Acute Leukemias - Republican Scientific Medical Library
Acute Leukemias - Republican Scientific Medical Library
Acute Leukemias - Republican Scientific Medical Library
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
258 Chapter 20 · Minimal Residual Disease Studies in <strong>Acute</strong> Lymphoblastic Leukemia<br />
Table 20.5. MRD studies in Ph+ALL<br />
Study N Rx Relapsed MRD-status Major conclusion<br />
MRD+ MRD–<br />
Gehly 1991 [92] 4 Allo 1/1 (100%) 0/3 (0%) Interval between MRD detection and relapse<br />
in Ph+ALL may be relatively short and quite<br />
different from Ph+ CML post transplant<br />
2 Auto 1/1 (100%) 1/1 (100%)<br />
Miyamura 1992 9 Allo 5/5 (100%) 1/4 (25%) Median interval between PCR positivity and<br />
[91]<br />
clinical relapse was only 4 weeks<br />
6 Auto 2/2 (100%) 0/4 (0%)<br />
Radich 1995 [93] 8 Auto 1/8 (12%) – PCR+ following Allo-SCT predictive of relapse<br />
Mitterbauer 1995 7 – 6/6 (100%) 1/1 (100%) One-step combined with two-step RQ-PCR<br />
[88]<br />
analysis gives valuable information about the<br />
efficacy of treatment and the dynamics of the<br />
leukemia<br />
Radich 1997 [90] 30 Allo 8/21 (38%) 0/9 (0%) Median time from first PCR-positive test to<br />
relapse was 94 days<br />
6 Auto 2/2 (100%) 2/4 (50%) p190 confers higher risk of relapse than p210<br />
Sierra 1997 [89] 18 Allo 5/18 (62%) – PCR+ following match Allo-SCT correlates<br />
with relapse<br />
Preudhomme 1997 8 CT 6/7 (85%) 0/1 (0%) Relapse is always preceded by switch to PCR<br />
[87]<br />
positivity of Ph+ by 4 to 6 months<br />
5 Allo 3/3 (100%) 0/2 (0%) Lower sensitivity of RT-PCR in PB compared<br />
with BM<br />
4 Auto 2/3 (66%) 0/1 (0%)<br />
Mitterbauer 1999 4 CT 4/4 (100%) – Relapse is preceded by 5 to 15 weeks by one<br />
[74]<br />
step PCR<br />
3 Allo 2/3(66%) –<br />
2 Auto 0/2 (0%) –<br />
CT = Chemotherapy<br />
Auto = Autologous stem cells transplant<br />
Allo=Allogeneic stem cell transplant<br />
also has begun to provide important insights into the efficacy<br />
of treatment for specific molecular cytogenetic<br />
subsets of ALL.<br />
Several important issues remain to be answered in<br />
carefully controlled trials. If MRD measurements are<br />
to be incorporated into clinical trials and used for treatment<br />
stratification and evaluation of treatment efficacy,<br />
the unresolved issues of technique standardization and<br />
quality control must be addressed. The Europe Against<br />
Cancer (EAC) and BIOMED initiatives have resulted in<br />
the development of standardized and validated method-<br />
ology for quantitative PCR analysis in order to permit<br />
accurate comparison of MRD data [46]. Adoption of this<br />
approach in future trials and standardization of methodologies<br />
for flow cytometric MRD studies will be essential<br />
to accurately evaluate data from different clinical<br />
trials, and to help to answer important questions that<br />
remain including: (1) what level of MRD is clinically important;<br />
(2) when are the critical treatment time-points<br />
for MRD evaluation; (3) will MRD-based treatment intervention<br />
improve outcome. Finally, any MRD result<br />
must be interpreted in the context of the treatment ad-