Time to repeal and replace response criteria for acute myeloid leukemia?

The International Working Group (IWG) response criteria for acute myeloid leukemia, published in 2003, have remained the standard by which the efficacy of new drugs is measured in clinical trials. Over the last decade, concepts related to treatment response have been challenged by several factors; f...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Blood reviews 2018-09, Vol.32 (5), p.416-425
Hauptverfasser: Bloomfield, Clara Derber, Estey, Elihu, Pleyer, Lisa, Schuh, Andre C., Stein, Eytan M., Tallman, Martin S., Wei, Andrew
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 425
container_issue 5
container_start_page 416
container_title Blood reviews
container_volume 32
creator Bloomfield, Clara Derber
Estey, Elihu
Pleyer, Lisa
Schuh, Andre C.
Stein, Eytan M.
Tallman, Martin S.
Wei, Andrew
description The International Working Group (IWG) response criteria for acute myeloid leukemia, published in 2003, have remained the standard by which the efficacy of new drugs is measured in clinical trials. Over the last decade, concepts related to treatment response have been challenged by several factors; for example, the dissociation between early clinical response and survival outcome in older patients, the recognition that epigenetic and newer differentiating-agent therapies may produce delayed responses and also hematologic improvement/transfusion independence without a morphologic response, and evidence that remissions without minimal (or measurable) residual disease (MRD) may result in outcomes superior to those of morphologic remissions with persistent MRD. The evolving role of MRD status as a potential surrogate for predicting long-term survival has enhanced the clinical need to standardize and incorporate emerging technologies that enable deeper responses beyond those recognized by the IWG, and to pre-emptively identify patients at risk of early relapse. The potential for therapeutic interventions to erase MRD and alter the natural history represents an important and open research question. Reviewed here are some of the implications and challenges associated with establishing and incorporating new treatment response criteria, initially into clinical research, and eventually into real-world practice.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.blre.2018.03.006
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2032792574</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0268960X17301546</els_id><sourcerecordid>2032792574</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c400t-48ed763f1d18cbe162293ca7f0357675cff7424be1791ac407057b43e0077e7b3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kE1LxDAQhoMo7rr6BzxIj15aJ0mbtCCILOoKC15W8BbSdApZ-7EmrbD_3pRdPXqagXneF-Yh5JpCQoGKu21SNg4TBjRPgCcA4oTMacZZTEVOT8kcmMjjQsDHjFx4vwWAggt5TmaskCDSXMzJamNbjIY-crhD3US6q6a10QbD9Lu-8xgZZwd0Vkd17yJtxgGjdo9Nb6uowfETW6sfLslZrRuPV8e5IO_PT5vlKl6_vbwuH9exSQGGOM2xkoLXtKK5KZEKxgputKyBZ1LIzNS1TFkaLrKgOmQkZLJMOQJIibLkC3J76N25_mtEP6jWeoNNozvsR68YcCYLlsk0oOyAGtd777BWO2db7faKgpoMqq2aDKrJoAKugsEQujn2j2WL1V_kV1kA7g8Ahi-_LTrljcXOYGUdmkFVvf2v_wc1K4EX</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2032792574</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Time to repeal and replace response criteria for acute myeloid leukemia?</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals</source><creator>Bloomfield, Clara Derber ; Estey, Elihu ; Pleyer, Lisa ; Schuh, Andre C. ; Stein, Eytan M. ; Tallman, Martin S. ; Wei, Andrew</creator><creatorcontrib>Bloomfield, Clara Derber ; Estey, Elihu ; Pleyer, Lisa ; Schuh, Andre C. ; Stein, Eytan M. ; Tallman, Martin S. ; Wei, Andrew</creatorcontrib><description>The International Working Group (IWG) response criteria for acute myeloid leukemia, published in 2003, have remained the standard by which the efficacy of new drugs is measured in clinical trials. Over the last decade, concepts related to treatment response have been challenged by several factors; for example, the dissociation between early clinical response and survival outcome in older patients, the recognition that epigenetic and newer differentiating-agent therapies may produce delayed responses and also hematologic improvement/transfusion independence without a morphologic response, and evidence that remissions without minimal (or measurable) residual disease (MRD) may result in outcomes superior to those of morphologic remissions with persistent MRD. The evolving role of MRD status as a potential surrogate for predicting long-term survival has enhanced the clinical need to standardize and incorporate emerging technologies that enable deeper responses beyond those recognized by the IWG, and to pre-emptively identify patients at risk of early relapse. The potential for therapeutic interventions to erase MRD and alter the natural history represents an important and open research question. Reviewed here are some of the implications and challenges associated with establishing and incorporating new treatment response criteria, initially into clinical research, and eventually into real-world practice.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0268-960X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1532-1681</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.blre.2018.03.006</identifier><identifier>PMID: 29706486</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: Elsevier Ltd</publisher><subject>Acute myeloid leukemia ; AML ; Biomarkers, Tumor ; Clinical trials ; Combined Modality Therapy ; Humans ; Leukemia, Myeloid, Acute - diagnosis ; Leukemia, Myeloid, Acute - mortality ; Leukemia, Myeloid, Acute - therapy ; Minimal residual disease ; MRD ; Neoplasm, Residual - diagnosis ; Prognosis ; Remission Induction ; Response criteria ; Treatment Outcome</subject><ispartof>Blood reviews, 2018-09, Vol.32 (5), p.416-425</ispartof><rights>2018 The Authors</rights><rights>Copyright © 2018 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c400t-48ed763f1d18cbe162293ca7f0357675cff7424be1791ac407057b43e0077e7b3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c400t-48ed763f1d18cbe162293ca7f0357675cff7424be1791ac407057b43e0077e7b3</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-5465-7591</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0268960X17301546$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,3537,27901,27902,65306</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29706486$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Bloomfield, Clara Derber</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Estey, Elihu</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pleyer, Lisa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schuh, Andre C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stein, Eytan M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tallman, Martin S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wei, Andrew</creatorcontrib><title>Time to repeal and replace response criteria for acute myeloid leukemia?</title><title>Blood reviews</title><addtitle>Blood Rev</addtitle><description>The International Working Group (IWG) response criteria for acute myeloid leukemia, published in 2003, have remained the standard by which the efficacy of new drugs is measured in clinical trials. Over the last decade, concepts related to treatment response have been challenged by several factors; for example, the dissociation between early clinical response and survival outcome in older patients, the recognition that epigenetic and newer differentiating-agent therapies may produce delayed responses and also hematologic improvement/transfusion independence without a morphologic response, and evidence that remissions without minimal (or measurable) residual disease (MRD) may result in outcomes superior to those of morphologic remissions with persistent MRD. The evolving role of MRD status as a potential surrogate for predicting long-term survival has enhanced the clinical need to standardize and incorporate emerging technologies that enable deeper responses beyond those recognized by the IWG, and to pre-emptively identify patients at risk of early relapse. The potential for therapeutic interventions to erase MRD and alter the natural history represents an important and open research question. Reviewed here are some of the implications and challenges associated with establishing and incorporating new treatment response criteria, initially into clinical research, and eventually into real-world practice.</description><subject>Acute myeloid leukemia</subject><subject>AML</subject><subject>Biomarkers, Tumor</subject><subject>Clinical trials</subject><subject>Combined Modality Therapy</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Leukemia, Myeloid, Acute - diagnosis</subject><subject>Leukemia, Myeloid, Acute - mortality</subject><subject>Leukemia, Myeloid, Acute - therapy</subject><subject>Minimal residual disease</subject><subject>MRD</subject><subject>Neoplasm, Residual - diagnosis</subject><subject>Prognosis</subject><subject>Remission Induction</subject><subject>Response criteria</subject><subject>Treatment Outcome</subject><issn>0268-960X</issn><issn>1532-1681</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2018</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kE1LxDAQhoMo7rr6BzxIj15aJ0mbtCCILOoKC15W8BbSdApZ-7EmrbD_3pRdPXqagXneF-Yh5JpCQoGKu21SNg4TBjRPgCcA4oTMacZZTEVOT8kcmMjjQsDHjFx4vwWAggt5TmaskCDSXMzJamNbjIY-crhD3US6q6a10QbD9Lu-8xgZZwd0Vkd17yJtxgGjdo9Nb6uowfETW6sfLslZrRuPV8e5IO_PT5vlKl6_vbwuH9exSQGGOM2xkoLXtKK5KZEKxgputKyBZ1LIzNS1TFkaLrKgOmQkZLJMOQJIibLkC3J76N25_mtEP6jWeoNNozvsR68YcCYLlsk0oOyAGtd777BWO2db7faKgpoMqq2aDKrJoAKugsEQujn2j2WL1V_kV1kA7g8Ahi-_LTrljcXOYGUdmkFVvf2v_wc1K4EX</recordid><startdate>201809</startdate><enddate>201809</enddate><creator>Bloomfield, Clara Derber</creator><creator>Estey, Elihu</creator><creator>Pleyer, Lisa</creator><creator>Schuh, Andre C.</creator><creator>Stein, Eytan M.</creator><creator>Tallman, Martin S.</creator><creator>Wei, Andrew</creator><general>Elsevier Ltd</general><scope>6I.</scope><scope>AAFTH</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5465-7591</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>201809</creationdate><title>Time to repeal and replace response criteria for acute myeloid leukemia?</title><author>Bloomfield, Clara Derber ; Estey, Elihu ; Pleyer, Lisa ; Schuh, Andre C. ; Stein, Eytan M. ; Tallman, Martin S. ; Wei, Andrew</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c400t-48ed763f1d18cbe162293ca7f0357675cff7424be1791ac407057b43e0077e7b3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2018</creationdate><topic>Acute myeloid leukemia</topic><topic>AML</topic><topic>Biomarkers, Tumor</topic><topic>Clinical trials</topic><topic>Combined Modality Therapy</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Leukemia, Myeloid, Acute - diagnosis</topic><topic>Leukemia, Myeloid, Acute - mortality</topic><topic>Leukemia, Myeloid, Acute - therapy</topic><topic>Minimal residual disease</topic><topic>MRD</topic><topic>Neoplasm, Residual - diagnosis</topic><topic>Prognosis</topic><topic>Remission Induction</topic><topic>Response criteria</topic><topic>Treatment Outcome</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Bloomfield, Clara Derber</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Estey, Elihu</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pleyer, Lisa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schuh, Andre C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stein, Eytan M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tallman, Martin S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wei, Andrew</creatorcontrib><collection>ScienceDirect Open Access Titles</collection><collection>Elsevier:ScienceDirect:Open Access</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Blood reviews</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Bloomfield, Clara Derber</au><au>Estey, Elihu</au><au>Pleyer, Lisa</au><au>Schuh, Andre C.</au><au>Stein, Eytan M.</au><au>Tallman, Martin S.</au><au>Wei, Andrew</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Time to repeal and replace response criteria for acute myeloid leukemia?</atitle><jtitle>Blood reviews</jtitle><addtitle>Blood Rev</addtitle><date>2018-09</date><risdate>2018</risdate><volume>32</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>416</spage><epage>425</epage><pages>416-425</pages><issn>0268-960X</issn><eissn>1532-1681</eissn><abstract>The International Working Group (IWG) response criteria for acute myeloid leukemia, published in 2003, have remained the standard by which the efficacy of new drugs is measured in clinical trials. Over the last decade, concepts related to treatment response have been challenged by several factors; for example, the dissociation between early clinical response and survival outcome in older patients, the recognition that epigenetic and newer differentiating-agent therapies may produce delayed responses and also hematologic improvement/transfusion independence without a morphologic response, and evidence that remissions without minimal (or measurable) residual disease (MRD) may result in outcomes superior to those of morphologic remissions with persistent MRD. The evolving role of MRD status as a potential surrogate for predicting long-term survival has enhanced the clinical need to standardize and incorporate emerging technologies that enable deeper responses beyond those recognized by the IWG, and to pre-emptively identify patients at risk of early relapse. The potential for therapeutic interventions to erase MRD and alter the natural history represents an important and open research question. Reviewed here are some of the implications and challenges associated with establishing and incorporating new treatment response criteria, initially into clinical research, and eventually into real-world practice.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>Elsevier Ltd</pub><pmid>29706486</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.blre.2018.03.006</doi><tpages>10</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5465-7591</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0268-960X
ispartof Blood reviews, 2018-09, Vol.32 (5), p.416-425
issn 0268-960X
1532-1681
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2032792574
source MEDLINE; Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals
subjects Acute myeloid leukemia
AML
Biomarkers, Tumor
Clinical trials
Combined Modality Therapy
Humans
Leukemia, Myeloid, Acute - diagnosis
Leukemia, Myeloid, Acute - mortality
Leukemia, Myeloid, Acute - therapy
Minimal residual disease
MRD
Neoplasm, Residual - diagnosis
Prognosis
Remission Induction
Response criteria
Treatment Outcome
title Time to repeal and replace response criteria for acute myeloid leukemia?
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-04T00%3A05%3A17IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Time%20to%20repeal%20and%20replace%20response%20criteria%20for%20acute%20myeloid%20leukemia?&rft.jtitle=Blood%20reviews&rft.au=Bloomfield,%20Clara%20Derber&rft.date=2018-09&rft.volume=32&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=416&rft.epage=425&rft.pages=416-425&rft.issn=0268-960X&rft.eissn=1532-1681&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.blre.2018.03.006&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2032792574%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2032792574&rft_id=info:pmid/29706486&rft_els_id=S0268960X17301546&rfr_iscdi=true