Pre-transplant persistence of minimal residual disease does not contraindicate allogeneic stem cell transplantation for adult patients with acute myeloid leukemia

Post-transplant maintenance therapy in acute myeloid leukemia after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation harmonizing multiple therapeutic modalities including targeted therapy, immunotherapy and cellular therapy

Allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HCT) has improved survival for patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML), especially for those at high risk of relapse. However, relapse remains the leading cause of treatment failure post-HCT, occurring in around 35-45% of patients, and leading to dismal outcomes. Strategies to reduce relapse risk are urgently needed, especially in the early post-transplant period before activation of the graft-versus-leukemia (GVL) effect. Maintenance therapy is a course of treatment given post-HCT with the expectation of reducing relapse risk. While there are currently no therapies approved for maintenance therapy for AML after HCT, there are a number of studies and ongoing investigations examining the role of maintenance therapies that include targeted agents against FLT3-ITD, BCL2, or IDH mutations, hypomethylating agents, immunomodulatory therapies and cellular therapies. In this review, we discuss the mechanistic and clinical data for post-transplant maintenance therapies in AML and strategies for maintenance therapy for AML after HCT.

Gilteritinib as treatment for extra-medullary relapse of FLT3-ITD acute myeloid leukemia FLT3-ITD, after allogeneic haematopoietic stem cell transplantation

Case of a patient with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) positive for mutations in both genes NPM1 and FLT3-ITD who underwent two allogeneic haematopoietic stem cell transplants (HSCT); the second allograft one was followed by extramedullary relapse (granulocytic sarcoma of right breast), with blast cells positive for FLT3-ITDmutation.  Treatment with Gilteritinib, a second generation selective oral type I FLT3 inhibitor, was started after the second HSCT with complete regression of breast granulocytic sarcoma in absence of hematological and extra hematologic toxicity. We conclude that Gilteritinib can represent an effective therapy for extra hematologic relapse, with acceptable toxicity and outpatient management.

Immunotherapy as a Turning Point in the Treatment of Acute Myeloid Leukemia

Simple Summary

Despite recent progress achieved in the management of acute myeloid leukemia (AML), it remains a life-threatening disease with a poor prognosis, particularly in the elderly, having an average 5-year survival of approximately 28%. However, recent evidence suggests that immunotherapy can provide the background for developing personalized targeted therapy to improve the clinical course of AML patients. Our review aimed to assess the immunotherapy effectiveness in AML by discussing the impact of monoclonal antibodies, immune checkpoint inhibitors, chimeric antigen receptor T cells, and vaccines in AML preclinical and clinical studies.

Abstract

Acute myeloid leukemia (AML) is a malignant disease of hematopoietic precursors at the earliest stage of maturation, resulting in a clonalproliferation of myoblasts replacing normal hematopoiesis. AML represents one of the most common types of leukemia, mostly affecting elderly patients. To date, standard chemotherapy protocols are only effective in patients at low risk of relapse and therapy-related mortality. The average 5-year overall survival (OS) is approximately 28%. Allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) improves prognosis but is limited by donor availability, a relatively young age of patients, and absence of significant comorbidities. Moreover, it is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. However, increasing understanding of AML immunobiology is leading to the development of innovative therapeutic strategies. Immunotherapy is considered an attractive strategy for controlling and eliminating the disease. It can be a real breakthrough in the treatment of leukemia, especially in patients who are not eligible forintensive chemotherapy. In this review, we focused on the progress of immunotherapy in the field of AML by discussing monoclonal antibodies (mAbs), immune checkpoint inhibitors, chimeric antigen receptor T cells (CAR-T cells), and vaccine therapeutic choices.

Eradication of Measurable Residual Disease in AML: A Challenging Clinical Goal

In non-promyelocytic (non-M3) AML measurable residual disease (MRD) detected by multi-parameter flow cytometry and molecular technologies, which are guided by Consensus-based guidelines and discover very low leukemic cell numbers far below the 5% threshold of morphological assessment, has emerged as the most relevant predictor of clinical outcome. Currently, it is well-established that MRD positivity after standard induction and consolidation chemotherapy, as well as during the period preceding an allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant (allo-HSCT), portends to a significantly inferior relapse-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS). In addition, it has become absolutely clear that conversion from an MRD-positive to an MRD-negative state provides a favorable clinical outcome similar to that associated with early MRD negativity. Thus, the complete eradication of MRD, i.e., the clearance of the few leukemic stem cells-which, due to their chemo-radiotherapy resistance, might eventually be responsible of disease recurrence-has become an un-met clinical need in AML. Nowadays, this goal might potentially be achieved thanks to the development of novel innovative treatment strategies, including those targeting driver mutations, apoptosis, methylation patterns and leukemic proteins. The aim of this review is to analyze these strategies and to suggest any potential combination able to induce MRD negativity in the pre- and post-HSCT period.

Use of Measurable Residual Disease to Evolve Transplant Policy in Acute Myeloid Leukemia: A 20-Year Monocentric Observation

Measurable residual disease (MRD) is increasingly employed as a biomarker of quality of complete remission (CR) in intensively treated acute myeloid leukemia (AML) patients. We evaluated if a MRD-driven transplant policy improved outcome as compared to a policy solely relying on a familiar donor availability. High-risk patients (adverse karyotype, FLT3-ITD) received allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant (alloHCT) whereas for intermediate and low risk ones (CBF-AML and NPM1-mutated), alloHCT or autologous SCT was delivered depending on the post-consolidation measurable residual disease (MRD) status, as assessed by flow cytometry. For comparison, we analyzed a matched historical cohort of patients in whom alloHCT was delivered based on the sole availability of a matched sibling donor. Ten-years overall and disease-free survival were longer in the MRD-driven cohort as compared to the historical cohort (47.7% vs. 28.7%, p = 0.012 and 42.0% vs. 19.5%, p = 0.0003). The favorable impact of this MRD-driven strategy was evident for the intermediate-risk category, particularly for MRD positive patients. In the low-risk category, the significantly lower CIR of the MRD-driven cohort did not translate into a survival advantage. In conclusion, a MRD-driven transplant allocation may play a better role than the one based on the simple donor availability. This approach determines a superior outcome of intermediate-risk patients whereat in low-risk ones a careful evaluation is needed for transplant allocation.

Augmented Reduced-Intensity Regimen Does Not Improve Postallogeneic Transplant Outcomes in Acute Myeloid Leukemia

PURPOSE

Reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) regimens have extended the curative potential of allogeneic stem-cell transplantation to older adults with high-risk acute myeloid leukemia (AML) and myelodysplasia (MDS) but are associated with a high risk of disease relapse. Strategies to reduce recurrence are urgently required. Registry data have demonstrated improved outcomes using a sequential transplant regimen, fludarabine/amsacrine/cytarabine-busulphan (FLAMSA-Bu), but the impact of this intensified conditioning regimen has not been studied in randomized trials.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Two hundred forty-four patients (median age, 59 years) with high-risk AML (n = 164) or MDS (n = 80) were randomly assigned 1:1 to a fludarabine-based RIC regimen or FLAMSA-Bu. Pretransplant measurable residual disease (MRD) was monitored by flow cytometry (MFC-MRD) and correlated with outcome.

RESULTS

There was no difference in 2-year overall survival (hazard ratio 1.05 [85% CI, 0.80 to 1.38] P = .81) or cumulative incidence of relapse (CIR) (hazard ratio 0.94 [95%CI, 0.60 to 1.46] P = .81) between the control and FLAMSA-Bu arms. Detectable pretransplant MFC-MRD was associated with an increased CIR (2-year CIR 41.0% v 20.0%, P = .01) in the overall trial cohort with a comparable prognostic impact when measured by an unsupervised analysis approach. There was no evidence of interaction between MRD status and conditioning regimen intensity for relapse or survival. Acquisition of full donor T-cell chimerism at 3 months abrogated the adverse impact of pretransplant MRD on CIR and overall survival.

CONCLUSION

The intensified RIC conditioning regimen, FLAMSA-Bu, did not improve outcomes in adults transplanted for high-risk AML or MDS regardless of pretransplant MRD status. Our data instead support the exploration of interventions with the ability to accelerate acquisition of full donor T-cell chimerism as a tractable strategy to improve outcomes in patients allografted for AML.

Early peripheral blast cell clearance predicts minimal residual disease status and refines disease prognosis in acute myeloid leukemia

Minimal residual disease (MRD) assessment in acute myeloid leukemia (AML) is increasingly used in risk stratification. However, several issues around this use are unresolved, including, among others, the most suitable time-point(s) for its application. Overall, late assessments appear more effective at distinguishing outcome but, in some studies, the early evaluations were already highly informative, anticipating the value of later ones. Our work integrated MRD with peripheral blast clearance (PBC), a treatment-related biomarker previously demonstrated to be a powerful predictor of response. From 2007 to 2014, we have studied 120 patients treated according to the NILG 02-06 trial and who achieved CR after induction. Patients in PBC-defined categories (separated by a 1.5-log threshold) showed significantly different probabilities of attaining MRD negativity, after either induction (MRD1) or consolidation (MRD2). Peripheral blast clearance combined with MRD1 largely anticipated MRD2-related information: when both biomarkers predicted chemosensitive disease (PBC_high /MRD1_neg ), the rate of MRD2-negativity was 90%, and DFS and OS estimates were 68% and 76% at 3 years, respectively. When both markers were unfavorable (PBC_low /MRD1_pos ), rates of MRD2 negativity, DFS, and OS were 20%, 34%, and 24%, respectively, at 3 years. In fact, MRD2 added prognostic value only in cases with discordant PBC/MRD1 data. Our data support a reasoned timing for MRD-based therapeutic decisions, modulated on individual chemosensitivity, an approach we have implemented in a forthcoming prospective multi-center trial by Gruppo Italiano Malattie EMatologiche dell'Adulto (GIMEMA).

Risk stratification using FLT3 and NPM1 in acute myeloid leukemia patients autografted in first complete remission

FLT3-ITD and NPM1 mutation refine prognostic stratification in acute myeloid leukemia (AML) with intermediate-risk cytogenetics. However, data on their role in patients undergoing autologous stem cell transplantation (Auto-SCT) as post-remission therapy (PRT) are limited. We therefore sought to retrospectively evaluate the role of FLT3-ITD and NPM1 in a cohort of AML patients (n = 405) with intermediate-risk cytogenetics, autografted in first complete remission (CR1). Patients were transplanted between 2000 and 2014 and reported to the European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation (EBMT) registry. Leukemia-free survival (LFS) was the primary outcome. Median follow-up was 5.5 years. FLT3-ITD^neg/NPM1^WT was the leading molecular subtype (50%), followed by FLT3-ITD^neg/NPM1^mut (30%). In the univariate analysis, molecular subtype was associated with LFS, overall survival (OS), and relapse incidence (RI) (p < 0.001); 5-year LFS: FLT3-ITD^neg/NPM1^mut 62%, FLT3-ITD^pos/NPM1^mut 38%, FLT3-ITD^neg/NPM1^WT 32%, and FLT3-ITD^pos/NPM1^WT 21%. At 5 years, OS and RI in the FLT3-ITD^neg/NPM1^mut subtype were 74% and 35%, respectively. The corresponding OS and RI in other subtypes were below 48% and over 57%. In a Cox multivariable model, molecular subtype was the strongest predictor of LFS, OS, and relapse. In conclusion, AML patients with intermediate-risk cytogenetics and FLT3-ITD^neg/NPM1^mut experience favorable outcomes when autografted in CR1, suggesting that Auto-SCT is a valid PRT option.

Minimal residual disease and stem cell transplantation outcomes

Risk classification and tailoring of treatment are essential for improving outcome for patients with acute myeloid leukemia or high-risk myelodysplastic syndrome. Both patient and leukemia-specific characteristics assessed using morphology, cytogenetics, molecular biology, and multicolor flow cytometry are relevant at diagnosis and during induction, consolidation, and maintenance phases of the treatment. In particular, minimal residual disease (MRD) during therapy has potential as a prognostic factor of outcome, determination of response to therapy, and direction of targeted therapy. MRD can be determined by cell surface markers using multicolor flow cytometry, whereas leukemia-specific translocations and mutations are measured using polymerase chain reaction-based techniques and recently using next-generation sequencing. All these methods of MRD detection have their (dis)advantages, and all need to be standardized, prospectively validated, and improved to be used for uniform clinical decision making and a potential surrogate end point for clinical trials testing novel treatment strategies. Important issues to be solved are time point of MRD measurement and threshold for MRD positivity. MRD is used for stem cell transplantation (SCT) selection in the large subgroup of patients with an intermediate risk profile. Patients who are MRD positive will benefit from allo-SCT. However, MRD-negative patients have a better chance of survival after SCT. Therefore, it is debated whether MRD-positive patients should be extensively treated to become MRD negative before SCT. Either way, accurate monitoring of potential residual or upcoming disease is mandatory. Tailoring therapy according to MRD monitoring may be the most successful way to provide appropriate specifically targeted, personalized treatment.

The Role of Measurable Residual Disease (MRD) in Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation for Hematological Malignancies Focusing on Acute Leukemia

The significance of measurable residual disease (MRD) in hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) is well recognized in different hematological malignancies, but the evidence indicate that pre-transplant MRD status is of particular importance in acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) and acute myeloid leukemia (AML). In ALL, inadequate response at the level of MRD is a commonly accepted risk factor for relapse and thus an indication for allogeneic HSCT. Similarly, growing evidence from the literature strongly suggest that MRD detected by multiparameter flow cytometry or molecular techniques should be also used for risk stratification in AML at the time of HSCT. Despite the well-defined association of MRD and outcomes of HSCT in acute leukemias, there are still many open issues such as the role of additional pre-transplant consolidation for MRD eradication, the ability of HSCT to overcome negative influence of MRD positivity on survival, the impact of conditioning regimen intensity on MRD clearance post HSCT, and transplantation outcomes or the selection of optimal donor with regards to MRD status. In addition, the role of MRD assessment in guiding post-transplant maintenance treatment should also be addressed in prospective trials. These open issues mostly awaiting further clinical studies will be discussed in our current review.

Next-generation sequencing-based minimal residual disease monitoring in patients receiving allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation for acute myeloid leukemia or myelodysplastic syndrome

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The monitoring of minimal residual disease (MRD) has important clinical implications in both the pre and postallogeneic stem cell transplant (SCT) setting in acute myeloid leukemia (AML) and myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS). Next-generation sequencing (NGS) is a rapidly improving technology whose application to the monitoring of MRD is an active area of research. We aim to describe existing methods of MRD in AML and MDS, with a focus on the utility of NGS in patients undergoing SCT.

RECENT FINDINGS

Flow cytometry and quantitative PCR have been recommended by the European Leukemia Net as the preferred methods of MRD in AML and MDS, but these methods have limitations in cases without a disease-defining phenotype and genotype. Clinical trials are currently ongoing to assess the use of NGS in the setting of SCT for MDS and AML. Few studies have so far assessed the optimal method of MRD monitoring in the posttransplant setting.

SUMMARY

The optimal method for the monitoring of MRD in AML and MDS both pre and post transplant may require more than one technology. NGS holds great promise for the monitoring of MRD, with prospective trials currently ongoing to evaluate its efficacy in this regard.

Measurable residual disease in acute myeloid leukemia using flow cytometry: approaches for harmonization/standardization

Introduction: Measurable residual disease (MRD) in acute myeloid leukemia (AML) is a rapidly evolving area with many institutes embarking on it, both in academic and pharmaceutical settings. However, there is a multitude of approaches to design, perform, and report flow cytometric MRD. Together with the long-term experience needed, this makes flow cytometric MRD in AML nonstandardized and time-consuming. Areas covered: This paper briefly summarizes critical issues, like sample preparation and transport, markers and fluorochromes of choice, but in particular focuses on the main issues, which includes specificity and sensitivity, hereby providing a new model that may circumvent the main disadvantages of the present approaches. New approaches that may add to the value of flow cytometric MRD includes assessment of leukemia stem cells, MRD in peripheral blood, and approaches to use multidimensional image analysis. Expert commentary: MRD in AML requires standardization/harmonization on many aspects, for which the present paper offers possible guidelines.

GIMEMA AML1310 trial of risk-adapted, MRD-directed therapy for young adults with newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia

A risk-adapted, MRD-driven transplant strategy is a feasible approach for the treatment of younger adults with AML. Pretransplant MRD positivity should not contraindicate delivery of an allogeneic stem cell transplant.

Measurable residual disease testing for personalized treatment of acute myeloid leukemia

This review summarizes - with the practicing hematologist in mind - the methods used to determine measurable residual disease (MRD) in everyday practice with some future perspectives, and the current knowledge about the prognostic impact of MRD on outcome in acute myeloid leukemia (AML), excluding acute promyelocytic leukemia. Possible implications for choice of MRD method, timing of MRD monitoring, and guidance of therapy are discussed in general and in some detail for certain types of leukemia with specific molecular markers to monitor, including core binding factor (CBF)-leukemias and NPM1-mutated leukemias.

The emerging role of measurable residual disease detection in AML in morphologic remission

Despite the increasing knowledge of the genomic landscape of acute myeloid leukemia (AML), prediction merely based on genetics fails to anticipate outcome, presumably due to the heterogeneous composition of the leukemic clone determining complex interactions between different genetic abnormalities. Therefore, the introduction of a post-treatment biomarker exploring the quality of response to therapy such as assessment of measurable (previously minimal) residual disease (MRD) may lead to refinements of the prognostic assessment in AML. In this view, the European LeukemiaNet has recently endorsed the achievement of a MRD negative morphologic complete remission as a purpose the treatment. Techniques like multiparametric flow cytometry and reverse transcriptase-quantitative polymerase chain reaction have reached a level of sensitivity and specificity that make them ready for introduction in clinical practice. In the present review, we will give an update on the efforts in harmonization and/or standardization of MRD assessment in AML, focusing on the newest acquisitions in the clinical applications of MRD, and considering issues like relationship of MRD with leukemic stem cells or MRD assessment in peripheral blood.

Minimal residual disease as a biomarker for outcome prediction and therapy optimization in acute myeloid leukemia

INTRODUCTION

Response to therapy is affected by the genetic heterogeneity of acute myeloid leukemia (AML) and persistence of leukemic cells below the threshold of morphological complete remission (mCR). Such persistence is called minimal (or measurable) residual disease (MRD). Areas covered: MRD assessment allows early identification of patients who are at high risk of relapse and who should timely receive aggressive therapy (e.g. allogeneic stem cell transplantation) and of those with a good quality mCR in whom an aggressive front-line therapy can be spared, avoiding the harm of excessive treatment toxicity. The most exploited methods to assess MRD are multiparameter flow cytometry (via identification of immunophenotypic aberrancies) or PCR-based assays (via identification of cytogenetic/molecular abnormalities). Expert commentary: A growing body of evidences demonstrates that positive MRD-testing at various time-points throughout the treatment course identifies patients at high risk of relapse. We will focus on the role of MRD as a biomarker to refine risk assessment and to prospectively direct treatment choices in adult with AML.

Graft-Versus-Leukemia Effect of Allogeneic Stem-Cell Transplantation and Minimal Residual Disease in Patients With Acute Myeloid Leukemia in First Complete Remission

Purpose

The detection of minimal residual disease (MRD) in patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) may improve future risk-adapted treatment strategies. We assessed whether MRD-positive and MRD-negative patients with AML benefit differently from the graft-versus-leukemia effect of allogeneic hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation (alloHSCT).

Methods

A total of 1,511 patients were treated in subsequent Dutch-Belgian Hemato-Oncology Cooperative Group and the Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research AML trials, of whom 547 obtained a first complete remission, received postremission treatment (PRT), and had available flow cytometric MRD before PRT. MRD positivity was defined as more than 0.1% cells with a leukemia-associated immunophenotype within the WBC compartment. PRT consisted of alloHSCT (n = 282), conventional PRT by a third cycle of chemotherapy (n = 160), or autologous hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation (n = 105).

Results

MRD was positive in 129 patients (24%) after induction chemotherapy before proceeding to PRT. Overall survival and relapse-free survival were significantly better in patients without MRD before PRT compared with MRD-positive patients (65% ± 2% v 50% ± 5% at 4 years; P = .002; and 58% ± 3% v 38% ± 4%; P < .001, respectively), which was mainly because of a lower cumulative incidence of relapse (32% ± 2% compared with 54% ± 4%; P < .001, respectively). Multivariable analysis with adjustment for covariables showed that the incidence of relapse was significantly reduced after alloHSCT compared with chemotherapy or autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (hazard ratio [HR], 0.36; P < .001), which was similarly exerted in both MRD-negative and MRD-positive patients (HR, 0.38; P < .001; and HR, 0.35; P < .001, respectively).

Conclusion

The graft-versus-leukemia effect of alloHSCT is equally present in MRD-positive and MRD-negative patients, which advocates a personalized application of alloHSCT, taking into account the risk of relapse determined by AML risk group and MRD status, as well as the counterbalancing risk of nonrelapse mortality.