Department of Hematology, Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China.
Department of Hematology, Sun Yat-Sen Memorial Hospital, Guangzhou, China.
JAMA Netw Open. 2021 Jul 1;4(7):e2115991. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.15991.
Measurable residual disease (MRD) is widely used as a therapy-stratification factor for acute myeloid leukemia (AML), but the association of dynamic MRD with postremission treatment (PRT) in patients with intermediate-risk AML (IR-AML) has not been well investigated.
To investigate PRT choices based on dynamic MRD in patients with IR-AML.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This cohort study examined 549 younger patients with de novo IR-AML in the South China Hematology Alliance database during the period from January 1, 2012, to June 30, 2016, including 154 who received chemotherapy, 116 who received an autologous stem cell transplant (auto-SCT), and 279 who received an allogeneic SCT (allo-SCT). Subgroup analyses were performed according to dynamic MRD after the first, second, and third courses of chemotherapy. The end point of the last follow-up was August 31, 2020. Statistical analysis was performed from December 1, 2019, to September 30, 2020.
Receipt of chemotherapy, auto-SCT, or allo-SCT.
The primary end points were 5-year cumulative incidence of relapse and leukemia-free survival.
Subgroup analyses were performed for 549 participants (314 male participants [57.2%]; median age, 37 years [range, 14-60 years]) according to the dynamics of MRD after 1, 2, or 3 courses of chemotherapy. Comparable cumulative incidences of relapse, leukemia-free survival, and overall survival were observed among participants who had no MRD after 1, 2, or 3 courses of chemotherapy. Participants who underwent chemotherapy and those who underwent auto-SCT had better graft-vs-host disease-free, relapse-free survival (GRFS) than those who underwent allo-SCT (chemotherapy: hazard ratio [HR], 0.35 [95% CI, 0.14-0.90]; P = .03; auto-SCT: HR, 0.07 [95% CI, 0.01-0.58]; P = .01). Among participants with MRD after 1 course of chemotherapy but no MRD after 2 or 3 courses, those who underwent auto-SCT and allo-SCT showed lower cumulative incidence of relapse (auto-SCT: HR, 0.25 [95% CI, 0.08-0.78]; P = .01; allo-SCT: HR, 0.08 [95% CI, 0.02-0.24]; P < .001), better leukemia-free survival (auto-SCT: HR, 0.26 [95% CI, 0.10-0.64]; P = .004; allo-SCT: HR, 0.21 [95% CI, 0.09-0.46]; P < .001), and overall survival (auto-SCT: HR, 0.22 [95% CI, 0.08-0.64]; P = .005; allo-SCT: HR, 0.25 [95% CI, 0.11-0.59]; P = .001) vs chemotherapy. In addition, auto-SCT showed better GRFS than allo-SCT (HR, 0.45 [95% CI, 0.21-0.98]; P = .04) in this group. Among participants with MRD after 1 or 2 courses of chemotherapy but no MRD after 3 courses, allo-SCT had superior cumulative incidence of relapse (HR, 0.10 [95% CI, 0.06-0.94]; P = .04) and leukemia-free survival (HR, 0.18 [95% CI, 0.05-0.68]; P = .01) compared with chemotherapy, but no advantageous cumulative incidence of relapse (HR, 0.15 [95% CI, 0.02-1.42]; P = .10) and leukemia-free survival (HR, 0.23 [95% CI, 0.05-1.08]; P = .06) compared with auto-SCT. Among participants with MRD after 3 courses of chemotherapy, allo-SCT had superior cumulative incidences of relapse, leukemia-free survival, and overall survival compared with chemotherapy (relapse: HR, 0.16 [95% CI, 0.08-0.33]; P < .001; leukemia-free survival: HR, 0.19 [95% CI, 0.10-0.35]; P < .001; overall survival: HR, 0.29 [95% CI, 0.15-0.55]; P < .001) and auto-SCT (relapse: HR, 0.25 [95% CI, 0.12-0.53]; P < .001; leukemia-free survival: HR, 0.35 [95% CI, 0.18-0.73]; P = .004; overall survival: HR, 0.54 [95% CI, 0.26-0.94]; P = .04). Among participants with recurrent MRD, allo-SCT was also associated with advantageous cumulative incidence of relapse, leukemia-free survival, and overall survival compared with chemotherapy (relapse: HR, 0.12 [95% CI, 0.04-0.33]; P < .001; leukemia-free survival: HR, 0.24 [95% CI, 0.10-0.56]; P = .001; overall survival: HR, 0.31 [95% CI, 0.13-0.75]; P = .01) and auto-SCT (relapse: HR, 0.28 [95% CI, 0.09-0.81]; P = .02; leukemia-free survival: HR, 0.30 [95% CI, 0.12-0.76]; P = .01; overall survival: HR, 0.26 [95% CI, 0.10-0.70]; P = .007).
This study suggests that clinical decisions based on dynamic MRD might be associated with improved therapy stratification and optimized PRT for patients with IR-AML. Prospective multicenter trials are needed to further validate these findings.
可测量残留疾病 (MRD) 被广泛用作急性髓系白血病 (AML) 的治疗分层因素,但中间风险 AML (IR-AML) 患者缓解后治疗 (PRT) 与动态 MRD 的关联尚未得到充分研究。
研究基于中间风险 AML (IR-AML) 患者动态 MRD 的 PRT 选择。
设计、地点和参与者: 本队列研究检查了 2012 年 1 月 1 日至 2016 年 6 月 30 日期间,来自华南血液联盟数据库的 549 名患有新发 IR-AML 的年轻患者的情况,包括 154 名接受化疗的患者、116 名接受自体干细胞移植 (auto-SCT) 的患者和 279 名接受异基因 SCT (allo-SCT) 的患者。根据化疗后第 1、2 和第 3 个疗程的动态 MRD 进行了亚组分析。最后一次随访的终点是 2020 年 8 月 31 日。统计分析于 2019 年 12 月 1 日至 2020 年 9 月 30 日进行。
接受化疗、auto-SCT 或 allo-SCT。
5 年累积复发率和无白血病生存率。
根据化疗后 1、2 或 3 个疗程的 MRD 动态情况,对 549 名参与者(314 名男性参与者[57.2%];中位年龄为 37 岁[范围 14-60 岁])进行了亚组分析。在化疗后 1、2 或 3 个疗程均无 MRD 的患者中,观察到相似的累积复发率、无白血病生存率和总生存率。与 allo-SCT 相比,接受化疗和 auto-SCT 的患者具有更好的移植物抗宿主病无复发存活率(GRFS)(化疗:风险比[HR],0.35[95%置信区间,0.14-0.90];P = .03;auto-SCT:HR,0.07[95%置信区间,0.01-0.58];P = .01)。在化疗后第 1 个疗程有 MRD 但第 2 或第 3 个疗程无 MRD 的患者中,接受 auto-SCT 和 allo-SCT 的患者复发累积发生率较低(auto-SCT:HR,0.25[95%置信区间,0.08-0.78];P = .01;allo-SCT:HR,0.08[95%置信区间,0.02-0.24];P < .001),无白血病生存率更高(auto-SCT:HR,0.26[95%置信区间,0.10-0.64];P = .004;allo-SCT:HR,0.21[95%置信区间,0.09-0.46];P < .001),总生存率更高(auto-SCT:HR,0.22[95%置信区间,0.08-0.64];P = .005;allo-SCT:HR,0.25[95%置信区间,0.11-0.59];P = .001)与化疗相比。此外,与 allo-SCT 相比,auto-SCT 在该组中具有更好的 GRFS(HR,0.45[95%置信区间,0.21-0.98];P = .04)。在化疗后第 1 或第 2 个疗程有 MRD 但第 3 个疗程无 MRD 的患者中,allo-SCT 具有较低的累积复发率(HR,0.10[95%置信区间,0.06-0.94];P = .04)和无白血病生存率(HR,0.18[95%置信区间,0.05-0.68];P = .01),但与化疗相比,累积复发率(HR,0.15[95%置信区间,0.02-1.42];P = .10)和无白血病生存率(HR,0.23[95%置信区间,0.05-1.08];P = .06)并无优势,与 auto-SCT 相比,allo-SCT 在化疗后第 3 个疗程具有更高的累积复发率、无白血病生存率和总生存率(复发:HR,0.16[95%置信区间,0.08-0.33];P < .001;无白血病生存率:HR,0.19[95%置信区间,0.10-0.35];P < .001;总生存率:HR,0.29[95%置信区间,0.15-0.55];P < .001)和 auto-SCT(复发:HR,0.25[95%置信区间,0.12-0.53];P < .001;无白血病生存率:HR,0.35[95%置信区间,0.18-0.73];P = .004;总生存率:HR,0.54[95%置信区间,0.26-0.94];P = .04)。在有复发性 MRD 的患者中,allo-SCT 与化疗(复发:HR,0.12[95%置信区间,0.04-0.33];P < .001;无白血病生存率:HR,0.24[95%置信区间,0.10-0.56];P = .001;总生存率:HR,0.31[95%置信区间,0.13-0.75];P = .01)和 auto-SCT(复发:HR,0.28[95%置信区间,0.09-0.81];P = .02;无白血病生存率:HR,0.30[95%置信区间,0.12-0.76];P = .01;总生存率:HR,0.26[95%置信区间,0.10-0.70];P = .007)相比,复发率较低,无白血病生存率和总生存率较高。
本研究表明,基于动态 MRD 的临床决策可能与改善治疗分层和优化中间风险 AML 患者的 PRT 相关。需要前瞻性多中心试验进一步验证这些发现。