1 / 45

Case 1

Case 1.

mave
Download Presentation

Case 1

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Case 1 • 82 y/o WF. MDS for one year ( ? cytogenetics). On EPO and Transfusion PRN.  transfusion dependence and  WBC PTA. WBC 115K, Hb 6.7, PLT 72K. Bone marrow revealed AML (M1). She refused chemotherapy. Hydoxyurea + supportive care. Last WBC 50K. She developed A.fib., CHF and pulmonary edema. She expired on day 10.

  2. Case 2 • 73 y/o WM. MDS(RAEB) for 11 months and transformed into AML. WBC 0.9K, Hb 7, PLT 15K, ANC 0.1. He received full dose of Cytarabine + Idarubicine(7+3) +G-CSF. Day 14, marrow was hypocellular. He had profound pancytopenia, and developed pneumonia and sepsis. He was intubated and went into multi-organ failure. He died on day 21 post-induction.

  3. Case 3 • 63 y/o health Asian female. Dx AML on 8/02 in Jakarta, Indonesia. She was treated with chlorambucil and hydroxyurea. She visited daughter in U.S. and developed fever. WBC 15.2K and blasts 11%. Hb 8.9, PLT 44K. Peripheral blood flowcytometry confirmed AML (M2). She received standard induction chemotherapy with Ara-C and idarubicin (7+3). The course was complicated by persistent fever, bacteremia, GI bleeding, ileus, CHF, pulmonary edema, pneumonia, A.Fib, V-tach. She received granulocyte transfusion for 3 weeks and TPN for one week. The 14 day marrow showed no leukemia. Her WBC started to recover on day 25 post-induction. She stayed in hospital for a total 35 days.

  4. Management of AML in Elderly Minxiang Gu, MD November 1,2002

  5. Acute Myeloid Leukemia • Incidence: increases with age - All age: 2.3/100,000 - Age60: 13.7/100,000 - Median age: 65-70 years old

  6. Outcome of the treatment in elderly AML Age < 60  60 CR 70 % 45-55 % MS 11 months 6-9 months 5 year survival 35-40 % 5-8 %

  7. Response Rate and Mortality of Induction Chemotherapy 49% 34% 64% 15% Hiddemann, W et al, JCO 17(11) 1999

  8. Why are Elderly AML doing poorly?

  9. For response: Cytogenetics /molecular genetics WBC count MDR phenotype Secondary AML Age For relapse: Cytogenetics /molecular genetics Time towards completed response WBC count flt-3 mutations Autonomous proliferation Secondary AML Age Major Prognostic Factors in AML

  10. Karyotype and the Prognosis

  11. Elderly AML have higher incidences of unfavorable chromosomal abnormalities and lower incidences of favorable chromosomal abnormalities Frequency of Karyotypes and Age : < 60 years >60 years No. of Patients % No. of Patients % Favorable 108 17 10 4 Intermediate 427 65 175 63 Unfavorable 123 18 94 33 Hiddemann, W et al, JCO 17(11) 1999

  12. Elderly AML has high prevalence of MDR expression • MDR (multidrug resistance gene) • MDR1: • P-glycoprotein, 170 kDa, chromosome 7 • ATP-dependent transport protein • Binds to a variety of substrates (anthracycline, epipodophylotixin) • Reversal agents: calcium channel blocker (verapamile), Cyclosporine A, Quinidine, PSC 833. • Expressed in 70% of AML patients > 60 and only 37% in patients <60. • Correlated to lower CR, short remission duration and poor survival.

  13. Elderly AML and Secondary AML • Higher incidence of secondary AML in elderly. • The de novo AML in elderly is cytogeneticly similar to secondary AML.

  14. The similarity between advanced MDS and elderly AML Cytogenetics MDS Elderly AML Normal karyotypes 31% 27% Single abnormality 14% 13% Double abnormality 17% 14% Complex karyotypes 37% 46% Abnormal 5 20% 31% Abnormal 7 27% 27% Rossi G, et al.; Leukemia 14, 2000

  15. Biological characteristics distinguishing secondary AML (t-AML and AML in the elderly) from true de novo AML t-AML/t-MDS Elderly ‘de novo’ AML True ‘de novo’ AML Age Typical cytogenetic abnormality Multilineage dysplasia/dyspoiesis Multi drug resistant phenotype (MDR1) Common in elderly Elderly common in younger -5/del(5q), inv(3) t(3:21), -7/del(7q), 17/I 17q, complex, -20q, t(11q23), +8, +13. +8, -5/del(5q), -7, del(7q), Complex t(15:17), t(8:21), inv(16). Complex >55 years 79% >55 years, 64% Uncommon Low frequency; MDR1 usually absent in t(15:17), inv(16) and t(8:21) High frequency; > 70% High frequency; >70% Dann.E J, et al Best Practice & Research Clinical Haematology, 14(1) 2001

  16. Why are Elderly AML doing poorly? (summary) • Higher incidence of unfavorable cytogenetics. • Higher incidence of MDR expression. • Increased prevalence of antecedent hematological disease. • Limited proliferative capacity of hemapoietic stem cell. • Comorbility and different metabolism cause high treatment related mortality.

  17. Complete Remission Rate by Disease Status, Cytogenetic Status, and MDR1 Expression in Elderly AML (SWOG9031) - 211patients > 55, median age 68 years - Induction: 7+3 Secondary AML De Novo AML Unfavorable intermed/favorable Unfavorable intermed/favorable MDR1 expression Pts CRs %CR Pts CRs %CR Pts CRs %CR Pts CRs %CR Bright/moderate positive (>0.15) Dim positive (0.10-0.14) Negative (<0.10) 15 2 13 9 1 11 17 4 24 40 19 48 2 0 0 3 1 33 6 3 50 16 10 63 2 0 0 7 4 57 2 0 0 27 22 81 - MDR1 expression 71% in elderly - A important prognostic factor for likelihood of CR in induction chemotherapy Leith,C P. et al, JCO 89(9) 1997

  18. Should we treat elderly AML with intensive chemotherapy?- Supportive Care verses Anti-leukemia Chemotherapy

  19. On the Value of Intensive Remission-Induction Chemotherapy in Elderly Patients of 65+ Years With Acute Myeloid Leukemia: A Randomized Phase III Study of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Leukemia Group Löwenberg, B , et al. JCO 7(9) 1989 60 AML Pts (age 65-82, median age 72, PS 0-4) ARM A (31) ARM B(29) Management “wait and see” + cytoreductive agent (hydroxyurea +cytarabine) for leukocytosis related complication 1-2 cycles of daunorubicin, vincristine and cytarabine. + one more cycle if achieve CR CR 58 % 0 % 2 Y survival 17% 0 % Mean survival 21 weeks 11 weeks Median % of days in H 55% 50%

  20. What modification should be made to increase the response rate and reduce the treatment-related mortality

  21. Remission induction Chemotherapy

  22. Add New Agents and Change the Dose of Cytarabine RBZ, rubidazone; 6-GT, thioguanine Hiddemann, W et al, JCO 17(11) 1999

  23. Daunorubicin Dose and Treatment Response to the Induction Therapy(1) Hiddemann, W et al, JCO 17(11) 1999

  24. Daunorubicin Dose and Treatment Response to Induction Therapy(2) DNR Dose No. of CR(%) ED(%) DFS at (mg/m2/course) Patient 5Y(%) < 90 1456 45 26 14 > 90 877 54 25 26 Hiddemann, W et al, JCO 17(11) 1999

  25. Remission Induction Chemotherapy (summary) • Agents and Intensity: • Add etoposide or 6-TG - not beneficial • Increase or decrease the dose of cytarabine - not beneficial • Reduce DNR dose: impact on CR rate and long-tern outcome • Conclusion: • As a population, favor intensive therapy (standard dose) to improve initial CR and long-tern survival.

  26. Postremission Therapy

  27. Intensive Postremission Chemotherapy in Adults with Acute Myeloid leukemia Mayer et al, N Engl J Med 6:896, 1994 -1088 Pts 7+3 induction 693 in CR 596 Pts consolidation -Dose of Ara-C 100mg/m2, 400mg/m2 or 3000mg/m2 Q12 day 1, 3, 5.  Only 29% patients >60 finished 4 courses versus 62% of younger patients. Likelihood of 4 Y survival: Age% <40 38 40-60 27 >60 9

  28. Cytarabine dose and patients age versus CR in 4 years AraC dose(mg/m2) CR in 4 years (%) <60 >60 100 24  16 400 29  16 3000 44  16 • Conclusion: Consolidation chemotherapy with HDAC (3g/m2) improves disease free and overall survival only in patient < 60 years of age.

  29. Mitoxantrone Versus Daunorubicin in Induction-Consolidation Chemotherapy --- The Value of Low Dose Cytarabine for Maintenance of Remission , and an Assessment of Prognostic Factors in Acute Myeloid Leukemia Cooperative Group of the European Organization for the Research and Treatment of Cancer and the Dutch-Belgian Hemato-Oncology Cooperative Hovon Group Randomized Phase III Study AML Lowenberg et al, JCO 16(3), 1998 489 Pts (median age 68) Induction Chemotherapy (DNR + AraC or MTZ + AraC) 147 CR Pts AraC 10 mg/m2 SC Q12 Hr day 1-12, Q42 days interval x 8 cycles or disease relapse. No further treatment 5Y DFS 13% 7 % P = 0.006 OAS 18% 15% P = 0.29

  30. Postremission therapy in older patients with de novo acute myeloid leukemia: a randomized trial comparing mitoxantrone and intermediate-dose cytarabine with standard-dose cytarabine Richard et al, Blood 98(3),2001 AraC alone (100mg/m2/day, 5 days/month) X 4 7.7 Y follow up 169 medically well 205 Pts in CR(60) ID AraC (500 mg/m2/12 hr) + mitoxantrone(5mg/m2/12hr) X 6 AraC AraC + mitoxantrone Relapse 77% 82% Median DFS 11 M 10 M Median Survival 20 M 16 M

  31. Conclusion • No standard consolidation regimen for elderly AML. • May benefit from standard dose or lower dose Ara-C therapy.

  32. Salvage Therapy for Relapsed or Persistent AML in Elderly

  33. Aggressive Salvage Treatment is not Appropriate for the Majority of Elderly Patients with Acute Myeloid Leukemia Relapsing from First Complete Remission Ferrara F et al, Blood 2000, 96: 324a • 150 patients with relapsed AML after CR1, median age 66 (61-79). • Treatment group (99): HDAC or FLAG (fludarabine+AraC+G-CSF) or IDAC +idarubicin/or mitoxantrone. • Control group(51): No treatment. Best supportive care + Hydrea for leukocytosis. • Outcome:

  34. WBC, cytogenetics and age > or < 70 had no inference on SFR. • BSC group required less hospitalization(p=.003), less transfusion (p=.004 and .006) and less antibiotics(p=.001). • Conclusion: • Aggressive salvage chemotherapy results in a true survival benefit only for a minority of elderly AML( CR1>12M). The remaining ones should be managed with BSC or allocated into experimental trial. Ferrara F et al, Blood 2000, 96: 324a

  35. Efficacy and Safety of Gemtuzumab Ozogamicia (Mylotarg) in Patients With CD33-Positive Acute Myeloid Leukemia in First Relapse Sievers,EL et al, JCO 19(13) 2001 • Humanized Anti-CD 33 antibody conjugated with calicheamicin. • 142 patients median age 61. • Dose: 9 mg/m2 IV over 2 hours, Q 14 days for 2 doses. • Outcome: • CR= 23% ; CRp = 19%; OR = 42% • RFS of CR+CRp = 6.8 months • Median survival: CR=12.6 M; CRp=11.1M; NR=2.9M; Average = 5.9M.

  36. Infusion related: Chill 11% Fever 7% Hypotension 4% 1st dose 34%; 2nd dose 12 % Treatment related: Sepsis 16% fever 15% Chill 13% N/V 11% Dyspnea 9% Hypertension 9% Hypotension 7% Pneumonia 7% Hyperbilirubinemia 33% Elevated ALT and ALT 17% Mucositis 4% Myelosuppression Neutropenia 93 % Thrombocytopenia 99% Bleeding 15% Epistaxis: 3% ICH: 4% Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (Grade 3 and 4)

  37. The Role of Hematopoietic Growth Factors

  38. A Controlled Study of Recombinant Human Granulocyte Colony-stimulating Factor in Elderly Patients after Treatment for Acute Myelogenous Leukemia Dombret. H et al, N Eng J Med 332(25) 1995 - 173 AML Pts, age  65 - Main end point: 8 weeks Neutrophil recover Treatment failure Max 28 days Lenograstin(5ug/kg/day) or Placebo 7+3 induction 1 8 28 Days

  39. G-CSF given after the induction chemotherapy for AML patients  65 year old: • Did not decrease the mortality rate at 8 weeks. • Did not improve the overall survival. • Did not cause persistent or early relapse of disease • Did shorten the duration of neutropenia. • Did improve CR.

  40. Granulocyte-Macrophage Colony-stimulating Factor after Initial Chemotherapy for Elderly Patients with Primary Acute Myelogenous Leukemia Stone, RM et al N Eng J Med 332(25), 1995 -388 Pts,  60, median age 69 • GM-CSF given after the induction chemotherapy for AML patients  60 year old: • Did not decrease the severe myelosuppression • Did not stimulate re-growth of leukemia • Did not improve CR

  41. Summary • Elderly AML represent a discrete population in terms of the biology of the disease, prognosis and treatment-related complications. It should be managed differently from the younger age population. • The cytogenetics, MDR expression, secondary AML, performance status and comorbility play important roles in the clinical decision making. • If there is no contraindication, the standard induction chemotherapy is favored to achieve better CR rate and long-term survival.

  42. Hematopoietic growth factors can be used safely to shorten the duration of critical neutropenia, but not improve CR rate and overall survival. • The standard regimen for postremission therapy has not been established. Standard or low dose of Ara-C can be considered. • Aggressive chemotherapy in relapsed AML only show survival benefit in small group of patients. Mylotarg shows benefit in this setting.

  43. Decision making in Elder AML Diagnosis Unfavarable biology (Cytogenetics, MDR, 2nd AML) Contraindication against intensive(standard) therapy Yes No Yes No Supportive care only New approaches Intensive (standard) therapy Hiddemann, W et al, JCO 17(11) 1999

  44. Future • Reversal of drug resistance: PSC833(a cyclosporine analogue). • Non-myeloablation SCT • Post-translational protein modulator: • Farnesyl transferase inhibitor • Histone deacetylase inhibitor

More Related