Display options
Cite
Zehra S, Najam R, Farzana T, et al. Outcomes of 1st Remission Induction Chemotherapy in Acute Myeloid Leukemia Cytogenetic Risk Groups. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2016;17(12):5251-5256doi: 10.22034/APJCP.2016.17.12.5251.
Zehra, S., Najam, R., Farzana, T., & Shamsi, T. (2016). Outcomes of 1st Remission Induction Chemotherapy in Acute Myeloid Leukemia Cytogenetic Risk Groups. Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP, 17(12), 5251-5256. https://doi.org/10.22034/APJCP.2016.17.12.5251
Zehra, Samreen, et al. "Outcomes of 1st Remission Induction Chemotherapy in Acute Myeloid Leukemia Cytogenetic Risk Groups." Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP vol. 17,12 (2016): 5251-5256. doi: https://doi.org/10.22034/APJCP.2016.17.12.5251
Zehra S, Najam R, Farzana T, Shamsi T. Outcomes of 1st Remission Induction Chemotherapy in Acute Myeloid Leukemia Cytogenetic Risk Groups. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2016 Dec 01;17(12):5251-5256. doi: 10.22034/APJCP.2016.17.12.5251. PMID: 28125870; PMCID: PMC5454667.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2016 Dec 01;17(12):5251-5256. doi: 10.22034/APJCP.2016.17.12.5251.

Outcomes of 1st Remission Induction Chemotherapy in Acute Myeloid Leukemia Cytogenetic Risk Groups.

Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP

Samreen Zehra, Rahela Najam, Tasneem Farzana, Tahir Shamsi

Affiliations

  1. National Institute of Blood Disease and Bone Marrow Transplantation, |Department of Pharmacology, Faculty of Pharmacy,University of Karachi, Pakistan. Email: [email protected]

PMID: 28125870 PMCID: PMC5454667 DOI: 10.22034/APJCP.2016.17.12.5251

Abstract

Background: Diagnostic karyotyping analysis is routinely used in acute myeloid leukemia (AML) clinics. Categorization of patients into risk stratified groups (favorable, intermediate and adverse) according to cytogenetic findings can serve as a valuable independent prognostic factor. Method and Material: A retrospective descriptive study was conducted based on the patient records of newly diagnosed non-M3 AML young adult cases undergoing standard 3+7 i.e, Daunorubicin and Ara-C (DA) as remission induction chemotherapy. Diagnostic cytogenetic analysis reports were analyzed to classify the patients into risk stratified groups according to South West Oncology Group criteria and prognostic significance was measured with reference to achievement of haematological remission after 1st induction chemotherapy. Results: A normal karyotype was commonly expressed, found in 47.2% of patients, while 65% (n=39) appeared to have intermediate risk cytogenetics, and 13.3% (n=8) adverse or unclassified findings. Favourable cytogenetics was least frequent in the patient cohort, accounting for only 8.3 % (n=5).The impact of cytogenetic risk groups on achievement of haematological remission was evaluated by applying Pearson Chi-square, and was found to be non-significant (df=12, p=0.256) but when the outcomes of favourable risk groups with intermediate, adverse and unclassified findings compared, results were highly significant (df=6, p=0.000) for each comparison. In patients of the favourable cytogenetic risk group, HR?? was reported in 40% (n=2/5), as compared to 62.2% (n=23/37) in the intermediate cytogenetic risk group, 57.1% (n=4/7) in the adverse cytogenetic risk group and 28.6% (n=2/7) in hte unclassified cytogenetic risk group. Conclusion: Cytogenetic risk stratification for AML cases following criteria provided by international guidelines did not produce conclusive results in our Pakistani patients. However, we cannot preclude an importance as the literature clearly supports the use of pretreatment karyotyping analysis as a significant predictive marker for clinical outcomes. The apparent differences between Pakistani and Western studies indicate an urgent need to develop risk stratification guidelines according to the specific cytogenetic makeup of South Asian populations.

Creative Commons Attribution License

Keywords: AML; haematological remission; remission induction chemotherapy; cytogenetics

References

  1. Lancet. 2006 Nov 25;368(9550):1894-907 - PubMed
  2. Blood. 2006 May 1;107(9):3481-5 - PubMed
  3. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2013;14(9):5341-4 - PubMed
  4. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2016;17 (1):357-60 - PubMed
  5. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2012 Aug;10 (8):984-1021 - PubMed
  6. Genes Cancer. 2011 Feb;2(2):95-107 - PubMed
  7. Blood. 2001 Sep 15;98(6):1752-9 - PubMed
  8. Blood. 2009 Jul 30;114(5):937-51 - PubMed
  9. Ann Intern Med. 1985 Oct;103(4):620-5 - PubMed
  10. Blood. 2010 Jan 21;115(3):453-74 - PubMed
  11. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2015;16(1):393 - PubMed
  12. Blood. 2010 Jul 22;116(3):354-65 - PubMed
  13. J Pak Med Assoc. 2006 Jan;56(1):9-13 - PubMed
  14. Am J Clin Oncol. 1982 Dec;5(6):649-55 - PubMed
  15. J Coll Physicians Surg Pak. 2014 Jul;24(7):472-6 - PubMed
  16. J Clin Oncol. 1999 Dec;17(12):3835-49 - PubMed
  17. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2014;15(3):1247-53 - PubMed
  18. N Engl J Med. 2009 Sep 24;361(13):1249-59 - PubMed
  19. J Clin Oncol. 1990 May;8(5):813-9 - PubMed
  20. J Pak Med Assoc. 2002 Oct;52(10):482-6 - PubMed
  21. Am J Hematol. 2014 Nov;89(11):1063-81 - PubMed
  22. N Engl J Med. 2012 Mar 22;366(12):1079-89 - PubMed
  23. J Clin Oncol. 2003 Dec 15;21(24):4642-9 - PubMed
  24. Blood. 2002 Dec 15;100(13):4325-36 - PubMed
  25. J Clin Oncol. 2008 Oct 10;26(29):4791-7 - PubMed
  26. Oncology (Williston Park). 2012 Aug;26(8):706-12 - PubMed
  27. Hematology Am Soc Hematol Educ Program. 2010;2010:47-55 - PubMed
  28. Leukemia. 2014 Jan;28(1):50-8 - PubMed
  29. Blood. 2000 Dec 15;96(13):4075-83 - PubMed
  30. Best Pract Res Clin Haematol. 2010 Dec;23(4):495-501 - PubMed

Publication Types