Cytogenetics is considered one of the most valuable prognostic determinants in acute myeloid leukemia (AML). However, many studies on which this assertion is based were limited by relatively small sample sizes or varying treatment approach, leading to conflicting data regarding the prognostic implications of specific cytogenetic abnormalities. The Medical Research Council (MRC) AML 10 trial, which included children and adults up to 55 years of age, not only affords the opportunity to determine the independent prognostic significance of pretreatment cytogenetics in the context of large patient groups receiving comparable therapy, but also to address their impact on the outcome of subsequent transplantation procedures performed in first complete remission (CR). On the basis of response to induction treatment, relapse risk, and overall survival, three prognostic groups could be defined by cytogenetic abnormalities detected at presentation in comparison with the outcome of patients with normal karyotype. AML associated with t(8;21), t(15;17) or inv(16) predicted a relatively favorable outcome. Whereas in patients lacking these favorable changes, the presence of a complex karyotype, −5, del(5q), −7, or abnormalities of 3q defined a group with relatively poor prognosis. The remaining group of patients including those with 11q23 abnormalities, +8, +21, +22, del(9q), del(7q) or other miscellaneous structural or numerical defects not encompassed by the favorable or adverse risk groups were found to have an intermediate prognosis. The presence of additional cytogenetic abnormalities did not modify the outcome of patients with favorable cytogenetics. Subgroup analysis demonstrated that the three cytogenetically defined prognostic groups retained their predictive value in the context of secondary as well as de novo AML, within the pediatric age group and furthermore were found to be a key determinant of outcome from autologous or allogeneic bone marrow transplantation (BMT) in first CR. This study highlights the importance of diagnostic cytogenetics as an independent prognostic factor in AML, providing the framework for a stratified treatment approach of this disease, which has been adopted in the current MRC AML 12 trial.

PurposeMinimal residual disease (MRD) and genetic abnormalities are important risk factors for outcome in acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Current risk algorithms dichotomize MRD data and do not assimilate genetics when assigning MRD risk, which reduces predictive accuracy. The aim of our study was to exploit the full power of MRD by examining it as a continuous variable and to integrate it with genetics.Patients and MethodsWe used a population-based cohort of 3,113 patients who were treated in UKALL2003, with a median follow-up of 7 years. MRD was evaluated by polymerase chain reaction analysis of Ig/TCR gene rearrangements, and patients were assigned to a genetic subtype on the basis of immunophenotype, cytogenetics, and fluorescence in situ hybridization. To examine response kinetics at the end of induction, we log-transformed the absolute MRD value and examined its distribution across subgroups.ResultsMRD was log normally distributed at the end of induction. MRD distributions of patients with distinct genetic subtypes were different (P < .001). Patients with good-risk cytogenetics demonstrated the fastest disease clearance, whereas patients with high-risk genetics and T-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia responded more slowly. The risk of relapse was correlated with MRD kinetics, and each log reduction in disease level reduced the risk by 20% (hazard ratio, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.77 to 0.83; P < .001). Although the risk of relapse was directly proportional to the MRD level within each genetic risk group, absolute relapse rate that was associated with a specific MRD value or category varied significantly by genetic subtype. Integration of genetic subtype–specific MRD values allowed more refined risk group stratification.ConclusionA single threshold for assigning patients to an MRD risk group does not reflect the response kinetics of the different genetic subtypes. Future risk algorithms should integrate genetics with MRD to accurately identify patients with the lowest and highest risk of relapse.

Summary. The single most important prognostic determinant in childhood acute lymphoblastic leukaemia (ALL) is effective therapy and changes in therapy may influence the significance of other risk factors. The effect of intensified therapy on the importance of currently recognized phenotypic and genotypic determinants of outcome was assessed in 2090 children enrolled on the Medical Research Council United Kingdom acute lymphoblastic leukaemia XI (MRC UKALL XI) protocol. Treatment allocation was not determined by risk factors. Multivariate analysis confirmed the dominant influence on prognosis of age, sex and presenting white cell count (WCC). After allowing for these features, blast karyotype, d 8 marrow blast percentage and remission status at the end of induction therapy were the only remaining significant predictors of outcome. Organomegaly, haemoglobin concentration, French±American±British type, body mass index, presence of central nervous system disease at diagnosis, immunophenotype and presence of TEL/AML1 fusion gene (examined in a subset of 659 patients) either had no significant effect on outcome or were significant only in univariate analysis. Among karyotype abnormalities with an independent influence on prognosis, high hyperdiploidy (. 50 chromosomes) was shown to be favourable, whereas near haploidy (23±29 chromosomes), presence of the Philadelphia chromosome, t(4;11) and abnormalities affecting the short arm of chromosome 9 [abn (9p)] were adverse risk factors. Early responders to therapy, determined by residual marrow infiltration after 8 d of induction therapy, had a good outcome, while the small proportion of patients who did not achieve a complete remission by the end of induction therapy had a poor outcome. A third block of late intensification was shown to improve event-free survival by 8% at 5 years. The effect of these risk factors was not significantly different between those randomized to the third intensification block and those not randomized to a third block.