Survival after allogeneic transplantation according to pretransplant minimal residual disease and conditioning intensity in patients with acute myeloid leukemia

Background

The measurement of minimal residual disease (MRD) by multiparametric flow cytometry (MFC) before hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) in patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) is a powerful prognostic factor. The interaction of pretransplant MRD and the conditioning intensity has not yet been clarified.

Objective

The aim of this study is to analyze the transplant outcomes of patients with AML who underwent HSCT in complete remission (CR), comparing patients with positive MRD (MRD+) and negative MRD (MRD-) before HSCT, and the interaction between conditioning intensity and pre-HSCT MRD.

Study design

We retrospectively analyzed the transplant outcomes of 118 patients with AML who underwent HSCT in CR in a single institution, comparing patients with MRD+ and MRD- before HSCT using a cutoff of 0.1% on MFC, and the interaction between conditioning intensity and pre-HSCT MRD.

Results

Patients with MRD+ before HSCT had a significantly worse 2-year (2y) event-free survival (EFS) (56.5% vs. 32.0%, p = 0.018) than MRD- patients, due to a higher cumulative incidence of relapse (CIR) at 2 years (49.0% vs. 18.0%, p = 0.002), with no differences in transplant-related mortality (TRM) (2y-TRM, 19.0% and 25.0%, respectively, p = 0.588). In the analysis stratified by conditioning intensity, in patients who received MAC, those with MRD- before HSCT had better EFS (p = 0.009) and overall survival (OS) (p = 0.070) due to lower CIR (p = 0.004) than MRD+ patients. On the other hand, the survival was similar in reduced intensity conditioning (RIC) patients regardless of the MRD status.

Conclusions

Patients with MRD+ before HSCT have worse outcomes than MRD- patients. In patients who received MAC, MRD- patients have better EFS and OS due to lower CIR than MRD+ patients, probably because they represent a more chemo-sensitive group. However, among RIC patients, results were similar regardless of the MRD status.

Clinical Impact of Measurable Residual Disease in Acute Myeloid Leukemia

Simple Summary

Advances in immunophenotyping and molecular techniques have allowed for the development of more sensitive diagnostic tests in acute leukemia. These techniques can identify low levels of leukemic cells (quantified as 10⁻⁴ to 10⁻⁶ ratio to white blood cells) in patient samples. The presence of such low levels of leukemic cells, termed “measurable/minimal residual disease” (MRD), has been shown to be a marker of disease burden and patient outcomes. In acute lymphoblastic leukemia, new agents are highly effective at eliminating MRD for patients whose leukemia progressed despite first line therapies. By comparison, the role of MRD in acute myeloid leukemia is less clear. This commentary reviews select data and remaining questions about the clinical application of MRD to the treatment of patients with acute myeloid leukemia.

Abstract

Measurable residual disease (MRD) has emerged as a primary marker of risk severity and prognosis in acute myeloid leukemia (AML). There is, however, ongoing debate about MRD-based surveillance and treatment. A literature review was performed using the PubMed database with the keywords MRD or residual disease in recently published journals. Identified articles describe the prognostic value of pre-transplant MRD and suggest optimal timing and techniques to quantify MRD. Several studies address the implications of MRD on treatment selection and hematopoietic stem cell transplant, including patient candidacy, conditioning regimen, and transplant type. More prospective, randomized studies are needed to guide the application of MRD in the treatment of AML, particularly in transplant.

Impact of diagnostic genetics on remission MRD and transplantation outcomes in older patients with AML

Older patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) have high relapse risk and poor survival after allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT). Younger patients may receive myeloablative conditioning to mitigate relapse risk associated with high-risk genetics or measurable residual disease (MRD), but older adults typically receive reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) to limit toxicity. To identify factors that drive HCT outcomes in older patients, we performed targeted mutational analysis (variant allele fraction ≥2%) on diagnostic samples from 295 patients with AML aged ≥60 years who underwent HCT in first complete remission, 91% of whom received RIC, and targeted duplex sequencing at remission in a subset comprising 192 patients. In a multivariable model for leukemia-free survival (LFS) including baseline genetic and clinical variables, we defined patients with low (3-year LFS, 85%), intermediate (55%), high (35%), and very high (7%) risk. Before HCT, 79.7% of patients had persistent baseline mutations, including 18.3% with only DNMT3A or TET2 (DT) mutations and 61.4% with other mutations (MRD positive). In univariable analysis, MRD positivity was associated with increased relapse and inferior LFS, compared with DT and MRD-negative mutations. However, in a multivariable model accounting for baseline risk, MRD positivity had no independent impact on LFS, most likely because of its significant association with diagnostic genetic characteristics, including MDS-associated gene mutations, TP53 mutations, and high-risk karyotype. In summary, molecular associations with MRD positivity and transplant outcomes in older patients with AML are driven primarily by baseline genetics, not by mutations present in remission. In this group of patients, where high-intensity conditioning carries substantial risk of toxicity, alternative approaches to mitigating MRD-associated relapse risk are needed.

Acute myeloid leukemia: 2021 update on risk-stratification and management

Management of AML involves choosing between purely palliative care, standard therapy and investigational therapy ("clinical trial"). Even most older patients likely benefit from treatment. Based on randomized trials CPX 351, midostaurin, gemtuzumab ozogamicin, and venetoclax, the latter three when combined with other drugs, should now be considered standard therapy. Knowledge of the likely results with these therapies is essential in deciding whether to recommend them or participate in a clinical trial, possibly including these drugs. Hence here, in the context of established prognostic algorithms, we review results with the recently- approved drugs compared with their predecessors and describe other potential options. We discuss benefit/risk ratios underlying the decision to offer allogeneic transplant and emphasize the importance of measurable residual disease. When first seeing a newly-diagnosed patient physicians must decide whether to offer conventional treatment or investigational therapy, the latter preferably in the context of a clinical trial. As noted below, such trials have led to changes in what today is considered "conventional" therapy compared to even 1-2 years ago. In older patients decision making has often included inquiring whether specific anti-AML therapy should be offered at all, rather than focusing on a purely palliative approach emphasizing transfusion and antibiotic support, with involvement of a palliative care specialist.