Adult patients with acute lymphoblastic leukemia and molecular failure display a poor prognosis and are candidates for stem cell transplantation and targeted therapies.

Quantification of minimal residual disease (MRD) by real-time PCR directed to TCR and Ig gene rearrangements allows a refined evaluation of response in acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL). The German Multicenter Study Group for Adult ALL prospectively evaluated molecular response after induction/consolidation chemotherapy according to standardized methods and terminology in patients with Philadelphia chromosome-negative ALL. The cytologic complete response (CR) rate was 89% after induction phases 1 and 2. At this time point the molecular CR rate was 70% in 580 patients with cytologic CR and evaluable MRD. Patients with molecular CR after consolidation had a significantly higher probability of continuous complete remission (CCR; 74% vs 35%; P < .0001) and of overall survival (80% vs 42%; P = .0001) compared with patients with molecular failure. Patients with molecular failure without stem cell transplantation (SCT) in first CR relapsed after a median time of 7.6 months; CCR and survival at 5 years only reached 12% and 33%, respectively. Quantitative MRD assessment identified patients with molecular failure as a new high-risk group. These patients display resistance to conventional drugs and are candidates for treatment with targeted, experimental drugs and allogeneic SCT. Molecular response was shown to be highly predictive for outcome and therefore constitutes a relevant study end point. The studies are registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as NCT00199056 and NCT00198991.

[1]  A. Hüttmann,et al.  High single-drug activity of nelarabine in relapsed T-lymphoblastic leukemia/lymphoma offers curative option with subsequent stem cell transplantation. , 2011, Blood.

[2]  Hermann Einsele,et al.  Targeted therapy with the T-cell-engaging antibody blinatumomab of chemotherapy-refractory minimal residual disease in B-lineage acute lymphoblastic leukemia patients results in high response rate and prolonged leukemia-free survival. , 2011, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[3]  D. Hoelzer,et al.  Modern therapy of acute lymphoblastic leukemia. , 2011, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[4]  T. Lipp,et al.  Immunochemotherapy with Rituximab Improves Molecular CR Rate and Outcome In CD20+ B-Lineage Standard and High Risk Patients; Results of 263 CD20+ Patients Studied Prospectively In GMALL Study 07/2003 , 2010 .

[5]  M. Andreeff,et al.  Chemoimmunotherapy with a modified hyper-CVAD and rituximab regimen improves outcome in de novo Philadelphia chromosome-negative precursor B-lineage acute lymphoblastic leukemia. , 2010, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[6]  H. Dombret,et al.  Status of minimal residual disease determines outcome of autologous hematopoietic SCT in adult ALL , 2010, Bone Marrow Transplantation.

[7]  J. V. van Dongen,et al.  Molecular response to treatment redefines all prognostic factors in children and adolescents with B-cell precursor acute lymphoblastic leukemia: results in 3184 patients of the AIEOP-BFM ALL 2000 study. , 2010, Blood.

[8]  R. Pieters,et al.  Standardized MRD quantification in European ALL trials: Proceedings of the Second International Symposium on MRD assessment in Kiel, Germany, 18–20 September 2008 , 2010, Leukemia.

[9]  T. Lipp,et al.  Successful Subtype Oriented Treatment Strategies in Adult T-All; Results of 744 Patients Treated in Three Consecutive GMALL Studies. , 2009 .

[10]  Dario Campana,et al.  Role of minimal residual disease monitoring in adult and pediatric acute lymphoblastic leukemia. , 2009, Hematology/oncology clinics of North America.

[11]  D. Campana,et al.  Minimal disseminated disease in childhood T-cell lymphoblastic lymphoma: a report from the children's oncology group. , 2009, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[12]  T. Barbui,et al.  Improved risk classification for risk-specific therapy based on the molecular study of minimal residual disease (MRD) in adult acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) , 2009 .

[13]  A. Borkhardt,et al.  Prognostic value of minimal residual disease quantification before allogeneic stem-cell transplantation in relapsed childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia: the ALL-REZ BFM Study Group. , 2009, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[14]  W. Jędrzejczak,et al.  Status of minimal residual disease after induction predicts outcome in both standard and high‐risk Ph‐negative adult acute lymphoblastic leukaemia. The Polish Adult Leukemia Group ALL 4‐2002 MRD Study , 2008, British journal of haematology.

[15]  J. Cayuela,et al.  Analysis of minimal residual disease by Ig/TCR gene rearrangements: guidelines for interpretation of real-time quantitative PCR data , 2007, Leukemia.

[16]  T. Szczepański.  Why and how to quantify minimal residual disease in acute lymphoblastic leukemia? , 2007, Leukemia.

[17]  J. Radich,et al.  End points to establish the efficacy of new agents in the treatment of acute leukemia. , 2007, Blood.

[18]  M. Kneba,et al.  Molecular relapse in adult standard-risk ALL patients detected by prospective MRD monitoring during and after maintenance treatment: data from the GMALL 06/99 and 07/03 trials. , 2007, Blood.

[19]  Rajesh Chopra,et al.  Outcome of 609 adults after relapse of acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL); an MRC UKALL12/ECOG 2993 study. , 2007, Blood.

[20]  E. Thiel,et al.  Clinical significance of minimal residual disease quantification in adult patients with standard-risk acute lymphoblastic leukemia. , 2006, Blood.

[21]  M. Tallman,et al.  Induction therapy for adults with acute lymphoblastic leukemia: results of more than 1500 patients from the international ALL trial: MRC UKALL XII/ECOG E2993. , 2005, Blood.

[22]  F. Behm,et al.  Prognostic importance of measuring early clearance of leukemic cells by flow cytometry in childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia. , 2002, Blood.

[23]  K. Schmiegelow,et al.  Precise quantification of minimal residual disease at day 29 allows identification of children with acute lymphoblastic leukemia and an excellent outcome. , 2002, Blood.

[24]  L. Foroni,et al.  Minimal residual disease tests provide an independent predictor of clinical outcome in adult acute lymphoblastic leukemia. , 2002, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[25]  D. Hoelzer,et al.  Treatment of adult acute lymphoblastic leukemia. , 1999, Hematology. American Society of Hematology. Education Program.

[26]  J. Downing,et al.  Gene expression classifiers for relapse-free survival and minimal residual disease improve risk classification and outcome prediction in pediatric B-precursor acute lymphoblastic leukemia. , 2010, Blood.

[27]  T. Klingebiel,et al.  Allogeneic transplantation for pediatric acute lymphoblastic leukemia: the emerging role of peritransplantation minimal residual disease/chimerism monitoring and novel chemotherapeutic, molecular, and immune approaches aimed at preventing relapse. , 2009, Biology of blood and marrow transplantation : journal of the American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation.

[28]  R. Arceci,et al.  Clinical significance of minimal residual disease in childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia and its relationship to other prognostic factors: a Children's Oncology Group study , 2009 .

[29]  A. Órfão,et al.  Minimal residual disease in adolescent (older than 14 years) and adult acute lymphoblastic leukemias: early immunophenotypic evaluation has high clinical value. , 2003, Blood.

[30]  Michael N Dworzak,et al.  Prognostic significance and modalities of flow cytometric minimal residual disease detection in childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia. , 2002, Blood.