Single Centre, Retrospective Analysis of Treatment Outcomes and Prognostic Factors in Blastic Phase Chronic Myeloid Leukemia (CML-BP) Following Systemic Therapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Despite the introduction of BCR-ABL1 tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI), the prognosis of blastic phase chronic myeloid leukemia (CML-BP) remains dismal. Due to its low incidence, prospective evaluation of outcomes of CML-BP following systemic treatment is challenging. Thus, we aimed to evaluate the outcomes of CML-BP following systemic therapy, and to analyze prognostic factors affecting treatment outcomes. Methods: We retrospectively identified 55 patients with CML-BP per the European LeukaemiaNet 2013 criteria who treated at the Princess Margaret Cancer Centre in Toronto, Canada between 2000 and 2022. Patient and disease characteristics at the time of CML-BP diagnosis are presented in Table 1. Multiparametric flow cytometry data are described below, with percentages reflecting the proportion of positive antigen expression in evaluable patients. Treatment outcomes measured included: complete response (CR), leukaemia-free survival (LFS) and overall survival (OS). Prognostic factors evaluated include: age, transformation from chronic/accelerated phase (CP/AP), clonal evolution (CE), additional cytogenetic abnormalities (ACA), ABL1 KD mutation, extramedullary disease, blast immunophenotype, systemic treatment modality (intensive chemotherapy (IC) +/- TKI vs TKI monotherapy) and allogeneic haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HCT). Results: Among the 55 patients, the median age at time of CML-BP diagnosis was 45 years (17 - 68) and included 35 (64%) cases of CML in myeloid BP (MBP) and 20 (36%) cases of lymphoid BP (LBP). 40 (72%) patients had transformed from a previous CP/AP with a median time of 2.4 years (0.1 - 19.3) from initial diagnosis to transformation. Extramedullary disease was present in 18/53 (34%) patients. The blast immunophenotype of MBP patients (n=31) was: CD34+ (84%), CD117+ (52%), HLA-DR+ (68%), CD13+ (87%), CD33+ (97%), MPO+ (40%), CD38+ (100%) and CD123+ (50%). Nine MBP patients (36%) had aberrant CD7 expression. Among 17 evaluable LBP patients, the immunophenotypic profile was: CD34+ (94%), HLA-DR+ (76%), CD19+ (94%), CD20+ (41%), CD10+ (94%), TdT (88%), CD38+ (100%) and CD7+ (18%). Nine patients (53%) had aberrant CD13 expression and five (29%) displayed aberrant CD33 expression. At CML-BP diagnosis, 21/42 (50%) had an ACA, of which 11 (26%) patients had high risk ACA, defined as −7/7q, 11q23 or 3q26.2 aberrations, or complex karyotype. Among transformed patients, CE was present in 16/43 (37%) patients. In 18 patients evaluated with Sanger sequencing at time of BP transformation, 9 patients (50%) had an ABL1-KD mutation. 54/55 received systemic therapy: 31 (57%) intensive chemotherapy (IC) + TKI, 7 (13%) IC alone, and 16 (30%) TKI monotherapy. Two patients died before response assessment, one after IC and one after TKI monotherapy. Among 46 patients with available post-treatment bone marrow assessments, CR/CRi rates were similar in those treated with IC+ TKI (29/31; 94%), IC only (5/6; 83%) or TKI only (7/9; 78%). Overall, 40/54 (74%) patients proceeded to allogeneic HCT after achieving CR/CRi or second CP. After a median follow-up of 39 months, the 3-year LFS and OS rates of all patients were 34.9% (20.7-49.6%) and 44.9% (95% CI, 30.4-58.4%), respectively. Patients with CML-LBP had a significantly higher OS compared to those with CML-MBP (p=0.0463), however, no significant difference in LFS was seen (p= 0.0913). Median duration of LFS and OS was 1.56 and 2.51 years, respectively. The following variables were found to be independently prognostic for OS: Transformation from CP/AP (p=0.0489, HR 4.328 [1.007, 18.60]), CD117 expression at time of CML-BP (p=0.0291, HR 2.809 [1.111, 7.102]), and IC + TKI (vs TKI monotherapy) (p=0.0068, HR 0.268 [0.104, 0.689]). CE at BP, transformation from CP/AP and IC +TKI (vs TKI monotherapy) were prognostic for LFS by univariate analysis, however, none was identified as independent risk factors. Conclusion The prognosis of CML-BP remains poor despite systemic therapy. Transformation from CP/AP, CD117 positivity at diagnosis of CML-BP and TKI monotherapy were identified as independent, adverse prognostic risk factors for OS. However, treatment with IC + TKI appeared to improve survival outcomes compared with TKI therapy alone. Therefore, combination therapy with IC + TKI should be considered the optimal strategy in treatment patients with CML-BP. Figure 1View largeDownload PPTFigure 1View largeDownload PPT Close modal
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".