|
|
|||||||
Acute Myeloid Leukemia |
transcript to stratify the risk of relapse in patients with acute promyelocytic leukemiaFrom the Servicio de Hematología, Hospital Universitario, Salamanca, Spain.
Correspondence: Ramón García Sanz, MD, PhD, Departament of Hematology, Hospital Universitario de Salamanca, Paseo San Vicente 58-182, 37007 Salamanca, Spain. E-mail: rgarcias{at}usal.es
| ABSTRACT |
|---|
|
|
|---|
by real-time polymerase chain reaction (RQ-PCR) is becoming an important tool for monitoring minimal residual disease (MRD) in patients with acute promyelocytic leukemia (APL). However, its clinical value remains to be determined. Our aim was to analyze any associations between the risk of relapse and RQ-PCR results in different phases of treatment, comparing these data with those yielded by conventional qualitative reverse transcriptase-PCR. Design and Methods: Follow-up samples from 145 APL patients treated with the PETHEMA protocols were evaluated by the RQ-PCR protocol (Europe Against Cancer program) and by the RT-PCR method (BIOMED-1 Concerted Action). Hematologic and molecular relapses and relapse-free survival were recorded. We then looked for associations between relapse risk and RQ-PCR results.
Results: After induction therapy, no association was found between positive RQ-PCR results and relapse. The PCR result here did not imply any change in the scheduled therapy. After the third consolidation course, two out of three cases with positive RQ-PCR relapsed in contrast to 16 out of 119 (13%) patients with negative RQ-PCR. During maintenance therapy and out-of treatment, all patients with >10 PML-RAR
normalized copy number (NCN) (n=19) relapsed while all patients with <1 NCN at the end of the study remained in hematologic remission (p<0.0001). In the intermediate group (NCN 1–10) (n=18), the relapse-free survival at 5 years was 60%. Hematologic relapses were predicted if a positive RQ-PCR result had been obtained in a follow-up sample within the previous 4 months.
Interpretation and Conclusions: Based on the information provided by RQ-PCR in samples obtained after the end of consolidation and subsequently, a relapse risk stratification could be established for APL patients. This stratification divides patients into three groups: those at high risk of relapse, those with an intermediate risk and those with a low risk of relapse.
Key words: acute promyelocytic leukemia, RQ-PCR, minimal residual disease.
Combined treatment with anthracycline-based chemotherapy and all trans retinoic acid (ATRA) is highly successful in acute promyelocytic leukemia (APL), providing long-lasting remissions and probable cures in up to 70% of newly diagnosed patients.1–5 Nevertheless, the persistence of resistant clones causing relapse and low survival still represents a problem in 15–25% of patients.6–9 Currently, detection of PML/RAR
transcripts by molecular techniques constitutes an important tool for monitoring minimal residual disease (MRD) and predicting evolution in APL patients.10 Conventional qualitative reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) has been widely used for genetic diagnosis and therapeutic monitoring of APL. Several reports have shown that RT-PCR positivity after consolidation treatment predicts hematologic relapse, whereas persistent RT-PCR negativity test is associated with long-term survival and a low relapse rate.9,11–12 However, this technique has several disadvantages such as the occurrence of false positive results due to cross-contamination and false negatives due to poor RNA quality or RT-PCR failures at different stages. In addition, the sensitivity of RT-PCR for measuring MRD is relatively low13–14 and the method is associated with significant inter-laboratory variability.15 Finally, qualitative RT-PCR requires significant post-PCR handling which is time and labor-consuming and often leads to contamination of samples.
Recently, quantification of the PML/RAR
copy number based on real-time PCR approaches (RQ-PCR) has become a new alternative for monitoring disease outcome. Although this approach suffers from some of the same problems as conventional RT-PCR, it has several advantages such as being highly sensitive, facilitating assessment of kinetics and being highly reproducible.13,16 Although several protocols have been developed for quantitative monitoring in APL,8,16–19 there is currently no consensus concerning threshold levels to discriminate between low and high relapse risk, and the optimum calendar for sampling remains to be defined.10,20 Moreover, the clinical value of these investigations still needs to be confirmed.10 In addition, comparisons between qualitative (RT-PCR) and quantitative (RQ-PCR) approaches as suitable techniques for predicting relapse have not been made. The present work analyzes the value of RQ-PCR for predicting relapse in APL and compares quantitative results with those of the conventional RT-PCR approach, according to treatment phase.
| Design and Methods |
|---|
|
|
|---|
rearrangements.16,22 Post-induction and post-consolidation samples were analyzed by both methods using cDNA samples from RNA stored at –80ºC. Any positive result after consolidation therapy was confirmed in a second sample or a repeated analysis with new cDNA. Patients who died of a cause related to induction therapy were not included in the present study.
Treatment protocol
Treatment was carried out according to the PETHEMA-LPA 96 protocol (before November 1999)2 or PETHEMA-LPA 99 (subsequently).23 Both protocols included an induction phase with ATRA plus idarubicin and three consolidation courses with idarubicin, mitoxantrone and idarubicin, followed by a maintenance phase with ATRA, methotrexate and mercaptopurine for 2 years.2 In the APL-99 protocol the consolidation phase was modified such that ATRA plus higher doses of idarubicin were given to patients with a white blood cell (WBC) count higher than 10000/µL and/or platelets counts lower than 40000/µL, who were considered as being at high-risk.23
Remission and relapse definition
Hematologic remission was defined as normal bone marrow cellularity with <5% leukemic promyelocytes and normalization of peripheral blood counts. Consequently, hematologic relapse was defined as the reappearance of
5% leukemic promyelocytes in the bone marrow.2,4 Molecular remission (MR) was defined as the disappearance on an agarose gel stained with ethidium bromide of the PML/RAR
-specific band visualized at diagnosis, using a qualitative RT-PCR assay with a sensitivity level of 10–4 in any follow-up sample, after the end of consolidation therapy.6,22 Regarding the RQ-PCR assay, MR was defined as present when less than 1 PML/RAR
normalized copy number (NCN) was detected (sensitivity of 10–5).16 Molecular relapse was defined as the reappearance of a positive molecular result according to either method in two consecutive bone marrow samples at any time after consolidation therapy.6 A result was considered to be false-positive when a positive molecular result appeared by any method but hematologic relapse was not observed within the subsequent 6 months.
RNA extraction and cDNA synthesis
Total RNA was obtained from leukocytes using the acid guanidium thiocyanate-phenol chloroform extraction method.24 Reverse transcription was performed as previously described:22 1–2 µg of total RNA were added to a 20-µL volume containing random hexamers as primers and 200 U of SuperScript RNase H reverse transcriptase (Invitrogen, California, USA). The mixture was incubated at 42°C for 60 min, followed by 3 min at 99°C and 2 min at 4°C. Aliquots were stored at –80ºC prior to further analysis.
RT-PCR qualitative assays
To amplify the PML/RAR
fusion gene, a two step qualitative RT-PCR analysis was performed as previously described.22,25 A volume of 5 µL (100 ng) of cDNA was diluted into 45 µL of a PCR mixture containing a final concentration of 400 nM primers, 2.5 mM MgCl2, 200 µM dNTP, PCR buffer (20 mM Tris-HCl, 50 mM KCl, pH 8.3) and 1.0 U of TaqGold DNA polymerase. PCR cycles included an initial denaturation at 95°C for 10 minutes. Melting, annealing and extension were carried out at 95°C for 30 sec, 65°C for 1 min, and 72°C for 1 min, respectively, for a total of 35 cycles. Nested PCR was performed under the same conditions, but using 2.5 µL of PCR product from previous reaction and internal primers. Finally, 25 µL of the PCR product were analyzed in a 2.5% agarose gel stained with ethidium bromide and visualized under UV light. Two negative controls (one with non-PML/RAR
RNA and one with distilled water) and a NB4 cell line as a positive control were included in the experiments. The assay sensitivity was 10–4, using several 10-fold microdilutions.22 The quality control of the cDNA preparation was assessed by amplification of the normal ABL gene.
RQ-PCR (real time) assays
The different PML-RAR
transcripts were quantified using the ABI PRISM 7700 DNA Sequence Detection System according to the Europe against Cancer Group (EAC) protocol, in which our group has actively participated.16 PML-RAR
transcript copy numbers were assessed in 5 µL (100 ng) of cDNA though the
Ct method, using commercial plasmids (IpsoGen Laboratories, Marseille, France) to construct the standard curve. Primers were designed as previously reported.16 The Abelson housekeeping gene (ABL) was selected as a control gene of RNA expression, as previously reported.26 A valid result required an ABL Ct within a range of 21.8 to 29.5, with at least 2000 copies of the ABL gene in the sample.26 A non-amplification control (NAC), containing RNA from a healthy donor and non-template control (NTC), with distilled water instead of human cDNA were included in each assay. A positive well was defined as a sigmoid amplification (log scale) with a Ct value below the Y-intercept value of the standard curve plus one Ct, as reported previously.16 A positive result was defined with at least two out of three wells. The sensitivity, established previously in our laboratory, was 10–5 using dilutions of the NB4 cell line.16 All samples were tested in triplicate and results are reported according to EAC guidelines as the normalized copy number (NCN), derived by multiplying the PML-RAR
copy number/ABL copy number ratio by 10000.16 A result of <1 NCN was reported as RQ-PCR negative.
Statistical analysis
All tests were carried out with the SPSS 12.0 program (SPSS, Chicago, IL, USA). For univariate analyses,
2 and Fishers exact test were performed to evaluate factors associated with relapse. Relapse-free survival (RFS) for analysis after consolidation therapy was defined as the time between the achievement of complete remission and relapse or last follow-up. The probabilities of RFS and overall survival (OS) were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared using the log-rank test.27 RFS was estimated using either molecular or hematologic relapse as censored events. OS was defined as the time from achievement of complete remission to death or last follow-up. The impact of multiple predictor variables on RFS was assessed using a Cox regression model.28
| Results |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Characteristics at presentation and influence on survival
The main clinical characteristics of patients at diagnosis are summarized in Table 1. The 3-year probabilities of RFS and OS were 83.3% and 89.3%, respectively. When we evaluated the impact of the clinical features on RFS, APL FAB M3 variant subtype (p=0.016) and WBC count higher than 10000/µL (p=0.021) at diagnosis were the only parameters associated with a shorter RFS (Table 2). Multivariate analysis showed that a high WBC count was the only independent factor associated with poor RFS (p=0.026). By contrast, other parameters such as number of blast cells in bone marrow or peripheral blood, platelets counts and PML/RAR
isoform had no prognostic impact on relapse risk (Table 2).
|
|
|
|
1 group versus 84% in the NCN<1 group at the end of the consolidation therapy (p<0.0001). During the maintenance phase, 442 samples from 96 patients were analyzed. In 75 patients (78.1%), all samples were constantly negative, while in 21 patients at least one positive sample was detected. Within this latter group, 12 had >10 NCN and the remaining nine had between 1 and 10 NCN. The RFS at 3 years was 94%, 67% and 0% for the NCN<1, NCN1–10 and NCN>10 groups, respectively (Figure 3a). Relapses occurred in all patients with NCN>10 within the 4 months following a positive molecular result (median 41 days, range 0–153 days).
|
NCN: <1 NCN, 1–10 NCN and >10 NCN: these groups had 5-year RFS probabilities of 100%, 67% and 14%, respectively (p<0.0001, Figure 3B). All patients with positive results by RQ-PCR in two consecutive samples during maintenance therapy or out of treatment, finally relapsed (n=23). By contrast, all patients with a result that was initially positive but negative in the confirmatory sample, remained in hematologic remission until the end of the study (n=12, median follow-up of 37.9 months; range, 8.3–57.0)
|
Comparison between RQ-PCR vs. RT-PCR assays
Overall, 507 samples taken during different phases of treatment were analyzed in parallel by both methods (Table 4). Results were concordant in 479 samples (94%) (both positive in 108 samples and both negative in 371 samples). In 28 samples, however, discrepant results were obtained: 23 samples were positive by RQ-PCR but negative by RT-PCR, while in five samples the opposite was observed. As shown in Table 4, most of these discrepancies occurred in the group of samples with 1–10 NCN. It should be noted that five out of eight patients with RQ-PCR results between 1–10 NCN and positive RT-PCR relapsed, whereas only one out of ten patients with 1–10 NCN by RQ-PCR and negative RT-PCR relapsed (Table 5). This difference was statistically significant (p=0.04). Regarding discrepant cases we observed that while RQ-PCR yielded false positive results (12 cases), particularly when the NCN was lower than 10, RT-PCR was associated with both false positive (five cases) and false negative (one case) results.
|
|
| Discussion |
|---|
|
|
|---|
normalized copy number.
As previously reported for both RQ-PCR and RT-PCR, no correlation was found between a positive test immediately after induction therapy and outcome.2,4,8,19 Actually, no significant differences in PML-RAR
NCN values post-induction were observed between relapsed patients and those who remained in continuous complete remission, as also reported by other groups.19,29–30 Similarly, the kinetics of tumor burden reduction (log-reduction in NCN between diagnosis and post-induction) did not correlate with disease outcome. These results contrast with the picture in other leukemic disorders such as t(9;22) acute lymphoblastic leukemia31 or t(8;21) acute myeloid leukemia, in which successful induction chemotherapy produces a reduction of 2 to 3 log in the level of AML1-MTG8, followed by a further 2 to 3 log after consolidation/intensification chemotherapy.32 Such differences could be explained in part by the type of therapy, since ATRA, unlike other cytotoxic treatments, promotes the differentiation of APL cells to a maturative stage instead of quickly eliminating leukemic cells.33 Furthermore, in contrast to other acute myeloid leukemias, induction treatment of APL can be associated with delayed leukemic clearance.10
Regarding post-consolidation analysis, it is generally accepted that there is a correlation between positive RQ-PCR assays and a high risk of relapse,3,13,19,30 especially when the third course of chemotherapy has been completed. However; in our series, as well as in other studies,7,23 the low number of positive cases detected at the end of consolidation limits the utility of this parameter. Interestingly, in a recent study that evaluated samples by RQ-PCR at the end of each consolidation course, there was a significant correlation between an MRD level >10–3 after first consolidation and poor clinical outcome.30 This value is equivalent to the 10 NCN threshold in the present study.
During maintenance therapy and beyond the end of treatment, a positive RQ-PCR test was associated with a higher relapse risk and shorter survival. Moreover, three well-defined risk groups could be established according to the PML-RAR
NCN assessed with the Europe Against Cancer protocol.16 Patients with <1 NCN had a very favorable RFS, especially when the test was performed during follow-up, post-maintenance therapy. By contrast, patients with >10 NCN had a very poor prognosis since all these patients finally relapsed. These results are similar to preliminary data communicated by Cassinat et al., showing that no relapse occurred in patients with <10 copies, whereas the relapse rate observed in patients with more than 100 copies was 100%.34 The discrepancies in the thresholds could be related to methodological differences such as the control gene used (PBGD vs ABL) for the normalization of the PML-RAR
copy number.
An interesting group with intermediate-risk was detected in our series. This group included patients with at least one positive result between 1 and 10 NCN during maintenance and out of treatment. There was a very high probability of relapse within this group if either a second confirmatory positive sample or RT-PCR positive assay was found. If not, this low positivity can be considered a false positive result, since all 11 patients with this pattern and negative RT-PCR remained in continuous complete remission. On the other hand, no false negative results were observed by RQ-PCR of samples taken in the post-maintenance phase. In contrast, RT-PCR can produce both false positive and false negative results in a few patients (three and two, respectively). These data suggest that RT-PCR could be used as a complementary assay for the RQ-PCR approach, especially within the subgroup with 1–10 NCN. A good correlation between RT-PCR and RQ-PCR results has recently been found in 31 newly APL diagnosed patients.35 Furthermore, it is important to note that the relatively high specifity of RT-PCR assay is not reason enough to substitute a highly sensitive, standarized and high through-put technology such as RQ-PCR.
Interestingly, all patients who had a positive molecular result, by both techniques, had a hematologic relapses within 4 months. This emphasizes the need for frequent sampling (at least every 4 months) in order to predict impending relapses. Since our data include patients monitored not only during maintenance therapy but also out of treatment, and we have observed a similar pattern of rapid relapse in these latter cases, we can conclude that the recent recommendation to monitor MRD every 3 months during maintenance therapy9–11,19 could be prolonged to the 2 years following treatment, although during this period sampling could be slightly less frequent (every 4–5 months). In addition, patients with adverse features such as WBC counts >10,000/µL at diagnosis should be monitored more closely, for example every 2 or 3 months.10 Its important to note that our recommendations about levels and frequencies of sample collection should be considered within the framework of treatment schedules similar to the PETHEMA protocol used here.
In conclusion, we propose a relapse-risk stratification based on quantification of PML-RAR
NCN, to evaluate APL patients during their maintenance therapy and beyond the end of treatment. Nevertheless, RT-PCR remains a complementary and valuable technique, particularly for patients with only one low positive RQ-PCR result. Finally, our data show that a positive molecular result with >10 NCN or reconfirmed positivity by RT-PCR is predictive of rapid clinical relapse within the subsequent 4 months.
| Acknowledgments |
|---|
| Footnotes |
|---|
MG and MCC were the iniatial designers of the study; CS, MCC and CF carried out all molecular studies and prepared the database for the final analysis; CS deveoped the statistical analysis and prepared the initial version of the paper; PM-J and AB helped in the molecular analysis and data collction; RG-S reviewed the conception and design of most of the work, made the database and supervised the statistical analysis, re-wrote the paper and provided the pre-approval of the final version; FR, MCR and MJP were clinicians responsible for the patients who took care of the protocol accomplishment, sampling and collection of the clinical data; JFSM and MG were responsible for the group and the final revision of the draft. They gave final approval of the version to be published.
The authors reported no potential conflicts of interest.
Funding: this work was partially supported by grant 89/A/06 from Gerencia Regional de Salud. CS was partially supported by Grants from "Instituto Costarricense contra el Cancer" and CENDEISSS.
Received for publication September 6, 2006. Accepted for publication January 26, 2007.
| References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
positive acute promyelocytic leukemia. Blood 1999;94:3015-21.
transcripts with a sensitive competitive RT-PCR method. Leukemia 2001;15:1060-5.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
isoform type: long-term follow-up in acute promyelocytic leukemia. Blood 2001;98:2651-6.
fusion gene in patients with acute promyelocytic leukemia enrolled in the GIMEMA-AIEOP multicenter "AIDA" trial. GIMEMA-AIEOP Multicenter "AIDA" Trial. Blood 1998;92:784-9.
-positive acute promyelocytic leukemia by combined all-trans retinoic acid and idarubicin (AIDA) therapy. Gruppo Italiano-Malattie Ematologiche Maligne dellAdulto and Associazione Italiana di Ematologia ed Oncologia Pediatrica Cooperative Groups. Blood 1997;90:1014-21.
transcript in long-term follow-up of acute promyelocytic leukemia patients. Haematologica 2001;86:577-85.
fusion transcripts detected by laboratories participating in an external quality control program using several reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction protocols. Haematologica 2001;86:570-6.
using real-time reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction. J Mol Diagn 2001;3:141-9.
mRNA in acute promyelocytic leukemia: assessment of prognostic significance in adult patients from inter-group protocol 0129. Blood 2003;101:2521-8.
, AML1-ETO, or CBFB-MYH11 acute myeloid leukemia based on quantification of fusion transcripts. Blood 2003;102:2746-55.
catabolism, role of oncogene degradation in disease remission. Oncogene 2001;20:7257-65.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
real-time quantitative PCR for definition of molecular relapse in APL patients (results of the APL Study Group). Blood (ASH Annual Meeting Abstracts) 2005;106[abstract 672].Related Article
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
B. Blanco, J. A. Perez-Simon, L. I. Sanchez-Abarca, T. Caballero-Velazquez, S. Gutierrez-Cossio, P. Hernandez-Campo, M. Diez-Campelo, C. Herrero-Sanchez, C. Rodriguez-Serrano, C. Santamaria, et al. Treatment with bortezomib of human CD4+ T cells preserves natural regulatory T cells and allows the emergence of a distinct suppressor T-cell population Haematologica, July 1, 2009; 94(7): 975 - 983. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
C. Santamaria, M. C. Chillon, R. Garcia-Sanz, A. Balanzategui, M. E. Sarasquete, M. Alcoceba, F. Ramos, T. Bernal, J. A. Queizan, M. J. Penarrubia, et al. The relevance of preferentially expressed antigen of melanoma (PRAME) as a marker of disease activity and prognosis in acute promyelocytic leukemia Haematologica, December 1, 2008; 93(12): 1797 - 1805. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | TABLE OF CONTENTS | ARCHIVE | SUBSCRIPTIONS |