MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4417010245 · doi:10.1182/blood-2025-547

Outcomes in children and adolescents with down syndrome and B-lymphoblastic leukemia: A report from Children's oncology group study AALL1731

2025· article· en· W4417010245 sur OpenAlexaff
Amanda Li, John A. Kairalla, Cindy Wang, Meenakshi Devidas, Olga Militano, Johann Hitzler, Anne Angiolillo, Michael J. Burke, Wanda L. Salzer, Stephen P. Hunger, Naomi Winick, David T. Teachey, Elizabeth A. Raetz, Mignon L. Loh, Sumit Gupta, Rachel E. Rau, Karen R. Rabin

Notice bibliographique

RevueBlood · 2025
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueAcute Lymphoblastic Leukemia research
Établissements canadiensHospital for Sick ChildrenBC Children's HospitalUniversity of British Columbia
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésBlinatumomabChemotherapyCohortChemotherapy regimenRegimenInduction chemotherapyAnthracyclineMinimal residual diseaseMethotrexateDown syndrome

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Abstract Background: Individuals with DS have a 20-fold increased risk of B-ALL, and experience increased rates of both relapse and treatment-related mortality (TRM). Those with high-risk (HR) disease requiring intensified therapy have shown the greatest disparities in both TRM and relapse rates compared to patients without DS, and thus may benefit most from treatment incorporating blinatumomab due to its anti-leukemic efficacy and favorable toxicity profile. Here, we report outcomes for patients with DS and B-ALL with HR features enrolled on COG trial AALL1731 from 2019-2022, receiving a regimen of modified chemotherapy plus 3 cycles of 28-day continuous intravenous blinatumomab, versus comparable patients with DS and B-ALL enrolled on the prior trial, AALL1131, treated with chemotherapy alone. Methods: Eligible patients had DS and de novo B-ALL, age 1-30 years, NCI HR and/or other HR features (CNS3 status, testicular involvement, steroid pretreatment, unfavorable cytogenetics, or end of induction [EOI] minimal residual disease [MRD]>0.01%). HR DS patients on AALL1131 received a chemotherapy regimen with DS-specific modifications: leucovorin rescue after intrathecal methotrexate (MTX), reduced induction anthracycline, intermediate-dose MTX, and enhanced supportive care. HR DS patients on AALL1731 were assigned to a single arm cohort termed DS-High. AALL1731 DS-High patients received the same treatment modifications as on AALL1131, and additionally omitted all induction anthracycline and the second month of delayed intensification (DI). AALL1731 DS-High patients also received 3 non-sequential cycles of blinatumomab intercalated between chemotherapy courses. The DS-High cohort was suspended to accrual on 4/29/2022 and subsequently permanently closed; patients meeting DS-High criteria at EOI after this date were taken off protocol therapy. Results: AALL1731 enrolled 134 patients with DS and B-ALL with HR features (85 classified as HR at diagnosis and 49 classified as HR post-induction). As of 06/2025, with a median follow-up time of 4.1 years (interquartile range 3.6-4.7 years), there were 3 deaths in induction and 7 deaths in remission (DIR). Induction death rate was not different between AALL1731 and AALL1131 (3.5% vs 3.6%). Ninety-three AALL1731 patients (69 classified as HR at diagnosis and 24 classified post-induction) received DS-High on protocol therapy post-induction (22 came off protocol due to protocol closure, and 19 for other reasons), with a 4-year disease-free survival (DFS) of 84.8+4.9%. A post-consolidation comparison of HR DS patients treated on AALL1731 (n=85) and AALL1131 (n=235) showed no significant difference in 4-year DFS (84.7+5.4% vs 77.6+2.8%, p=0.21); overall survival (OS) (88.2+4.8% vs 89.2+2.1%, p=0.71); or cumulative incidence (CI) of DIR (8.2+3.0% vs 4.7+1.4%, p=0.22). Post-consolidation DIR on AALL1731 occurred in DI (n=4), maintenance (n=2), and off therapy (n=1), 5 with an infectious component. Importantly, DS-High patients treated on AALL1731 showed a significantly lower 4-year CI of relapse compared with AALL1131 (4.7+2.3% vs 16.9+2.5%, p=0.006). Indeed, among the AALL1731 DS-High cohort, more post-Consolidation treatment failures were due to DIR (N=7) than due to relapse (N=4), in contrast to similar patients on AALL1131 (DIR=12, relapse=52). Among the AALL1731 DS-High cohort as of the 06/25 data cutoff, no relapse was seen later than 2.7 years from diagnosis. Three relapses on AALL1731 were CD19-positive (2 isolated extramedullary, one combined marrow/CNS) and one was CD19-negative. Conclusions: Patients with DS and B-ALL continue to have inferior outcomes compared to those without DS due to both relapse and TRM. At a median follow-up of 4 years, DFS and OS on AALL1731 were preserved but not improved compared to AALL1131 with use of 3 cycles of blinatumomab and moderately de-intensified chemotherapy. However, the CI of relapse is significantly lower on AALL1731 and to date, late relapses seen in previous cohorts of DS patients have not been observed. As 25% of DS relapses on AALL1131 occurred more than 4 years from diagnosis, AALL1731 DFS may demonstrate superiority with longer follow-up time. Nevertheless, unacceptable risk of TRM persists for patients with DS and B-ALL. Our findings suggest that strategies further reducing chemotherapy and/or further incorporating immunotherapy are warranted in future trials to improve outcomes for this high-risk, vulnerable population.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,017
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,034

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,002
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,002
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,000
Communication savante0,0010,000
Science ouverte0,0000,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0010,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,005
Tête enseignante GPT0,258
Écart entre enseignants0,253 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2025
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueBloodMême sujetAcute Lymphoblastic Leukemia researchTravaux en français237 207