Evolving characteristics and outcome of secondary acute promyelocytic leukemia (APL): A prospective analysis by the French‐Belgian‐Swiss APL group. Issue 14 (6th April 2015)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Braun, Thorsten; Cereja, Sophie; Chevret, Sylvie; Raffoux, Emmanuel; Beaumont, Marie; Detourmignies, Laurence; Pigneux, Arnaud; Thomas, Xavier; Bordessoule, Dominique; Guerci, Agnès; Lamy, Thierry; Recher, Christian; Poiré, Xavier; Tournilhac, Olivier; Spertini, Olivier; Chomienne, Christine; Degos, Laurent; Dombret, Hervé; Adès, Lionel; Fenaux, Pierre
• Is Part Of: Cancer. Volume 121:Issue 14(2015)
• Page Start: 2393
• Page End: 2399
• Publication Date: 2015-04-06
• Subjects: acute promyelocytic leukemia -- breast cancer -- prostate cancer -- secondary acute myeloid leukemia; Cancer -- Periodicals; Cancer -- Cytopathology -- Periodicals; 616.99405
• DOI: 10.1002/cncr.29389
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0008-543X

Abstract

Abstract : BACKGROUND: Reports of patients with secondary acute promyelocytic leukemia (APL) have increased in recent years, particularly for those who received treatment with mitoxantrone, and retrospective studies have suggested that their characteristics and outcomes were similar to those of patients with de novo APL. METHODS: The authors investigated patients with de novo and secondary APL who were included in the ongoing APL‐2006 trial. Patients with secondary APL who were included in that trial also were compared with a previous retrospective cohort of patients with secondary APL. RESULTS: In the APL‐2006 trial, 42 of 280 patients (15%) had secondary APL. Compared with the retrospective cohort, patients with secondary APL in the APL‐2006 trial had a lower incidence of prior breast carcinoma (35.7% vs 57%; P = .03) and a higher incidence of prior prostate carcinoma (26.2% vs 4.7%; P < .001). Treatment of the primary tumor in the APL‐2006 trial less frequently included combined radiochemotherapy (28.6% vs 47.2%; P = .044) and no mitoxantrone (0% vs 46.7%; P = .016) but more frequently included anthracyclines (53.3% vs 38.3%; P = .015). In the APL‐2006 trial, patients who had secondary APL, compared with those who had de novo APL, were older (mean, 60.2 years vs 48.7 years, respectively; P < .0001) but had a similar complete response rate (97.6% vs 90.3%, respectively), cumulative incidence of relapse (0% vs 1.8%, respectively), and overall survival (92.3% vs 90.9%, respectively) at 18 months. CONCLUSIONS: Although the incidence of secondary APL appears to be stable over time, evolving strategies for the treatment of primary cancers have reduced its occurrence among breast cancer patients but have increased its incidence among patients with prostate cancer. The current results confirm prospectively that patients with secondary APL have characteristics and outcomes similar to those of patients with de novo APL. Cancer 2015;121:2393–2399. © 2015 American Cancer Society . Abstract : The current results suggest that, at least for secondary acute promyelocytic leukemia (APL), evolving strategies in the treatment of cancers have modified the primary tumors and the drugs involved in leukemogenesis, but without reducing their incidence. These findings also confirm prospectively that patients with secondary APL have characteristics and outcomes similar to those of patients with de novo APL.