ESMO / ASCO Recommendations for a Global Curriculum in Medical Oncology Edition 2016

The European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) and the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) are publishing a new edition of the ESMO/ASCO Global Curriculum (GC) thanks to contribution of 64 ESMO-appointed and 32 ASCO-appointed authors. First published in 2004 and updated in 2010, the GC edition 2016 answers to the need for updated recommendations for the training of physicians in medical oncology by defining the standard to be fulfilled to qualify as medical oncologists. At times of internationalisation of healthcare and increased mobility of patients and physicians, the GC aims to provide state-of-the-art cancer care to all patients wherever they live. Recent progress in the field of cancer research has indeed resulted in diagnostic and therapeutic innovations such as targeted therapies as a standard therapeutic approach or personalised cancer medicine apart from the revival of immunotherapy, requiring specialised training for medical oncology trainees. Thus, several new chapters on technical contents such as molecular pathology, translational research or molecular imaging and on conceptual attitudes towards human principles like genetic counselling or survivorship have been integrated in the GC. The GC edition 2016 consists of 12 sections with 17 subsections, 44 chapters and 35 subchapters, respectively. Besides renewal in its contents, the GC underwent a principal formal change taking into consideration modern didactic principles. It is presented in a template-based format that subcategorises the detailed outcome requirements into learning objectives, awareness, knowledge and skills. Consecutive steps will be those of harmonising and implementing teaching and assessment strategies.

Azacitidine front-line in 339 patients with myelodysplastic syndromes and acute myeloid leukaemia: comparison of French-American-British and World Health Organization classifications

BACKGROUND

The MDS-IWG and NCCN currently endorse both FAB and WHO classifications of MDS and AML, thus allowing patients with 20-30 % bone marrow blasts (AML20-30, formerly MDS-RAEB-t) to be categorised and treated as either MDS or AML. In addition, an artificial distinction between AML20-30 and AML30+ was made by regulatory agencies by initially restricting approval of azacitidine to AML20-30. Thus, uncertainty prevails regarding the diagnosis, prognosis and optimal treatment timing and strategy for patients with AML20-30. Here, we aim to provide clarification for patients treated with azacitidine front-line.

METHODS

The Austrian Azacitidine Registry is a multicentre database (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01595295). For this analysis, we selected 339 patients treated with azacitidine front-line. According to the WHO classification 53, 96 and 190 patients had MDS-RAEB-I, MDS-RAEB-II and AML (AML20-30: n = 79; AML30+: n = 111), respectively. According to the FAB classification, 131, 101 and 111 patients had MDS-RAEB, MDS-RAEB-t and AML, respectively.

RESULTS

The median ages of patients with MDS and AML were 72 (range 37-87) and 77 (range 23-93) years, respectively. Overall, 80 % of classifiable patients (≤30 % bone marrow blasts) had intermediate-2 or high-risk IPSS scores. Most other baseline, treatment and response characteristics were similar between patients diagnosed with MDS or AML. WHO-classified patients with AML20-30 had significantly worse OS than patients with MDS-RAEB-II (13.1 vs 18.9 months; p = 0.010), but similar OS to patients with AML30+ (10.9 vs 13.1 months; p = 0.238). AML patients that showed MDS-related features did not have worse outcomes compared with patients who did not (13.2 vs 8.9 months; p = 0.104). FAB-classified patients with MDS-RAEB-t had similar survival to patients with AML30+ (12.8 vs 10.9 months; p = 0.376), but significantly worse OS than patients with MDS-RAEB (10.9 vs 24.4 months; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Our data demonstrate the validity of the WHO classification of MDS and AML, and its superiority over the former FAB classification, for patients treated with azacitidine front-line. Neither bone marrow blast count nor presence of MDS-related features had an adverse prognostic impact on survival. Patients with AML20-30 should therefore be regarded as having 'true AML' and in our opinion treatment should be initiated without delay.

Frequency of del(12p) is commonly underestimated in myelodysplastic syndromes: Results from a German diagnostic study in comparison with an international control group

In myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS), deletion of the short arm of chromosome 12 (del(12p)) is usually a small abnormality, rarely detected as a single aberration by chromosome banding analysis (CBA) of bone marrow metaphases. Del(12p) has been described in 0.6 to 5% of MDS patients at initial diagnosis and is associated with a good to intermediate prognosis as a sole anomaly according to current scoring systems. Here, we present the results of a systematic del(12p) testing in a German prospective diagnostic study (clinicaltrials.gov: NCT01355913) on 367 MDS patients in whom CD34+ peripheral blood cells were analysed for the presence of del(12p) by sequential fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) analyses. A cohort of 2,902 previously published MDS patients diagnosed by CBA served as control. We demonstrate that, using a sensitive FISH technique, 12p deletion occurs significantly more frequently in MDS than previously described (7.6% by CD34+ PB-FISH vs. 1.6% by CBA, P < 0.001) and is often associated with other aberrations (93% by CD34+ PB-FISH vs. 60% by CBA). Additionally, the detection rate can be increased by repeated analyses in a patient over time which is important for the patient´s prognosis to distinguish a sole anomaly from double or complex aberrations. To our knowledge, this is the first study to screen for 12p deletions with a suitable probe for ETV6/TEL in 12p13. Our data suggest that the supplement of a probe for the detection of a 12p deletion to common FISH probe panels helps to avoid missing a del(12p), especially as part of more complex aberrations.

Validation of WHO classification-based Prognostic Scoring System (WPSS) for myelodysplastic syndromes and comparison with the revised International Prognostic Scoring System (IPSS-R). A study of the International Working Group for Prognosis in Myelodysplasia (IWG-PM)

A risk-adapted treatment strategy is mandatory for myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS). We refined the World Health Organization (WHO)-classification-based Prognostic Scoring System (WPSS) by determining the impact of the newer clinical and cytogenetic features, and we compared its prognostic power to that of the revised International Prognostic Scoring System (IPSS-R). A population of 5326 untreated MDS was considered. We analyzed single WPSS parameters and confirmed that the WHO classification and severe anemia provide important prognostic information in MDS. A strong correlation was found between the WPSS including the new cytogenetic risk stratification and WPSS adopting original criteria. We then compared WPSS with the IPSS-R prognostic system. A highly significant correlation was found between the WPSS and IPSS-R risk classifications. Discrepancies did occur among lower-risk patients in whom the number of dysplastic hematopoietic lineages as assessed by morphology did not reflect the severity of peripheral blood cytopenias and/or increased marrow blast count. Moreover, severe anemia has higher prognostic weight in the WPSS versus IPSS-R model. Overall, both systems well represent the prognostic risk of MDS patients defined by WHO morphologic criteria. This study provides relevant in formation for the implementation of risk-adapted strategies in MDS.

Validation of cytogenetic risk groups according to International Prognostic Scoring Systems by peripheral blood CD34+FISH: results from a German diagnostic study in comparison with an international control group

International Prognostic Scoring Systems are used to determine the individual risk profile of myelodysplastic syndrome patients. For the assessment of International Prognostic Scoring Systems, an adequate chromosome banding analysis of the bone marrow is essential. Cytogenetic information is not available for a substantial number of patients (5%-20%) with dry marrow or an insufficient number of metaphase cells. For these patients, a valid risk classification is impossible. In the study presented here, the International Prognostic Scoring Systems were validated based on fluorescence in situ hybridization analyses using extended probe panels applied to cluster of differentiation 34 positive (CD34(+)) peripheral blood cells of 328 MDS patients of our prospective multicenter German diagnostic study and compared to chromosome banding results of 2902 previously published patients with myelodysplastic syndromes. For cytogenetic risk classification by fluorescence in situ hybridization analyses of CD34(+) peripheral blood cells, the groups differed significantly for overall and leukemia-free survival by uni- and multivariate analyses without discrepancies between treated and untreated patients. Including cytogenetic data of fluorescence in situ hybridization analyses of peripheral CD34(+) blood cells (instead of bone marrow banding analysis) into the complete International Prognostic Scoring System assessment, the prognostic risk groups separated significantly for overall and leukemia-free survival. Our data show that a reliable stratification to the risk groups of the International Prognostic Scoring Systems is possible from peripheral blood in patients with missing chromosome banding analysis by using a comprehensive probe panel (clinicaltrials.gov identifier:01355913).

Minimizing risk of hypomethylating agent failure in patients with higher-risk MDS and practical management recommendations

In Europe, azacitidine is the only hypomethylating agent approved for the treatment of patients with int-2-/high-risk myelodysplastic syndromes, offering significantly improved survival compared with conventional care. However, not all patients treated with azacitidine respond to treatment, and the vast majority of responders subsequently relapse. Currently, no standard care regimens have been established for patients after failure of azacitidine. Here, we discuss treatment options after loss of response or progression on azacitidine. In addition, we briefly consider optimization of first-line treatment along with potential biomarkers for identifying and monitoring response during treatment with azacitidine.

Proposed score for survival of patients with myelodysplastic syndromes

BACKGROUND

Patient selection for various therapies in myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) is based on prognostic factors, scoring systems and the individual life expectancy. However, most established risk scores include mainly disease-related parameters and thus focus on leukaemia-transformation rather than survival.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

To establish a risk score optimized for prediction of survival, we analysed international prognostic scoring system (IPSS)-related and IPSS-independent variables in 400 patients with primary MDS (median age: 71 years; range 18-91) of the Austrian MDS platform. Patients were randomly split into a learning sample (60%) and validation sample (40%). External validation was performed on 93 patients from the Heinrich Heine University (Duesseldorf/Germany).

RESULTS

By multivariate analysis, IPSS, ferritin, age and comorbidities were found to be independent predictive variables concerning survival. Based on weighing these prognostic parameters against each other, we established a novel survival score employing IPSS, ferritin (< 900 ng/mL = 0; ≥ 900 ng/mL = 1), age (< 70 years = 0; 70-79 years = 1; ≥ 80 years = 1.5) and HCT-CI comorbidity (low/intermediate = 0; high = 0.5). Using this score, four prognostic risk groups could be discriminated in the validation sample, with highly significant differences in life expectancy [median survival: LowS (score 0), not reached; Int-1S (score 0.5-1.0), 3.84 years; Int-2S (score 1.5-2.0): 2.72 years; and HighS (score > 2.0): 0.80 years; P < 0.0001].

CONCLUSIONS

Our newly proposed score may be a useful tool for survival prediction in MDS and helpful in patient selection for various therapies in daily practice and clinical trials.

Monosomal karyotype in MDS: explaining the poor prognosis?

Monosomal karyotype (MK) is associated with an adverse prognosis in patients in acute myeloid leukemia (AML). This study analyzes the prognostic impact of MK in a cohort of primary, untreated patients with myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS). A total of 431 patients were extracted from an international database. To analyze whether MK is an independent prognostic marker in MDS, cytogenetic and clinical data were explored in uni- and multivariate models regarding overall survival (OS) as well as AML-free survival. In all, 204/431 (47.3%) patients with MK were identified. Regarding OS, MK was prognostically significant in patients with ≤ 4 abnormalities only. In highly complex karyotypes (≥ 5 abnormalities), MK did not separate prognostic subgroups (median OS 4.9 months in MK+ vs 5.6 months in patients without MK, P=0.832). Based on the number of abnormalities, MK-positive karyotypes (MK+) split into different prognostic subgroups (MK+ and 2 abnormalities: OS 13.4 months, MK+ and 3 abnormalities: 8.0 months, MK+ and 4 abnormalities: 7.9 months and MK+ and ≥ 5 abnormalities: 4.9 months; P<0.01). In multivariate analyses, MK was not an independent prognostic factor. Our data support the hypothesis that a high number of complex abnormalities, associated with an instable clone, define the subgroup with the worst prognosis in MDS, independent of MK.

New comprehensive cytogenetic scoring system for primary myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) and oligoblastic acute myeloid leukemia after MDS derived from an international database merge

PURPOSE

The karyotype is a strong independent prognostic factor in myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS). Since the implementation of the International Prognostic Scoring System (IPSS) in 1997, knowledge concerning the prognostic impact of abnormalities has increased substantially. The present study proposes a new and comprehensive cytogenetic scoring system based on an international data collection of 2,902 patients.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients were included from the German-Austrian MDS Study Group (n = 1,193), the International MDS Risk Analysis Workshop (n = 816), the Spanish Hematological Cytogenetics Working Group (n = 849), and the International Working Group on MDS Cytogenetics (n = 44) databases. Patients with primary MDS and oligoblastic acute myeloid leukemia (AML) after MDS treated with supportive care only were evaluated for overall survival (OS) and AML evolution. Internal validation by bootstrap analysis and external validation in an independent patient cohort were performed to confirm the results.

RESULTS

In total, 19 cytogenetic categories were defined, providing clear prognostic classification in 91% of all patients. The abnormalities were classified into five prognostic subgroups (P < .001): very good (median OS, 61 months; hazard ratio [HR], 0.5; n = 81); good (49 months; HR, 1.0 [reference category]; n = 1,809); intermediate (26 months; HR, 1.6; n = 529); poor (16 months; HR, 2.6; n = 148); and very poor (6 months; HR, 4.2; n = 187). The internal and external validations confirmed the results of the score.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, these data should contribute to the ongoing efforts to update the IPSS by refining the cytogenetic risk categories.

Time changes in predictive power of established and recently proposed clinical, cytogenetical and comorbidity scores for Myelodysplastic Syndromes

BACKGROUND

Recent improvements in the treatment of Myelodysplastic Syndromes have fostered further interest in the development of prognostic scores. Prognostic indices such as the IPSS were developed and later validated assuming their predictive values to be unchanged over time. A systematic analysis of the possible variability of predictive power over time in different scores is still lacking and was the aim of this study.

DESIGN AND METHODS

For 243 primary MDS patients from a single institution treated with supportive care, 19 established or modified scoring systems based on different prognostic factors (clinical, cytogenetical and/or comorbidity) were analysed for their variability over time by statistical methods that quantify time variations in the risk relations (specifically the risk ratios of Cox models) between prognostic subgroups.

RESULTS

Established scores based mainly on clinical parameters showed strong to moderate loss of predictive power over time whereas cytogenetic scores maintained their predictive power. Scores including comorbidity data showed gain of predictive power over time.

CONCLUSIONS

The development and comparison of prognostic systems have to take into account their stability versus the possibility or need for re-evaluation. Possibly not only re-evaluation after time is of importance, but also different weighting of items constituting scores.

Coalesced multicentric analysis of 2,351 patients with myelodysplastic syndromes indicates an underestimation of poor-risk cytogenetics of myelodysplastic syndromes in the international prognostic scoring system

PURPOSE

The International Prognostic Scoring System (IPSS) remains the most commonly used system for risk classification in myelodysplastic syndromes (MDSs). The IPSS gives more weight to blast count than to cytogenetics. However, previous publications suggested that cytogenetics are underweighted in the IPSS. Here we investigate the prognostic impact of cytogenetic subgroups compared with that of bone marrow blast count in a large, multicentric, international patient cohort.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In total, 2,351 patients with MDS who have records in the German-Austrian and the MD Anderson Cancer Center databases were included and analyzed in univariate and multivariate models regarding overall survival and risk of transformation to acute myeloid leukemia (AML). The data were analyzed separately for patients treated with supportive care without specific therapy, with AML-like chemotherapy, or with other therapy regimens (low-dose chemotherapy, demethylating agents, immune modulating agents, valproic acid, and cyclosporine).

RESULTS

The prognostic impact of poor-risk cytogenetic findings (as defined by the IPSS classification) on overall survival was as unfavorable as an increased (> 20%) blast count. The hazard ratio (compared with an abnormal karyotype or a bone marrow blast count < 5%) was 3.3 for poor-risk cytogenetics, 4.8 for complex abnormalities harboring chromosomes 5 and/or 7, and 3.1 for a blast count of 21% to 30% (P < .01 for all categories). The predictive power of the IPSS cytogenetic subgroups was unaffected by type of therapy given.

CONCLUSION

The independent prognostic impact of poor-risk cytogenetics on overall survival is equivalent to the impact of high blast counts. This finding should be considered in the upcoming revision of the IPSS.

Prognostic impact of age and gender in 897 untreated patients with primary myelodysplastic syndromes

BACKGROUND

The International Prognostic Scoring System (IPSS) is the golden standard to assess prognosis in myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS). The aim of this analysis was to study age and gender as interacting variables for individualized prognostication.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In all, 897 patients with primary MDS treated with supportive care only were examined in a retrospective multicenter study. A Cox model was developed to determine the prognostic impact of age and gender on survival and to examine their modulating influence on IPSS results. Based on main effects and interactions of these variables, we established an individualized age- and gender-adapted scoring system to improve prognostication in MDS.

RESULTS

While the risk of a patient in the IPSS is best represented by the values 0 (low), +1 (intermediate-1), +2 (intermediate-2), and +3 (high), these values were found to vary between -1.9 and +3.5 in the same patients when including age and gender. Whereas in low-risk MDS, male patients were found to have a less favorable survival, a particularly high risk (+3.5) was found in younger (< or = 66 years) high-risk female patients.

CONCLUSION

The inclusion of age and gender and their respective interactions contribute to improved and individualized prognostication in MDS.

Comorbidity as prognostic variable in MDS: comparative evaluation of the HCT-CI and CCI in a core dataset of 419 patients of the Austrian MDS Study Group

BACKGROUND

The evaluation of comorbidity is of increasing importance in patients with hematologic disorders.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In the present study, the influence of comorbidity on survival and acute myeloid leukemia (AML) evolution was analyzed retrospectively in 419 patients with de novo myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) (observation period: 1985-2007). The median age was 71 years (range 24-91 years). Two different scoring systems, the hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation-specific comorbidity index (HCT-CI) and the Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) were applied.

RESULTS

The HCT-CI was found to be a significant prognostic factor for overall survival (OS, P < 0.05) as well as event-free survival (EFS, P < 0.05) in our patients, whereas the CCI was of prognostic significance for OS (P < 0.05), but not for EFS. For AML-free survival, neither the HCT-CI nor the CCI were of predictive value. A multivariate analysis including age, lactate dehydrogenase, ferritin, karyotype, number of cytopenias, French-American-British groups, and comorbidity was applied. Comorbidity was found to be an independent prognostic factor in patients with low- or int-1-risk MDS (P < 0.05) regarding OS and EFS.

CONCLUSIONS

Together, our data show that comorbidity is an important risk factor for OS and EFS in patients with MDS.

Deferasirox induces regression of iron overload in patients with myelodysplastic syndromes

BACKGROUND

Transfusion-related morbidity is an emerging problem in chronically transfused patients with myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS). Although several iron-chelating drugs are available, the optimal way of treatment of iron-overload remains uncertain. A major disadvantage of deferoxamine is that the drug has to be applied as continuous subcutaneous infusion. Therefore, novel oral agents have been developed. One of these drugs is deferasirox (Exjade).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We report on 14 MDS patients who were treated with deferasirox (500-1500 mg daily) for up to 24 months. In these patients, treatment responses were recorded by determining serum ferritin levels before and during therapy and by applying recently established response criteria.

RESULTS

In all patients except one, ferritin levels decreased during therapy. Four patients showed a complete response, one a minor response and five a stable iron load. In the responding patients, initially elevated liver enzymes decreased substantially. No substantial change in transferrin saturation or transfusion frequency was recorded. Side effects were mild and tolerable in most patients. In one patient, treatment with deferasirox was stopped because of impaired kidney function.

CONCLUSION

Our data show that treatment with deferasirox is a reasonable approach to counteract iron overload in patients with MDS.