Isodicentric 7p, idic(7)(q11.2), in acute myeloid leukemia associated with older age and favorable response to induction chemotherapy: a new clinical entity?

Three adult de novo acute myeloid leukemias (AML M1, M2, and M4) with an isochromosome 7p are presented. No additional abnormalities were detected by G-band and multicolor, using combined binary ratio labeling, fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) analyses, indicating that the i(7p) was the sole, i.e., the primary, chromosomal aberration. Although the patients were elderly--68, 72, and 78 years old--they all responded very well to chemotherapy, achieving complete remission lasting more than a year. Further FISH analyses, using painting, centromeric, as well as 7q11.2-specific YAC probes, revealed that the i(7p) contained two centromeres and that the breakpoints were located in 7q11.2. Thus, the abnormality should formally be designated idic(7)(q11.2). The detailed mapping disclosed a breakpoint heterogeneity, with the breaks in 7q11.2 varying among the cases, being at least 1,310 kb apart. Furthermore, the breakpoints also differed within one of the cases, being located on both the proximal and the distal side of the most centromeric probe used. Based on our three patients, as well as on a previously reported 82-year-old patient with AML M2 and idic(7)(q11) as the only chromosomal change, we suggest that this abnormality, as the sole anomaly, is associated with AML in elderly patients who display a good response to induction chemotherapy and, hence, have a favorable prognosis. Furthermore, the heterogeneous breakpoints in 7q11.2 suggest that the important functional outcome of the idic(7)(q11.2) is the genomic imbalance incurred, i.e., gain of 7p and loss of 7q material, rather than a rearrangement of a specific gene.

Frequent good partial remissions from thalidomide including best response ever in patients with advanced refractory and relapsed myeloma

Twenty-three patients with advanced and heavily pretreated myeloma were treated with thalidomide. Starting dose was 200 mg/d, and 20 patients had dose escalations up to 400 (n = 5), 600 (n = 12) or 800 mg/d (n = 3), usually in divided doses. Nineteen patients were refractory to recent chemotherapy, and four had untreated relapse after prior intensive therapy. Ten out of 23 patients (43%) achieved partial response (PR; nine with refractory and one with relapsed disease), six patients had minor response or stabilization of the disease and four had disease progression. Another three patients died early from advanced myeloma at less than 3 weeks of thalidomide therapy. Of the 10 patients with PR, seven had a better response than after any prior therapy, despite vincristine-doxorubicin-dexamethasone (VAD)-based treatment in all but one and high-dose melphalan with autologous stem cell support in four. Time to achieve PR was rapid in patients receiving thalidomide in divided doses (median 31 d). Responses also included reduced bone marrow plasma cell infiltration and improved general status. Normalized polyclonal gammaglobulin levels were seen in four cases. Six out of 10 patients with PR remained in remission with a median time on treatment of 23 weeks (range 15-50 weeks). Sedation was common but usually tolerable, and some patients continued full- or part-time work. Four patients had skin problems, three patients had pneumonia, one hypothyrosis, one sinus bradycardia and one minor sensory neuropathy. Thalidomide may induce good partial remissions in advanced refractory myeloma with tolerable toxicity, and should be evaluated in other settings for myeloma patients. Divided thalidomide doses seem to reduce time to achieve remission and may improve response rate.

Empiric monotherapy for febrile neutropenia--a randomized study comparing meropenem with ceftazidime

In this Swedish multicentre study we compared the efficacy of meropenem with ceftazidime for treatment of febrile neutropenia. 192 patients were randomized and the number of evaluable patients was 92 in the meropenem group and 95 in the ceftazidime group. 40 (43%) patients in the meropenem arm and 49 (52%) in the ceftazidime arm had acute leukaemia. 56 (61%) and 52 (55%) patients respectively had a neutrophil count of < 0.1 x 10(9)/l at randomization and the median duration of neutropenia was 6.5 and 8 d, respectively. Thirty-one (34%) and 28 (29%) patients had a microbiologically defined infection, 14 (15%) and 17 (18%) a clinically defined infection and the remaining 47 (51%) and 50 (53%) had unexplained fever. After 72 h of treatment, 46 (50%) patients in the meropenem arm and 53 (56%) patients in the ceftazidime arm were alive on unmodified monotherapy. 42 (46%) and 47 (49%) of these completed the study on monotherapy alone. Only 2 patients (2%) in each arm had to stop treatment owing to allergic reactions. None of the observed differences were statistically significant and we therefore conclude that meropenem was an effective and safe alternative to ceftazidime for empiric treatment of fever during neutropenia.