All content on this site is intended for healthcare professionals only. By acknowledging this message and accessing the information on this website you are confirming that you are a Healthcare Professional. If you are a patient or carer, please visit Know AML.

The AML Hub uses cookies on this website. They help us give you the best online experience. By continuing to use our website without changing your cookie settings, you agree to our use of cookies in accordance with our updated Cookie Policy

Introducing

Now you can personalise
your AML Hub experience!

Bookmark content to read later

Select your specific areas of interest

View content recommended for you

Find out more
  TRANSLATE

The AML Hub website uses a third-party service provided by Google that dynamically translates web content. Translations are machine generated, so may not be an exact or complete translation, and the AML Hub cannot guarantee the accuracy of translated content. The AML Hub and its employees will not be liable for any direct, indirect, or consequential damages (even if foreseeable) resulting from use of the Google Translate feature. For further support with Google Translate, visit Google Translate Help.

Steering CommitteeAbout UsNewsletterContact
LOADING
You're logged in! Click here any time to manage your account or log out.
LOADING
You're logged in! Click here any time to manage your account or log out.
2020-04-02T07:42:07.000Z

The impact of leukapheresis on clinical outcomes in patients with AML and hyperleukocytosis, results from a large, retrospective, study

Apr 2, 2020
Share:

Bookmark this article

Hyperleukocytosis (HL) is defined by a white blood cell (WBC) count of > 50 × 109/L or > 100 × 109/L.1 HL is associated with poor outcome in patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) because of complications, such as leukostasis, tumor lysis syndrome (TLS) and disseminated intravascular coagulopathy (DIC).1 HL associated with leukostasis requires immediate treatment, with options such as leukapheresis, intensive chemotherapy (IC), and hydroxyurea.2

Limited data are available on short- and long-term outcomes of patients with HL, and the impact of leukapheresis on clinical outcomes is not well defined. In this large, international, retrospective study recently published in LeukemiaMaximilian Stahl and colleagues aimed to evaluate the impact of hyperleukocytosis, leukostasis, and leukapheresis on short- and long-term clinical outcomes in newly diagnosed patients with AML.3

Study design and patient characteristics3

  • Data were retrospectively collected from 998 patients with AML and hyperleukocytosis (WBC > 50 × 109/L), of these 779 received IC and were selected for this study
  • Patient characteristics are reported in Table 1
  • Hyperleukocytosis was managed by:
    • Leukapheresis in 113 patients, with
      • immediate induction of IC (n = 68)
      • delayed induction of IC (n = 41)
    • immediate initiation of IC (n = 340)
    • administration of hydroxyurea followed by IC (n = 301)

Table 1. Patient characteristics

DIC, disseminated intravascular coagulopathy; IQR, interquartile range; TLS, tumor lysis syndrome

 

Characteristics

All
(N = 779)

No leukapheresis
(n = 666)

Leukapheresis
(n = 113)

p value

Median age, years

(IQR)

55

(41–66)

55

(42–66)

55

(38–65)

0.459

Median WBC

(IQR)

110 × 109/L

(77–170)

103 × 109/L

(73–152)

175 × 109/L

(127─246)

< 0.001

Favorable cytogenetic risk

23.6%

27.6%

2%

< 0.001

Intermediate cytogenetic risk

59.8%

56.5%

77.2%

< 0.001

Unfavorable cytogenetic risk

16.6%

15.9%

20.8%

< 0.001

Leukostasis

27.2%

22.1%,

55.9%

< 0.001

TLS

28.2%

29.3%

20.8%

0.09

DIC

18.2%

17.8%

20.4%

0.566

Results3

  • Short- and long-term outcomes were analyzed in the entire population and by treatment groups. The results are reported in Table 2
  • For patients without clinical leukostasis vs patients with leukostasis, median OS was 15.1 months (95% CI, 13.4–17.4) vs 7.4 months (95% CI, 3.9–9.8; p < 0.0001)
  • The median OS
    • for patients > 55 vs ≤ 55 years was 6.6 months (95% CI, 5.4–8.6) vs 23 months (95% CI, 17.8–32.8, p < 0.0001), respectively
    • for patients > 65 years with hyperleukocytosis was only 4.5 months (95% CI, 2.7–7.1) vs 16.2 months (95% CI, 14.1–20.6; p < 0.0001) for patients ≤ 65 years with hyperleukocytosis
  • 30-day survival probability:
    • 0.745 vs 0.918 (p < 0.0001) in patients > 55 vs ≤ 55 years, respectively
    • 0.692 vs 0.885 (p < 0.0001) in patients > 65 vs ≤ 65 years, respectively

 Table 2. Clinical outcomes

CI, confidence interval; CR, complete response; CRi, complete response with incomplete count recovery; IQR, interquartile range; PR, partial response; OS, overall survival

Outcomes

All

No leukapheresis

Leukapheresis

p value

Death in the first 30 days

16.7%

17.3%

13.2%

0.329

Response

CR

CRi

PR

No response

 

50.4%

13.7%

3.8%

32.1%

 

51.5%

12.8%

3.2%

32.5%

 

43.5%

19.4%

7.4%

29.6%

0.036

Median duration of CR, days

(IQR)

202

(114─363)

208

(133─368)

171

(78─280)

0.192

Relapse

42.6%

38.8%

63.8%

< 0.001

Median OS, months

(95% CI)

12.6

(11.5─14.9)

12

(10.4─13.9)

18.8

(13.3─32.5)

0.07

  • Predictors of 30-day mortality
    • age ≥ 55 years (odds ratios [OR] = 4.37; p < 0.001)
    • presence of clinical leukostasis (OR = 3.59; p < 0.001)
  • Predictors of OS
    • age ≥ 55 years (HR = 2.67; p < 0.001)
    • presence of clinical leukostasis (HR = 1.59; p < 0.001)
  • Predictors of CR/CRi
    • age ≥ 55 years (OR = 0.24; p <0.001)
    • poor cytogenetics (OR = 0.48; p = 0.004)
    • leukostasis (OR = 0.37; p < 0.001)
  • A subgroup of patients with clinical evidence of leukostasis (investigator adjudicated), showed better outcomes with leukapheresis vs no leukapheresis:
    • 30-day mortality, 19.3% vs 36.1% (p = 0.026)
    • median OS, 12 months vs 4.4 months (p = 0.044)

Conclusions3

The results of this study, from one of the largest cohorts of patients with AML and hyperleukocytosis, showed that

  • leukostasis was associated with poor outcomes
  • older patients had worse OS and 30-days survival probability
  • non-significant impact of leukapheresis on 30-day mortality, achievement of CR, or OS
    • a subgroup of patients with leukostasis showed significant improvement in 30-day mortality and OS with leukapheresis

The definition of leukostasis is one limitation of this study. Due to the absence of diagnostic tests, leukostasis was defined by the investigators based on clinical symptoms, thus patients might have been incorrectly assigned to this group. Because of this issue, plus the small number of patients with leukostasis, the benefit of leukapheresis on the short and long-term clinical outcomes of this sub-population was not well defined. Randomized studies are needed to define the impact of leukapheresis on the outcome of patients with AML and hyperleukocytosis.

  1. Rollig C & Ehninger G How I treat hyperleukocytosis in acute myeloid leukemia. Blood. 2015 May 21; 125(21):3246─ DOI: 10.1182/blood-2014-10-551507
  2. Dohner H et al. Diagnosis and management of acute myeloid leukemia in adults: recommendations from an international expert panel, on behalf of the European LeukemiaNet. Blood. 2010 Jan 21; 115(3):453─ DOI: 10.1182/blood-2009-07-235358
  3. Stahl M et al. Management of hyperleukocytosis and impact of leukapheresis among patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) on short- and long-term clinical outcomes: a large, retrospective, multicenter, international study. Leukemia. 2020 Mar 4. DOI: 1038/s41375-020-0783-3

Your opinion matters

Do you intend to implement next-generation sequencing for measurable residual disease monitoring in MDS patients?
1 vote - 2 days left ...

Newsletter

Subscribe to get the best content related to AML delivered to your inbox