Clinical, Cytogenetic Characteristics and Survival of Acute Leukemia in a National Research Center Database, 10-Year Real-World Data Review

Introduction Major resources of our current knowledge on acute leukemia epidemiology and prognosis are based on data from clinical trials. Due to the selective bias of clinical trials, data might differ from the general leukemia population in real-life setting. National Clinical Research Center for Blood Disease established a comprehensive database through the electronic health records (EHR) to facilitate research of the hematologic cancers i.e. acute myeloid leukemia (AML), acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL), and acute promyelocytic leukemia (APL). The aim of the database is to gain insight into the epidemiology of these cancers, to evaluate treatment responses, to compare results between geographical regions of China. Furthermore, with the privilege of national research center, the database expects to identify prognostic and predictive factors for outcome to improve the quality of treatment and patients care. Methods The database development was initiated in 2001. Standard data elements were established to capture the key clinical variables. For individual patients, data from EHRs were extracted, integrated and quality checked. The implement of database facilitated the clinical professions to identify eligible patients, establish research projects, conduct retrospective analysis and follow-up patient outcomes. Continued efforts were made for improving the construction and quality of the database over two decades. We performed a 10-year real-world data review in the database to evaluate the quality of the recorded data and, moreover to describe the clinical, cytogenetic characteristics and survival of acute leukemia patients. The completeness for collected variables was acceptable for statistical analysis. In total, 3,404 patients (1,895 males and 1,509 females) who were diagnosed and treated between Jan. 1, 2010 and Dec. 31, 2020 were enrolled. A substantial proportion (>60%) of patients were residents of the northern and northeast region of China. Demographic and baseline characteristics also included age, age class, baseline blood test, transplantation and research participation. Molecular mutations such as nucleophosmin-1 (NPM1), FMS-related tyrosine kinase 3 (FLT3), and CCAAT/enhancer-binding protein alpha (CEBPA) et al were included in the screening panels. We explored the treatment remission rate and prognosis of different chromosomal karyotype groups among AML patients. Results The patient numbers of the AML, ALL and APL subgroups were 2,345, 769 and 290 respectively. Blood routine results well demonstrated the clinical characteristics of each subgroup (Tbl. 1). In AML group, the frequencies of NPM1, FLT3-ITD, KIT and CEBPA double mutations were 17.9%, 13.2%, 8.7% and 10.1%, respectively (Tbl. 2). In term of ALL, 640 cases (83.2%) were B-ALL and 129 (16.8%) were T-ALL. Among B-ALL, 256 cases (33.3%) were Ph positive. 10-year analysis for overall survival shown that AML patients had better outcomes as compared with ALL group (Fig. 1). In this database, 1,780 AML cases (excluding APL) were enrolled in cytogenetic analysis. The survival rates of different cytogenetic risk groups from our real-world data were separated by the ELN2017 and MRC risk stratification respectively (Fig. 2A-B). Remarkably, we found two rare but recurrent abnormalities, 16 cases with t(7;11) (p15;p15) and 12 cases with t(16;21)(p11;q22/q24;q22). Cases showed high relapse and mortality rate. Compared with the normal karyotype group, the survival of both subentities was worse and transplantation might be recommended in CR1 phase (Fig. 2C), therefore, we recommend that these two subtypes might be regarded as the worse risk group, although neither is mentioned in the current guidelines. The incidence of t(8;21) in our database was 17.9% (Fig. 3). To explore the impact of additional chromosomal abnormalities on the prognosis of t(8;21), we found that the overall survival of patients with additional trisomy 4 was worse than those without trisomy 4 (Fig. 2D), which was rarely mentioned in previous reports. Conclusion The real-world database is of great importance for defining the comprehensive features of AML, APL and ALL in clinical setting. The results offered a remarkable contribution to our knowledge on acute leukemia and identified the prognosis of rare chromosomal karyotype in AML. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Wang: AbbVie: Consultancy; Astellas Pharma, Inc.: Research Funding.

Chromosomal Characteristics and Prognostic Analysis of Secondary Acute Myeloid Leukemia

BackgroundSecondary Acute Myeloid Leukemia (S-AML) patients generally have a poor prognosis, and the chromosomal karyotype of S-AML have been rarely reported in the published literature. We aimed to explore the chromosomal karyotype and its clinical significance in patients with S-AML.MethodsClinical characteristics and chromosome karyotypes of 26 patients with S-AML were retrospectively analyzed. The overall survival (OS) was measured from the time of the patients’ transition to AML (which means the time of S-AML diagnosis) .ResultsAmong the 26 S-AML patients, there were 13 males and 13 females, with a median age of 63 years old (range, 20-77 years old). All of them were secondary to a variety of hematologic malignancies or solid tumors, and most of them were secondary to myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS). About 62% of the S-AML patients showed chromosome abnormalities. The level of serum lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) in S-AML patients with abnormal chromosome karyotype was higher than those with normal chromosome karyotype. Apart from the differences in treatment regimens, S-AML patients with chromosomal karyotype abnormalities had shorter OS (P<0.05). ConclusionsS-AML patients with abnormal chromosomal karyotype have higher LDH and shorter OS than normal chromosomal karyotype, and the OS of hypodiploidy was much shorter than hyperdiploid.

Application of chromosome microarray analysis in prenatal diagnosis

Background To explore the application value of chromosomal microarray analysis (CMA) in prenatal diagnosis. Methods The results of chromosome karyotype analysis and CMA of 477 cases undergoing amniocentesis were analyzed. The results of the no ultrasound abnormality group and the ultrasound abnormality group were compared separately. Within the ultrasound abnormality group, the results of the ultrasound structural malformation group, the ultrasound soft index abnormality group, and other ultrasound abnormality (including abnormal amniotic fluid volume and fetal growth restriction) groups were compared. Results Abnormal chromosome and CMA results were found in a total of 71 cases (15.88%, 71/447), which can be broken down into a total of 23 karyotype abnormalities (5.15%, 23/447), consisting of 18 cases of aneuploidy (4.03%, 18/447), 2 cases of unbalanced chromosome rearrangements (0.44%, 2/447), and 3 cases of chimerism (0.67%, 3/447); 17 cases with detection of pathogenic copy number variations (pCNVs) (3.80%, 17/447); and 31 cases of detection of clinical variants of unknown significance (VOUS) (6.93%, 31/447). CMA detected 3.8% more genetic abnormalities than karyotype analysis (in addition to the abnormalities detected simultaneously by karyotype analysis). Between the no ultrasound abnormality group and the ultrasound abnormality group, there was an extremely significant difference in the detection rate of an abnormal chromosomal karyotype (P < 0.01) and of VOUS (P < 0.01), but there was no significant difference in the detection rate of pCNV (P > 0.05). Comparing the ultrasound structural malformation group, the ultrasound soft index abnormality group, and the other ultrasound abnormality group, there were no significant differences in the detection rate of abnormal chromosomal karyotypes (P > 0.05), pCNV (P > 0.05) or VOUS (P > 0.05). Conclusions The detection rate of chromosomal karyotype abnormalities in prenatal diagnosis in cases with no ultrasound abnormalities was higher. For cases with fetal ultrasound structural abnormalities, when compared with traditional karyotype analysis, CMA can improve the detection rate of fetal genetic abnormalities. However, the no ultrasound abnormality group also had a high VOUS abnormality detection rate, so it is necessary to strictly define the CMA indications.

Analysis of Prenatal Diagnosis Results and Pregnancy Outcome of Non-invasive Prenatal Screening High-risk Fetuses

BackgroundWith the development of whole-genome sequencing, small chromosomal deletions and duplications could be found by NIPT. This study is to evaluate the clinical significance of fetal chromosomal karyotype analysis and chromosomal microarray analysis (CMA) to clarify the clinical significance of 528 cases of high-throughput sequencing noninvasive prenatal screening suggesting high-risk cases. MethodsNon-invasive prenatal screening showed that the fetus 21, 18, 13, sex chromosomes, and other chromosomes are at high risk of aneuploidy and fetal chromosome copy number variations (CNVs) are at high risk, requiring prenatal diagnosis Pregnant women are the research objects. After obtaining informed consent, fetal cells were obtained by amniocentesis or umbilical vein puncture for chromosomal karyotype and CMA analysis. All cases of childbirth were followed up by telephone over a period of 1 year.Results Among 528 fetuses, 447 were at high risk of aneuploidy. The positive predictive value (PPV) for trisomy 21(T21), trisomy 18 (T18), trisomy 13 (T13), sex chromosome aneuploidies (SCAs), and other chromosome aneuploidy was 85.24%, 51.52%, 12.5%, 50.82%, and 5.88% respectively. Another 81 cases of non-invasive prenatal screening suggest CNVs High risk. The PPV for CNVs was 34.57% .Among them, CNVs has a clear pathogenic significance can reach 24.69% . Follow-up of childbirth cases: Of the 62 pregnant women diagnosed with fetal SCA, 13 chose to continue their pregnancy, and the overall continued pregnancy rate was 20.97% (13/62); CNVs has no clear significance/no disease reported in 8 cases, 1 case After being lost to follow-up, all 7 cases chose to continue their pregnancy. One of the children was not informed about the specific situation; one girl had six fingers on both hands, and the rest had no abnormal growth; the remaining five children developed normally. ConclusionThis study has obtained relatively reliable PPV data for NIPT screening for chromosomal aneuploidy, which provides a reliable basis for clinical genetic counseling and treatment; it is recommended to perform prenatal diagnosis and perform chromosomal nucleus when non-invasive and high-risk prompts suspicious chromosomal abnormalities (over/under/microdeletion/microduplication). Type and CMA inspection, so that the inspection is more comprehensive and not easy to miss the diagnosis.