Notice: Users may be experiencing issues with displaying some pages on stanfordhealthcare.org. We are working closely with our technical teams to resolve the issue as quickly as possible. Thank you for your patience.
 

Learn about the flu shot, COVID-19 vaccine, and our masking policy »

Stanford Health Care

Epidemiology and Clinical Significance of Secondary and Therapy-Related Acute Myeloid Leukemia: A National Population-Based Cohort Study. Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology Granfeldt Østgård, L. S., Medeiros, B. C., Sengeløv, H. n., Nørgaard, M. n., Andersen, M. K., Dufva, I. H., Friis, L. S., Kjeldsen, E. n., Marcher, C. W., Preiss, B. n., Severinsen, M. n., Nørgaard, J. M. 2015

Abstract

Secondary and therapy-related acute myeloid leukemia (sAML and tAML, respectively) remain therapeutic challenges. Still, it is unclear whether their inferior outcome compared with de novo acute myeloid leukemia (AML) varies as a result of previous hematologic disease or can be explained by differences in karyotype and/or age.In a Danish national population-based study of 3,055 unselected patients with AML diagnosed from 2000 to 2013, we compared the frequencies and characteristics of tAML, myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) -sAML, and non-MDS-sAML (chronic myelomonocytic leukemia and myeloproliferative neoplasia) versus de novo AML. Limited to intensive therapy patients, we compared chance of complete remission by logistic regression analysis and used a pseudo-value approach to compare relative risk (RR) of death at 90 days, 1 year, and 3 years, overall and stratified by age and karyotype. Results were given crude and adjusted with 95% CIs.Overall, frequencies of sAML and tAML were 19.8% and 6.6%, respectively. sAML, but not tAML, was associated with low likelihood of receiving intensive treatment. Among intensive therapy patients (n = 1,567), antecedent myeloid disorder or prior cytotoxic exposure was associated with decreased complete remission rates and inferior survival (3-year adjusted RR for MDS-sAML, non-MDS-sAML, and tAML: RR, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.02 to 1.32; RR, 1.27; 95% CI, 1.16 to 1.34; and RR, 1.16; 95% CI, 1.03 to 1.32, respectively) compared with de novo AML. Among patients = 60 years old and patients with adverse karyotype, previous MDS or tAML did not impact overall outcomes, whereas non-MDS-sAML was associated with inferior survival across age and cytogenetic risk groups (adverse risk cytogenetics: 1-year adjusted RR, 1.47; 95% CI, 1.23 to 1.76; patients = 60 years old: 1-year adjusted RR, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.06 to 1.61).Our results support that de novo AML, sAML, and tAML are biologically and prognostically distinct subtypes of AML. Patients with non-MDS-sAML have dismal outcomes, independent of age and cytogenetics. Previous myeloid disorder, age, and cytogenetics are crucial determinants of outcomes and should be integrated in treatment recommendations for these patients.

View details for PubMedID 26304885