Induction response criteria in acute myeloid leukaemia: implications of a flow cytometric measurable residual disease negative test in refractory adults

Additional impact of mutational genotype on prognostic determination in resistant and relapsed acute myeloid leukaemia

Outcome after failure of initial therapy in younger adult patients with acute myeloid leukaemia (AML) is highly variable. Cytogenetics, length of first remission (CR1) before relapse, and allogeneic transplantation are known prognostic factors, but the contribution of leukaemic genotype is less clear, particularly in resistant disease. Of 5,651 younger adult patients entered into UK MRC/NCRI AML trials between 1988 and 2014 with available FLT3ITD and NPM1 genotype, 326 (6%) had resistant disease and 2338 (41 %) relapsed after achieving CR1. Overall survival (OS) was significantly higher in relapsed compared to resistant disease (p = 0·03). Independent favourable prognostic factors for OS in resistant disease included lower blast cell percentage after two courses of induction therapy (p = 0.0006) and NPM1 mutant (NPM1MUT) (p = 0.04). In relapsed disease, longer CR1 was a favourable independent factor for attainment of CR2 (p < 0.0001) and OS from time of relapse (p < 0.0001), but CR2 rate and OS from relapse were significantly worse in those who had received an allograft in CR1 (respectively p < 0.05, p < 0·002). NPM1MUT was marginally beneficial for OS (p = 0.04). FLT3ITD and DNMT3AMUT were adverse factors for OS (respectively p < 0.0001, p = 0.02). Mutational analysis adds additional independent prognostic information to demographic features and previous therapy in patients with resistant and relapsed disease.

Minimal residual disease and stem cell transplantation outcomes

Risk classification and tailoring of treatment are essential for improving outcome for patients with acute myeloid leukemia or high-risk myelodysplastic syndrome. Both patient and leukemia-specific characteristics assessed using morphology, cytogenetics, molecular biology, and multicolor flow cytometry are relevant at diagnosis and during induction, consolidation, and maintenance phases of the treatment. In particular, minimal residual disease (MRD) during therapy has potential as a prognostic factor of outcome, determination of response to therapy, and direction of targeted therapy. MRD can be determined by cell surface markers using multicolor flow cytometry, whereas leukemia-specific translocations and mutations are measured using polymerase chain reaction-based techniques and recently using next-generation sequencing. All these methods of MRD detection have their (dis)advantages, and all need to be standardized, prospectively validated, and improved to be used for uniform clinical decision making and a potential surrogate end point for clinical trials testing novel treatment strategies. Important issues to be solved are time point of MRD measurement and threshold for MRD positivity. MRD is used for stem cell transplantation (SCT) selection in the large subgroup of patients with an intermediate risk profile. Patients who are MRD positive will benefit from allo-SCT. However, MRD-negative patients have a better chance of survival after SCT. Therefore, it is debated whether MRD-positive patients should be extensively treated to become MRD negative before SCT. Either way, accurate monitoring of potential residual or upcoming disease is mandatory. Tailoring therapy according to MRD monitoring may be the most successful way to provide appropriate specifically targeted, personalized treatment.

MRD evaluation of AML in clinical practice: are we there yet?

MRD technologies increase our ability to measure response in acute myeloid leukemia (AML) beyond the limitations of morphology. When applied in clinical trials, molecular and immunophenotypic MRD assays have improved prognostic precision, providing a strong rationale for their use to guide treatment, as well as to measure its effectiveness. Initiatives such as those from the European Leukemia Network now provide a collaborative knowledge-based framework for selection and implementation of MRD assays most appropriate for defined genetic subgroups. For patients with mutated-NPM1 AML, quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) monitoring of mutated-NPM1 transcripts postinduction and sequentially after treatment has emerged as a highly sensitive and specific tool to predict relapse and potential benefit from allogeneic transplant. Flow cytometric MRD after induction is prognostic across genetic risk groups and can identify those patients in the wild-type NPM1 intermediate AML subgroup with a very high risk for relapse. In parallel with these data, advances in genetic profiling have extended understanding of the etiology and the complex dynamic clonal nature of AML, as well as created the opportunity for MRD monitoring using next-generation sequencing (NGS). NGS AML MRD detection can stratify outcomes and has potential utility in the peri-allogeneic transplant setting. However, there remain challenges inherent in the NGS approach of multiplex quantification of mutations to track AML MRD. Although further development of this methodology, together with orthogonal testing, will clarify its relevance for routine clinical use, particularly for patients lacking a qPCR genetic target, established validated MRD assays can already provide information to direct clinical practice.