Acute Leukemias of Ambiguous Lineage; Study on 247 Pediatric Patients
Authors: Hrusak Ondrej , Luks Ales , Janotova Iveta , Mejstrikova Ester , Vaskova Martina , Bleckmann Kirsten , Konatkowska Benigna , Irving Julie , Polgarova Kamila , Inaba Hiroto , Schmiegelow Kjeld , Rossi Jorge Gabriel , Felice Maria Sara , Dalla-Pozza Luciano , Morales Jessa , Sartor Mary , Dworzak Michael , Moricke Anja , Campbell Myriam , Cabrera Maria Elena , Marinov Neda , Elitzur Sarah , Izraeli Shai , De Haas Valerie , Kolenova Alexandra , Svec Peter , Kreminska Elena , Stokley Simone , Polychronopoulou Sophia , da Costa Elaine , Marquart Hanne Vibeke , Kattamis Antonis , Ratei Richard , Reinhardt Dirk , Jackson Kathy , Moorman Anthony V , Schrappe Martin , Stary Jan 
Published: October 2019

Up to 5% of patients with acute leukemia (AL) are diagnosed as AL of ambiguous lineage. The ambiguous lineage ALs consist of mixed phenotype AL (MPAL, or biphenotypic AL, BAL), bilineal AL, switching AL and rare, undifferentiated ALs. From a molecular genetic point of view, they overlap with several molecular genetic subsets such as AL with MLL rearrangements or early T precursor AL. As no general treatment strategy exists, these patients have been variably treated with lymphoblastic (ALL)- , myeloid (AML)- or combined (hybrid) therapy, with or without stem cell transplant. They are often unreported as they are excluded from standard protocols. So far, attempts to shed more light on these patients has largely focused on definitions of ambiguous lineage AL. Only limited therapeutic observations have been possible in studies on this AL subset, usually reporting 50 or fewer pediatric/adult patients. In order to facilitate more detailed analyses, we have created an international study "iBFM AMBI2012 Study/Registry".

In this study, patients under 18 years at diagnosis are eligible. Each center/country was asked to report all consecutive patients with ambiguous lineage AL, from a 2- to 13-year period ending May 31, 2015. The definitions included those with WHO and EGIL criteria and remained unchanged throughout the study. Complete information on type of treatment, follow up and immunophenotype was requested. Where available (n=101 at the time of this abstract uploading), raw cytometric FCS data files were stored centrally for review. Apart from the study itself, the central database served also as a basis for consulting individual patients during the diagnostic workup. Furthermore, data on fusion genes, cytogenetics, treatment response and availability of specimens for collateral studies were also collected.

In total, 247 patients from Australia, Austria, Brazil, Czechia, Germany, Greece, Israel, Netherlands, NOPHO (Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Norway, Sweden, Iceland and Lithuania), PINDA (Chile), Poland, SAHOP (Argentina), Slovakia, St. Jude Children's Research Hospital (USA), Ukraine and United Kingdom are reported. Among those, 222 fulfilled the definitions of MPAL/BAL, partially overlapping with cases in whom two clones had been identified (n=47) and 14 cases presented with undifferentiated AL. Most of them, consistent with our general treatment guideline (Figure 1), started their treatment with an ALL type of protocol (n=150), 60 patients started on AML therapy, 8 patients received a combined regimen including the Interfant protocols, 2 patients were not treated, 13 received other treatment, and this information is missing in 9 patients (additional 5 pts. started on ALL treatment but their follow up information is incomplete). The 5 year event free survival of the entire cohort was 55±4% and its separation by first type of treatment is shown in Figure 2.

In a collateral study, we set up a qPCR array on 90 genes that are characteristic of the lymphoid or myeloid lineages and/or are thought to be involved in their regulation. Using this array, sorted cells of granulocytic, monocytic, T, and B lineages at various stages of development (17 stages total) were analyzed and compared to samples of AL including 6 samples of MPAL of precursor B/myeloid phenotype. Although this array did not show a general deregulation in the MPAL genome compared to that in AL or healthy cells, subtle changes were seen such as decrease of CEBPE and LILRA2 gene expression, in comparison to classical B precursor ALL.

Overall, our data shows that the general treatment guideline (Figure 1), which favors ALL treatment is justified by the outcome. However, although this study is larger than those published, caution is needed during its interpretation due to variations in diagnostics and treatment among the participating countries. Therefore, our data should be viewed as a basis for non-ambiguous treatment guidelines that will direct each patient to either ALL or AML treatment. These guidelines will be tested prospectively. In addition, the framework of this study is being used as a basis of consulting new AL cases with diagnostic uncertainties. Furthermore, it serves as a data resource for biologic studies.

Supported by AZV 15-28525A, UNCE 204012, NT/14534-3, NT/13462-4, P302/12/G101.

Disclosures

Kattamis: Novartis: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; ApoPharma: Speakers Bureau.