Residual disease monitoring in childhood acute myeloid leukemia by multiparameter flow cytometry: the MRD-AML-BFM Study Group.

PURPOSE Monitoring of residual disease (RD) by flow cytometry in childhood acute myeloid leukemia (AML) may predict outcome. However, the optimal time points for investigation, the best antibody combinations, and most importantly, the clinical impact of RD analysis remain unclear. PATIENTS AND METHODS Five hundred forty-two specimens of 150 children enrolled in the AML-Berlin-Frankfurt-Muenster (BFM) 98 study were analyzed by four-color immunophenotyping at up to four predefined time points during treatment. For each of the 12 leukemia-associated immunophenotypes and time points, a threshold level based on a previous retrospective analysis of another cohort of children with AML and on control bone marrows was determined. RESULTS Regarding all four time points, there is a statistically significant difference in the 3-year event-free survival (EFS) in those children presenting with immunologically detectable blasts at 3 or more time points. The levels at bone marrow puncture (BMP) 1 and BMP2 turned out to have the most significant predictive value for 3-year-EFS: 71% +/- 6% versus 48% +/- 9%, P(Log-Rank) = .029 and 70% +/- 6% versus 50% +/- 7%, P(Log-Rank) = .033), resulting in a more than two-fold risk of relapse. In a multivariate analysis, using a combined risk classification based on morphologically determined blasts at BMP1 and BMP2, French-American-British classification, and cytogenetics, the influence of immunologically determined RD was no longer statistically significant. CONCLUSION RD monitoring before second induction has the same predictive value as examining levels at four different time points during intensive chemotherapy. Compared with commonly defined risk factors in the AML-BFM studies, flow cytometry does not provide additional information for outcome prediction, but may be helpful to evaluate the remission status at day 28.

[1]  A. Órfão,et al.  Early immunophenotypical evaluation of minimal residual disease in acute myeloid leukemia identifies different patient risk groups and may contribute to postinduction treatment stratification. , 2001, Blood.

[2]  E. Estey,et al.  Expression of unusual immunophenotype combinations in acute myelogenous leukemia. , 1993, Blood.

[3]  D. Catovsky,et al.  Criteria for the diagnosis of acute leukemia of megakaryocyte lineage (M7). A report of the French-American-British Cooperative Group. , 1985, Annals of internal medicine.

[4]  G. Ehninger,et al.  Shift of aberrant antigen expression at relapse or at treatment failure in acute leukemia. , 2000, Cytometry.

[5]  G. Henze,et al.  Definition of a standard‐risk group in children with AML , 1999, British journal of haematology.

[6]  A. Venditti,et al.  Clinical relevance of minimal residual disease detection in adult acute myeloid leukemia. , 2002, Journal of hematotherapy & stem cell research.

[7]  J. Downing,et al.  Clinical significance of residual disease during treatment in childhood acute myeloid leukaemia , 2003, British journal of haematology.

[8]  G Flandrin,et al.  Proposed revised criteria for the classification of acute myeloid leukemia. A report of the French-American-British Cooperative Group. , 1985, Annals of internal medicine.

[9]  H. Gralnick,et al.  Proposals for the Classification of the Acute Leukaemias French‐American‐British (FAB) Co‐operative Group , 1976, British journal of haematology.

[10]  D. Reinhardt,et al.  Early deaths and treatment-related mortality in children undergoing therapy for acute myeloid leukemia: analysis of the multicenter clinical trials AML-BFM 93 and AML-BFM 98. , 2004, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[11]  C. Bloomfield,et al.  Report of the National Cancer Institute-sponsored workshop on definitions of diagnosis and response in acute myeloid leukemia. , 1990, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[12]  J. Miguel,et al.  Characterization of aberrant phenotypes in acute myeloblastic leukemia , 1995, Annals of Hematology.

[13]  W Hiddemann,et al.  Flow cytometric characterization of acute myeloid leukemia. Part II. Phenotypic heterogeneity at diagnosis. , 1992, Leukemia.

[14]  G. Schuurhuis,et al.  MRD parameters using immunophenotypic detection methods are highly reliable in predicting survival in acute myeloid leukaemia , 2004, Leukemia.

[15]  O. Hrusak,et al.  [Minimal residual disease in acute myeloid leukemia in children--standardization and evaluation of immunophenotyping in the AML-BFM-98 study]. , 2002, Klinische Padiatrie.

[16]  C. Bloomfield,et al.  High frequency of immunophenotype changes in acute myeloid leukemia at relapse: implications for residual disease detection (Cancer and Leukemia Group B Study 8361). , 2001, Blood.

[17]  D. Reinhardt,et al.  Minimale Resterkrankung bei der akuten myeloischen Leukämie (AML) im Kindesalter - Etablierung und Standardisierung der Immunphänotypisierung in der Therapiestudie AML-BFM-98 , 2002 .

[18]  W. Hiddemann,et al.  Determination of relapse risk based on assessment of minimal residual disease during complete remission by multiparameter flow cytometry in unselected patients with acute myeloid leukemia. , 2004, Blood.

[19]  A. Teigler‐Schlegel,et al.  Immunophenotypic differences between diagnosis and relapse in childhood AML: Implications for MRD monitoring , 2005, Cytometry. Part B, Clinical cytometry.

[20]  A. Órfão,et al.  Phenotypic changes in acute myeloid leukaemia: implications in the detection of minimal residual disease. , 1996, Journal of clinical pathology.