Displaying all 5 publications

Abstract:
Sort:
  1. Yeoh AEJ, Lu Y, Chin WHN, Chiew EKH, Lim EH, Li Z, et al.
    J. Clin. Oncol., 2018 Sep 10;36(26):2726-2735.
    PMID: 30044693 DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2018.78.3050
    Purpose Although IKZF1 deletion ( IKZF1del) confers a higher risk of relapse in childhood B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia (B-ALL), it is uncertain whether treatment intensification will reverse this risk and improve outcomes. The Malaysia-Singapore ALL 2010 study (MS2010) prospectively upgraded the risk assignment of patients with IKZF1del to the next highest level and added imatinib to the treatment of all patients with BCR- ABL1 fusion. Patients and Methods In total, 823 patients with B-ALL treated in the Malyasia-Singapore ALL 2003 study (MS2003; n = 507) and MS2010 (n = 316) were screened for IKZF1del using the multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification assay. The impact of IKZF1del on the 5-year cumulative incidence of relapse (CIR) was compared between the two studies. Results Patient characteristics were similar in both cohorts, including IKZF1del frequencies (59 of 410 [14.4%] v 50 of 275 [18.2%]; P = .2). In MS2003, where IKZF1del was not used in risk assignment, IKZF1del conferred a significantly higher 5-year CIR (30.4% v 8.1%; P = 8.7 × 10-7), particularly in the intermediate-risk group who lacked high-risk features (25.0% v 7.5%; P = .01). For patients with BCR-ABL1-negative disease, IKZF1del conferred a higher 5-year CIR (20.5% v 8.0%; P = .01). In MS2010, the 5-year CIR of patients with IKZF1del significantly decreased to 13.5% ( P = .05) and no longer showed a significant difference in patients with BCR-ABL1-negative disease (11.4% v 4.4%; P = .09). The 5-year overall survival for patients with IKZF1del improved from 69.6% in MS2003 to 91.6% in MS2010 ( P = .007). Conclusion Intensifying therapy for childhood B-ALL with IKZF1del significantly reduced the risk of relapse and improved overall survival. Incorporating IKZF1del screening significantly improved treatment outcomes in contemporary ALL therapy.
  2. Yeoh AE, Ariffin H, Chai EL, Kwok CS, Chan YH, Ponnudurai K, et al.
    J. Clin. Oncol., 2012 Jul 1;30(19):2384-92.
    PMID: 22614971 DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2011.40.5936
    PURPOSE: To improve treatment outcome for childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL), we designed the Malaysia-Singapore ALL 2003 study with treatment stratification based on presenting clinical and genetic features and minimal residual disease (MRD) levels measured by polymerase chain reaction targeting a single antigen-receptor gene rearrangement.
    PATIENTS AND METHODS: Five hundred fifty-six patients received risk-adapted therapy with a modified Berlin-Frankfurt-Münster-ALL treatment. High-risk ALL was defined by MRD ≥ 1 × 10(-3) at week 12 and/or poor prednisolone response, BCR-ABL1, MLL gene rearrangements, hypodiploid less than 45 chromosomes, or induction failure; standard-risk ALL was defined by MRD ≤ 1 × 10(-4) at weeks 5 and 12 and no extramedullary involvement or high-risk features. Intermediate-risk ALL included all remaining patients.
    RESULTS: Patients who lacked high-risk presenting features (85.7%) received remission induction therapy with dexamethasone, vincristine, and asparaginase, without anthracyclines. Six-year event-free survival (EFS) was 80.6% ± 3.5%; overall survival was 88.4% ± 3.1%. Standard-risk patients (n = 172; 31%) received significantly deintensified subsequent therapy without compromising EFS (93.2% ± 4.1%). High-risk patients (n = 101; 18%) had the worst EFS (51.8% ± 10%); EFS was 83.6% ± 4.9% in intermediate-risk patients (n = 283; 51%).
    CONCLUSION: Our results demonstrate significant progress over previous trials in the region. Three-drug remission-induction therapy combined with MRD-based risk stratification to identify poor responders is an effective strategy for childhood ALL.
  3. Lecarpentier J, Silvestri V, Kuchenbaecker KB, Barrowdale D, Dennis J, McGuffog L, et al.
    J. Clin. Oncol., 2017 Jul 10;35(20):2240-2250.
    PMID: 28448241 DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2016.69.4935
    Purpose BRCA1/2 mutations increase the risk of breast and prostate cancer in men. Common genetic variants modify cancer risks for female carriers of BRCA1/2 mutations. We investigated-for the first time to our knowledge-associations of common genetic variants with breast and prostate cancer risks for male carriers of BRCA1/ 2 mutations and implications for cancer risk prediction. Materials and Methods We genotyped 1,802 male carriers of BRCA1/2 mutations from the Consortium of Investigators of Modifiers of BRCA1/2 by using the custom Illumina OncoArray. We investigated the combined effects of established breast and prostate cancer susceptibility variants on cancer risks for male carriers of BRCA1/2 mutations by constructing weighted polygenic risk scores (PRSs) using published effect estimates as weights. Results In male carriers of BRCA1/2 mutations, PRS that was based on 88 female breast cancer susceptibility variants was associated with breast cancer risk (odds ratio per standard deviation of PRS, 1.36; 95% CI, 1.19 to 1.56; P = 8.6 × 10-6). Similarly, PRS that was based on 103 prostate cancer susceptibility variants was associated with prostate cancer risk (odds ratio per SD of PRS, 1.56; 95% CI, 1.35 to 1.81; P = 3.2 × 10-9). Large differences in absolute cancer risks were observed at the extremes of the PRS distribution. For example, prostate cancer risk by age 80 years at the 5th and 95th percentiles of the PRS varies from 7% to 26% for carriers of BRCA1 mutations and from 19% to 61% for carriers of BRCA2 mutations, respectively. Conclusion PRSs may provide informative cancer risk stratification for male carriers of BRCA1/2 mutations that might enable these men and their physicians to make informed decisions on the type and timing of breast and prostate cancer risk management.
  4. Héritier S, Emile JF, Barkaoui MA, Thomas C, Fraitag S, Boudjemaa S, et al.
    J. Clin. Oncol., 2016 09 01;34(25):3023-30.
    PMID: 27382093 DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2015.65.9508
    PURPOSE: Langerhans cell histiocytosis (LCH) is an inflammatory myeloid neoplasia with a broad spectrum of clinical manifestations and outcomes in children. The somatic BRAF(V600E) mutation occurs frequently, but clinical significance remains to be determined.

    PATIENTS AND METHODS: BRAF(V600E) mutation was investigated in a French LCH cohort. We analyzed associations between mutation status and clinical presentation, extent of disease, reactivation rate, response to therapy, and long-term permanent sequelae.

    RESULTS: Among 315 patients with successfully determined BRAF status, 173 (54.6%) carried a BRAF(V600E) mutation. Patients with BRAF(V600E) manifested more severe disease than did those with wild-type BRAF. Patients with BRAF(V600E) comprised 87.8% of patients (43 of 49) with multisystem LCH with risk organ involvement (liver, spleen, hematology), 68.6% of patients (35 of 51) with multisystem LCH without risk organ involvement, 43.9% of patients (86 of 196) with single-system LCH, and 42.1% of patients (8 of 19) with lung-involved LCH (P < .001). BRAF(V600E) mutation was also associated with organ involvement that could lead to permanent, irreversible damage, such as neurologic (75%) and pituitary (72.9%) injuries. Compared with patients with wild-type BRAF, patients with BRAF(V600E) more commonly displayed resistance to combined vinblastine and corticosteroid therapy (21.9% v 3.3%; P = .001), showed a higher reactivation rate (5-year reactivation rate, 42.8% v 28.1%; P = .006), and had more permanent, long-term consequences from disease or treatment (27.9% v 12.6%; P = .001).

    CONCLUSION: In children with LCH, BRAF(V600E) mutation was associated with high-risk features, permanent injury, and poor short-term response to chemotherapy. Further population-based studies should be undertaken to confirm our observations and to assess the impact of BRAF inhibitors for this subgroup of patients who may benefit from targeted therapy.

  5. Chow PKH, Gandhi M, Tan SB, Khin MW, Khasbazar A, Ong J, et al.
    J. Clin. Oncol., 2018 Jul 01;36(19):1913-1921.
    PMID: 29498924 DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2017.76.0892
    Purpose Selective internal radiation therapy or radioembolization (RE) shows efficacy in unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) limited to the liver. This study compared the safety and efficacy of RE and sorafenib in patients with locally advanced HCC. Patients and Methods SIRveNIB (selective internal radiation therapy v sorafenib), an open-label, investigator-initiated, phase III trial, compared yttrium-90 (90Y) resin microspheres RE with sorafenib 800 mg/d in patients with locally advanced HCC in a two-tailed study designed for superiority/detriment. Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 and stratified by center and presence of portal vein thrombosis. Primary end point was overall survival (OS). Efficacy analyses were performed in the intention-to-treat population and safety analyses in the treated population. Results A total of 360 patients were randomly assigned (RE, 182; sorafenib, 178) from 11 countries in the Asia-Pacific region. In the RE and sorafenib groups, 28.6% and 9.0%, respectively, failed to receive assigned therapy without significant cross-over to either group. Median OS was 8.8 and 10.0 months with RE and sorafenib, respectively (hazard ratio, 1.1; 95% CI, 0.9 to 1.4; P = .36). A total of 1,468 treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) were reported (RE, 437; sorafenib, 1,031). Significantly fewer patients in the RE than sorafenib group had grade ≥ 3 AEs (36 of 130 [27.7%]) v 82 of 162 [50.6%]; P < .001). The most common grade ≥ 3 AEs were ascites (five of 130 [3.8%] v four of 162 [2.5%] patients), abdominal pain (three [2.3%] v two [1.2%] patients), anemia (zero v four [2.5%] patients), and radiation hepatitis (two [1.5%] v zero [0%] patients). Fewer patients in the RE group (27 of 130 [20.8%]) than in the sorafenib group (57 of 162 [35.2%]) had serious AEs. Conclusion In patients with locally advanced HCC, OS did not differ significantly between RE and sorafenib. The improved toxicity profile of RE may inform treatment choice in selected patients.
Related Terms
Filters
Contact Us

Please provide feedback to Administrator (tengcl@gmail.com)

External Links