 2021 Feb;8(2):e122-e134
pubmed: 33347814
N Engl J Med. 2016 Jun 9;374(23):2209-2221
pubmed: 27276561
Methods Mol Med. 2004;91:151-73
pubmed: 14573936
Blood. 2016 May 19;127(20):2391-405
pubmed: 27069254
J Clin Oncol. 2004 Jun 15;22(12):2510-1
pubmed: 15197216
Cancer. 2017 Aug 15;123(16):3050-3060
pubmed: 28387922
Blood. 2013 Apr 11;121(15):2996-3004
pubmed: 23412096
Cancer Med. 2023 Aug;12(16):16929-16944
pubmed: 37548369
Leuk Res. 2018 Aug;71:95-99
pubmed: 30048839
Leuk Res. 2015 Mar;39(3):348-54
pubmed: 25573287
Lancet Oncol. 2017 Jan;18(1):100-111
pubmed: 27923552
J Clin Oncol. 2009 Feb 10;27(5):791-8
pubmed: 19124806
Am J Hematol. 2015 May;90(5):E80-5
pubmed: 25653205
Blood Cancer J. 2020 Oct 6;10(10):96
pubmed: 33024084
Bone Marrow Transplant. 2021 Apr;56(4):936-945
pubmed: 33208914
Ann Oncol. 2021 Aug;32(8):1046-1048
pubmed: 34107346
Lancet Oncol. 2017 Jan;18(1):112-121
pubmed: 27927582