Explore the vast range of titles available.

Several guidelines and recommendations on the management of chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) have been prepared by several scientific societies. The European LeukemiaNet (ELN) appointed a panel of experts who submitted their recommendations to peer-reviewed scientific journals in 2006, 2009, and 2013. Here, we make a critical review of the last, 2013, ELN recommendations, concerning the use of the five available tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs), the evaluation of cytogenetic and molecular response, and the strategy of treatment. Three TKIs (imatinib, nilotinib, dasatinib) are recommended first-line. Bosutinib and ponatinib are available second-line; ponatinib is particularly indicated in case of the T315I mutation. Achieving an optimal response, not only for survival but also for a deeper, stable, treatment-free remission, requires a BCR-ABL transcripts level ≤10 % at 3 months, ≤1 % at 6 months, ≤0.1 % at 1 year, and ≤0.01 % later on. Molecular monitoring must include mutational analysis in every case of failure. A successful treatment of accelerated and blastic phase requires TKIs, and in many cases also allogeneic stem cell transplantation.

There are different BCR-ABL1 fusion genes that are translated into proteins that are different from each other, yet all leukemogenic, causing chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) or acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Their frequency has never been systematically investigated. In a series of 45503 newly diagnosed CML patients reported from 45 countries, it was found that the proportion of e13a2 (also known as b2a2) and of e14a2 (also known as b3a2), including the cases co-expressing e14a2 and e13a2, was 37.9% and 62.1%, respectively. The proportion of these two transcripts was correlated with gender, e13a2 being more frequent in males (39.2%) than in females (36.2%), was correlated with age, decreasing from 39.6% in children and adolescents down to 31.6% in patients ≥ 80 years old, and was not constant worldwide. Other, rare transcripts were reported in 666/34561 patients (1.93%). The proportion of rare transcripts was associated with gender (2.27% in females and 1.69% in males) and with age (from 1.79% in children and adolescents up to 3.84% in patients ≥ 80 years old). These data show that the differences in proportion are not by chance. This is important, as the transcript type is a variable that is suspected to be of prognostic importance for response to treatment, outcome of treatment, and rate of treatment-free remission.

In this provocative commentary, we consider several questions posed by the late chronic myeloid leukaemia (CML) expert Prof. Michele Baccarani, which he challenged us to address after his death. He noted only a small proportion of people with chronic phase CML receiving tyrosine kinase-inhibitor (TKI)-therapy are likely to achieve sustained therapy-free remission (TFR) and even fewer are likely to be cured. Persons most likely to fail TKItherapy can be identified at diagnosis or soon after starting TKI-therapy. These persons are likely to need lifetime TKI-therapy with attendant risks of adverse events, cost and psychological consequences. Allogeneic transplants achieve much higher rates of leukaemia-free survival compared with TKI-therapy but are associated with transplant-related adverse events including an almost 20 percent risk of transplant-related deaths within 1 year post-transplant and a compromised quality-of-life because of complications such as chronic graft-versus-host disease. Subject-, disease- and transplant-related co-variates associated with transplant outcomes are known with reasonable accuracy. Not everyone likely to fail TKI-therapy is a transplant candidate. However, in those who candidates are physicians and patients need to weigh benefits and risks of TKI-therapy versus a transplant. We suggest transplants should be more often considered in the metric when counseling people with chronic phase CML unlikely to achieve TFR with TKI-therapy. We question whether we are discounting a possible important therapy intervention; we think so.

Nilotinib has shown greater efficacy than imatinib in patients with newly diagnosed Philadelphia chromosome-positive chronic myeloid leukaemia (CML) in chronic phase after a minimum follow-up of 12 months. We present data from the Evaluating Nilotinib Efficacy and Safety in clinical Trials–newly diagnosed patients (ENESTnd) study after a minimum follow-up of 24 months. ENESTnd was a phase 3, multicentre, open-label, randomised study. Adult patients were eligible if they had been diagnosed with chronic phase, Philadelphia chromosome-positive CML within the previous 6 months. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to receive nilotinib 300 mg twice a day, nilotinib 400 mg twice a day, or imatinib 400 mg once a day, all administered orally, by use of a computer-generated randomisation schedule, using permuted blocks, and stratified according to Sokal score. Efficacy results are reported for the intention-to-treat population. The primary endpoint was major molecular response at 12 months, defined as BCR–ABL transcript levels on the International Scale (BCR–ABL IS) of 0·1% or less by real-time quantitative PCR in peripheral blood. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00471497. 282 patients were randomly assigned to receive nilotinib 300 mg twice daily, 281 to receive nilotinib 400 mg twice daily, and 283 to receive imatinib. By 24 months, significantly more patients had a major molecular response with nilotinib than with imatinib (201 [71%] with nilotinib 300 mg twice daily, 187 [67%] with nilotinib 400 mg twice daily, and 124 [44%] with imatinib; p<0·0001 for both comparisons). Significantly more patients in the nilotinib groups achieved a complete molecular response (defined as a reduction of BCR–ABL IS levels to ≤0·0032%) at any time than did those in the imatinib group (74 [26%] with nilotinib 300 mg twice daily, 59 [21%] with nilotinib 400 mg twice daily, and 29 [10%] with imatinib; p<0·0001 for nilotinib 300 mg twice daily vs imatinib, p=0·0004 for nilotinib 400 mg twice daily vs imatinib). There were fewer progressions to accelerated or blast phase on treatment, including clonal evolution, in the nilotinib groups than in the imatinib group (two with nilotinib 300 mg twice daily, five with nilotinib 400 mg twice daily, and 17 with imatinib; p=0·0003 for nilotinib 300 mg twice daily vs imatinib, p=0·0089 for nilotinib 400 mg twice daily vs imatinib). At 24 months, survival was comparable in all treatment groups, but fewer CML-related deaths had occurred in both the nilotinib groups than in the imatinib group (five with nilotinib 300 mg twice daily, three with nilotinib 400 mg twice daily, and ten with imatinib). Overall, the only grade 3 or 4 non-haematological adverse events that occurred in at least 2·5% of patients were headache (eight [3%] with nilotinib 300 mg twice daily, four [1%] with nilotinib 400 mg twice daily, and two [<1%] with imatinib) and rash (two [<1%], seven [3%], and five [2%], respectively). Grade 3 or 4 neutropenia was more common with imatinib than with either dose of nilotinib (33 [12%] with nilotinib 300 mg twice daily, 30 [11%] with nilotinib 400 mg twice daily, and 59 [21%] with imatinib). Serious adverse events were reported in eight additional patients in the second year of the study (four with nilotinib 300 mg twice daily, three with nilotinib 400 mg twice daily, and one with imatinib). Nilotinib continues to show better efficacy than imatinib for the treatment of patients with newly diagnosed CML in chronic phase. These results support nilotinib as a first-line treatment option for patients with newly diagnosed disease. Novartis.

BCR-ABL1 kinase domain (KD) mutation status is considered to be an important element of clinical decision algorithms for chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) patients who do not achieve an optimal response to tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). Conventional Sanger sequencing is the method currently recommended to test BCR-ABL1 KD mutations. However, Sanger sequencing has limited sensitivity and cannot always discriminate between polyclonal and compound mutations. The use of next-generation sequencing (NGS) is increasingly widespread in diagnostic laboratories and represents an attractive alternative. Currently available data on the clinical impact of NGS-based mutational testing in CML patients do not allow recommendations with a high grade of evidence to be prepared. This article reports the results of a group discussion among an ad hoc expert panel with the objective of producing recommendations on the appropriateness of clinical decisions about the indication for NGS, the performance characteristics of NGS platforms, and the therapeutic changes that could be applied based on the use of NGS in CML. Overall, these recommendations might be employed to inform clinicians about the practical use of NGS in CML.

There is paucity of evidence-based data on health-related quality of life (HRQOL) outcomes of chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) patients treated with tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). We performed a multicenter propensity-matched case-control study to compare HRQOL of newly diagnosed CML patients treated with front-line dasatinib (cases) or imatinib (controls). Patient-reported HRQOL was assessed with the EORTC QLQ-C30 and the EORTC QLQ-CML24 questionnaires. The impact on daily life scale of the EORTC QLQ-CML24 was selected a priori in the protocol as the primary HRQOL scale for the comparative analysis. Overall, 323 CML patients were enrolled of whom 223 in therapy with imatinib and 100 in therapy with dasatinib. Patients treated with dasatinib reported better disease-specific HRQOL outcomes in impact on daily life (Δ = 8.72, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.17–14.27, p = 0.002), satisfaction with social life (Δ = 13.45, 95% CI: 5.82–21.08, p = 0.001), and symptom burden (Δ = 7.69, 95% CI: 3.42–11.96, p = 0.001). Analysis by age groups showed that, in patients aged 60 years and over, differences favoring dasatinib were negligible across several cancer generic and disease-specific HRQOL domains. Our findings provide novel comparative HRQOL data that extends knowledge on safety and efficacy of these two TKIs and may help to facilitate first-line treatment decisions.

Purpose To ensure that observed differences in the scores of the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30) reflect actual differences in health-related quality of life (HRQoL) rather than measurement bias, measurement invariance needs to be established. We investigated the assumption of measurement invariance of the EORTC QLQ-C30 in patients with hematological malignancies across age, sex, comorbidity, disease type, and time. Methods We used a large database of patients with hematological malignancies, which included HRQoL data collected with the EORTC QLQ-C30. We used the structural equation modeling approach to test for measurement (metric and scalar) invariance across groups (age, sex, comorbidity, disease) and time (baseline, 1 month and 2 month follow-up). Longitudinal invariance was examined in a subgroup of patients diagnosed with myelodysplastic syndromes. Results Confirmatory factor analyses demonstrated full measurement invariance for age and comorbidity and over time, while support for partial scalar invariance was obtained for sex and disease. Violations of invariance for sex were observed for items of the physical functioning scale and the emotional functioning scale, while for disease type, violations of invariance were observed for items of the physical functioning scale, emotional functioning scale, and the cognitive functioning scale. Conclusions Our findings support measurement invariance of the EORTC QLQ-C30 in a large sample of patients with hematological malignancies. The results showed that the number of non-invariant items was negligible, suggesting that this questionnaire is a valid and robust measurement tool in patients with hematological malignancies, also for comparisons across groups and time.