Jhanwar, Suresh C.

Abstract Abstract 2922 The myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) are a heterogeneous group of hematological malignancies characterized by ineffective hematopoiesis and a highly variable clinical course, for which novel treatments are beginning to emerge. Conventional cytogenetic studies (CCS) of bone marrow (BM) are routinely used in clinical practice to detect abnormal clones in proliferating (metaphase) cells, identifying clonal aberrations in ∼50% of de novo MDS cases. Cytogenetics is also one of the key International Prognostic Scoring System (IPSS) components used to estimate overall survival and leukemia-free survival in MDS. Chromosome abnormalities may be quantified at presentation and during treatment by the use of fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) with DNA probes for specific chromosome loci (e.g., chromosomes 5, 7, 8 and 20) in non-proliferating (interphase) nuclei. However, it is not clear whether or not peripheral blood CCS will yield the same diagnostic and prognostic data as bone marrow CCS at disease presentation or whether patients without apparent chromosome abnormalities by CCS have “hidden” abnormalities that can be identified by interphase FISH. To answer these questions, 15 members of the International Working Group on MDS Cytogenetics agreed to perform CCS and FISH in parallel on both peripheral blood and bone marrow samples collected from MDS patients. To be certain that all participating sites scored and interpreted their individual FISH data in a similar fashion, a quality assurance (QA) study was completed with each site studying two identical test (proficiency) samples. Concordance among sites was very good to excellent allowing for the establishment of a standardized protocol with clear scoring criteria before patient samples were processed. In the second phase of the study, a total of 77 MDS patients were accrued to the study with 61% showing an abnormal karyotype. A FISH panel consisting of eight probe sets [-5/5q-, -7/7q-/der(1;7), +8/8q-, -11/+11/11q-/add(11q), 12p-/+21/t(12;21), -13/13q-, 17p- and 20q-/i(20q)/i(20p), Abbott Molecular, Inc.] was performed on both specimen types. While CCS was frequently unsuccessful (57.5%) in the PB specimens, FISH was informative (concordant with BM/PB CCS) in 92% of cases, with 49% of PB FISH demonstrating an abnormal clone. FISH was discordant in 4 of 77 BM and PB samples (5%), while CCS and FISH on BM and PB were discordant in 6 of 77 BM specimens (8%) and 6 of 73 PB specimens (8%). The data suggest that evaluation of interphase nuclei from PB on follow-up (non-diagnostic) FISH studies on MDS patients will be equally informative (and less costly and stressful) as a BM sample. Disclosures: Slovak: PerkinElmer: Employment. Haferlach:MLL Munich Leukemia Laboratory: Employment, Equity Ownership, Research Funding. Ohyashiki:Nippon Shinyaku Co., Ltd.: Research Funding.

Purpose: To investigate the effect of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) on hematopoietic toxicities, supportive care requirements, time to complete intensive therapy, and event-free survival (EFS) and overall survival (OS) in children with high-risk acute lymphoblastic leukemia (HR-ALL). Patients and Methods: A total of 287 children with HR-ALL were randomly assigned to intensive chemotherapy regimens (New York I [NY I] or NY II) as part of the Children’s Cancer Group (CCG)-1901 protocol. The induction phases consisted of five drugs (vincristine, prednisone, l-asparaginase, daunorubicin, and cyclophosphamide). Initial consolidation comprised six-agent chemotherapy combined with 18 Gy of total-brain irradiation. Patients were randomly assigned to receive G-CSF (5 μg/kg/day) during either induction or initial consolidation. A crossover study analysis was done on the 259 patients who completed both phases of therapy. Results: The mean time to neutrophil recovery (≥ 0.5 × 109/L) was reduced with G-CSF (16.7 v 19.1 days, P = .0003); however, patients who received G-CSF did not have significantly reduced episodes of febrile neutropenia (149 v 164, P = .41), positive blood cultures (57 v 61, P = .66), or serious infections (75 v 79, P = .62). Hospitalization (14.0 v 13.9 days, P = .87) and induction therapy completion times (NY I, 30.3 v 31.3 days, P = .11; NY II, 33.4 v 32.3 days, P = .40) were not significantly altered. There were no differences in 6-year EFS (P = .24) or OS (P = .54) between patients receiving or not receiving G-CSF on CCG-1901, NY I and NY II. Conclusion: Children with high-risk ALL do not appear to benefit from prophylactic G-CSF.