Burke, Michael J

PURPOSE Although cure rates for childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) exceed 90%, ALL remains a leading cause of cancer death in children. Half of relapses arise in children initially classified with standard-risk (SR) disease. MATERIALS AND METHODS To identify genomic determinants of relapse in children with SR ALL, we performed genome and transcriptome sequencing of diagnostic and remission samples of children with SR (n = 1,381) or high-risk B-ALL with favorable cytogenetic features (n = 115) enrolled on Children's Oncology Group trials. We used a case-control study design analyzing 439 patients who relapsed and 1,057 who remained in complete remission for at least 5 years. RESULTS Genomic subtype was associated with relapse, which occurred in approximately 50% of cases of PAX5 -altered ALL (odds ratio [OR], 3.31 [95% CI, 2.17 to 5.03]; P = 3.18 × 10 –8 ). Within high-hyperdiploid ALL, gain of chromosome 10 with disomy of chromosome 7 was associated with favorable outcome (OR, 0.27 [95% CI, 0.17 to 0.42]; P = 8.02 × 10 –10 ; St Jude Children's Research Hospital validation cohort: OR, 0.22 [95% CI, 0.05 to 0.80]; P = .009), and disomy of chromosomes 10 and 17 with gain of chromosome 6 was associated with relapse (OR, 7.16 [95% CI, 2.63 to 21.51]; P = 2.19 × 10 –5 ; validation cohort: OR, 21.32 [95% CI, 3.62 to 119.30]; P = .0004). Genomic alterations were associated with relapse in a subtype-dependent manner, including alterations of INO80 in ETV6::RUNX1 ALL, IKZF1 , and CREBBP in high-hyperdiploid ALL and FHIT in BCR::ABL1 -like ALL. Genomic alterations were also associated with the presence of minimal residual disease, including NRAS and CREBBP in high-hyperdiploid ALL. CONCLUSION Genetic subtype, patterns of aneuploidy, and secondary genomic alterations determine risk of relapse in childhood ALL. Comprehensive genomic analysis is required for optimal risk stratification.

Background: Approximately 2-3% of B-ALL patients have Philadelphia chromosome like (Ph-like) B-ALL with an ABL-class fusion ( ABL1, ABL2, PDGFRB, or CSF1R fusions), but lacking BCR::ABL1. These patients are predicted to be sensitive to ABL-class tyrosine kinase inhibitors, such as imatinib or dasatinib. Ph-like B-ALL is associated with male sex, older age, higher initial white blood cell (WBC) count, elevated end of induction (EOI) minimal residual disease (MRD), and poor outcome. The AALL1131 Dasatinib arm was designed to evaluate response to therapy following induction of patients with ABL-class fusion B-ALL, when given dasatinib continuously on a modified Berlin-Frankfurt-Münster (MBFM) backbone. Methods: Between February 2012 and March 2019, AALL1131 enrolled patients 1-30 years with newly diagnosed high risk (HR) B-ALL. AALL1131 was amended in August 2016, to include the Dasatinib arm for patients with ABL-class fusions involving ABL1, ABL2, PDGFRB, and CSF1R. Patients with Down Syndrome were not eligible for the Dasatinib arm. ABL-class fusion B-ALL patients with a predicted TKI-sensitive mutation were screened by low density array (LDA) PCR and confirmed by additional molecular testing. Following 4-drug induction, patients with HR B-ALL and ABL-class fusions received MBFM with dasatinib (60 mg/m 2, maximum 140 mg) daily from start of consolidation through end of maintenance. Dasatinib was held only for toxicity. Results: Twenty-two evaluable patients with HR B-ALL were non-randomly assigned to the Dasatinib arm. ABL-class 3' partners included ABL1 (n=4), ABL2 (n=4), PDGFRB (n=12), and CSF1R (n=2). Compared to all patients on AALL1131, patients treated on the Dasatinib arm were older (median age at diagnosis 14 versus 10 years, p=0.008), more often male (77% versus 56%, p=0.046), and had a trend towards an increased initial WBC (median WBC at diagnosis 44,000/µL versus 19,000/µL, p=0.086). Patients with ABL-class fusions had EOI MRD > 0.01% in 20 of 22 patients and available end of consolidation MRD >0.01% in 6 of 10 patients. Only 5 of 22 (22.7%) patients completed prescribed protocol therapy. Reasons for therapy discontinuation included induction failure (n=2), relapse (n=1), alternate therapy (n=1), determined to be in the patient's best interest (n=10), death (n=1), unknown (n=2). Compared to all patients on AALL1131, four-year disease-free survival was 52.5+18.1% versus 86.8+0.7% (p<0.0001) and overall survival 79.4+13.6% versus 89.2+0.4% (p<0.0001). Dasatinib was well tolerated with no unexpected treatment related toxicities. Conclusion: Patients with ABL-class fusions were more likely male, EOI MRD+, and had poorer outcomes. Seventy-seven percent of patients enrolled on the Dasatinib arm did not complete prescribed therapy. While dasatinib was well tolerated, treatment failures occurred early, indicating alternate strategies are needed.

PURPOSE Patients with Down syndrome (DS) and B-ALL experience increased rates of relapse, toxicity, and death. We report results for patients with DS B-ALL enrolled on Children's Oncology Group trials between 2003 and 2019. METHODS We analyzed data for DS (n = 743) and non-DS (n = 20,067) patients age 1-30 years on four B-ALL standard-risk (SR) and high-risk trials. RESULTS Patients with DS exhibited more frequent minimal residual disease (MRD) ≥0.01% at end induction (30.8% v 21.5%; P < .001). This difference persisted at end consolidation only in National Cancer Institute (NCI) high-risk patients (34.0% v 11.7%; P < .0001). Five-year event-free survival (EFS) and overall survival (OS) were significantly poorer for DS versus non-DS patients overall (EFS, 79.2% ± 1.6% v 87.5% ± 0.3%; P < .0001; OS, 86.8% ± 1.4% v 93.6% ± 0.2%; P < .0001), and within NCI SR and high-risk subgroups. Multivariable Cox regression analysis of the DS cohort for risk factors associated with inferior EFS identified age >10 years, white blood count >50 × 103/μL, and end-induction MRD ≥0.01%, but not cytogenetics or CRLF2 overexpression. Patients with DS demonstrated higher 5-year cumulative incidence of relapse (11.5% ± 1.2% v 9.1% ± 0.2%; P = .0008), death in remission (4.9% ± 0.8% v 1.7% ± 0.1%; P < .0001), and induction death (3.4% v 0.8%; P < .0001). Mucositis, infections, and hyperglycemia were significantly more frequent in all patients with DS, while seizures were more frequent in patients with DS on high-risk trials (4.1% v 1.8%; P = .005). CONCLUSION Patients with DS-ALL exhibit an increased rate of relapse and particularly of treatment-related mortality. Novel, less-toxic therapeutic strategies are needed to improve outcomes.

10520 Background: Outcomes for adolescents and young adults (AYAs) with acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) are superior with pediatric-inspired therapy. CALGB 10403, the first US adult cooperative group prospective trial using a pediatric-inspired augmented BFM (ABFM)-based regimen, demonstrated feasibility and improved survival. We examined differences in drug delivery and targeted toxicities in AYAs who received the same therapy on C10403 vs the Children’s Oncology Group (COG) study AALL1131. Methods: The proportion of AYAs receiving full dose (within 10% of protocol- specified) vincristine (VCR) and pegaspargase (PEG) during induction (IND), consolidation (CON), and delayed intensification (DI); the likelihood of selected grade ≥3 adverse events (AEs); and the impact of patient characteristics were compared in AYAs 16-30 years. Targeted AEs with analogous reporting requirements in both studies included hyperbilirubinemia, pancreatitis, sensory neuropathy, and GI/intracranial hemorrhage. Thrombosis, transaminitis and hyperglycemia were not comparably captured. Fisher’s Exact test and logistic regression models were used for analyses. Results: After excluding AYAs removed from study after induction, 87 AALL1131 AYAs (accrued 2012-2016) and 188 C10403 AYAs (accrued 2007-2012) were analyzed with median ages of 17 (16-26) vs 22 (17-30) years, p < 0.001. There was no difference in the intensity of VCR delivery during IND, but in CON and DI, AALL1131 AYAs were more likely to receive all specified VCR (93.1% vs 81.9%, p = 0.02; 92.7% vs 72.1%, p = 0.01). Women were less likely to receive all specified VCR (OR 0.57, 95% CI 0.34-0.94, p = 0.03), and overweight/obese AYAs were somewhat less likely to receive all VCR compared to those considered normal weight (OR 0.88 and 0.59, p = 0.09). More C10403 AYAs were obese/overweight compared to AALL1131 AYAs (p = 0.04). There were no significant differences in dosing of PEG during IND/CON, but in DI AALL1131 AYAs were more likely to receive both doses (75.6% vs 57.1%, p = 0.03). No patient variables impacted delivery of PEG. There was no significant difference in grade ≥3 toxicities captured similarly on both studies. Conclusions: AYAs enrolled on AALL1131 were more likely to receive all protocol-specified VCR and PEG compared to those on C10403. Selected AE rates were comparable, suggesting that older AYAs do not tolerate doses of VCR and PEG for reasons other than toxicity, with body habitus as one potential variable. Further analyses to compare dose density, toxicities, and outcomes experienced by younger AYAs versus older are ongoing.

Abstract Background: Children with DS and B-ALL have historically experienced excessive TRM, primarily from infection. Here we provide an interim report on TRM in children with DS and newly diagnosed B-ALL enrolled on Children's Oncology Group (COG) trials for NCI standard risk (SR) (AALL0932) and high risk (HR) B-ALL (AALL1131). Methods: As of 06/30/2015, 203 SR DS-ALL patients have completed Induction on AALL0932 with 146 receiving post-Induction treatment on AALL0932. Eighty-eight HR DS patients have completed Induction on AALL1131, with 80 receiving post-Induction treatment on AALL1131. An additional 26 SR DS patients with poor early response received post-Induction therapy on AALL1131. Adverse events were graded according to NCI CTCAE v4.0, with enhanced data collection for targeted toxicities including infectious toxicities, and enhanced supportive care recommendations. Results: Patient characteristics are summarized in Table 1. TRM on AALL0932 occurred during Induction in 2/203 (1.0%) and post-Induction in 3/146 (2.1%), compared to 17/5528 (0.3%) and 12/3119 (0.4%) in non-DS SR patients (Fisher exact p=0.14 for Induction and p=0.03 for post-Induction). TRM on AALL1131 occurred during Induction in 4/88 (4.5%) and post-Induction in 5/106 (4.7%), compared to 34/2116 (1.6%) and 13/1258 (1.0%) in non-DS AALL1131 patients (p=0.06 for Induction and p=0.01 for post-Induction). Timing, cause, and other circumstances surrounding TRM are provided in Table 2. Gram-negative organisms accounted for the majority of fatal bacterial infections in patients with HR DS-ALL. Conclusion: TRM continues to be higher on current COG trials for patients with DS-ALL compared to non-DS patients. Most of the toxic deaths occur during intensive treatment phases due to infection in the context of profound neutropenia. Patients with HR B-ALL have a higher incidence of toxic death, notably in patients over 15 years of age. Based on our findings, hospitalization and antimicrobial prophylaxis during intensive treatment phases should be considered in children with DS-ALL due to their increased risk of infection-related mortality. Table 1. Patient Characteristics AALL1131 AALL0932 DS-ALL Non-DS ALL DS-ALL Non-DS ALL N 117 2689 207 5619 Median Age at Diagnosis (Years) 10.5 10.3 4.8 4.5 Gender Male 62 1511 117 2981 Female 55 1178 90 2637 Table 2. Treatment-Related Mortality Case Characteristics Case Age Gender Treatment Phase Site of Infection Organism AALL1131 (High Risk) 1 15 F Induction D#29 (RER) Pneumonia, ARDS HMPV (pre-treatment) 2 21 F Induction D#29 (SER) Sepsis 3 17 F Induction D#22 (SER) Sepsis, typhlitis Escherichia coli 4 12 M Induction D#16 (RER) Sepsis, pneumonia (+baseline CHD, AV canal s/p repair 2003) Influenza B 5 19 M Consolidation D#18 Sepsis Citrobacter 6 2 F Delayed Intensification D#101 ARDS/capillary leak (+baseline CHD) Rhinovirus 7 15 F Delayed Intensification D#45 Sepsis, pneumonia Klebsiella, enterovirus, rhinovirus 8 27 M Delayed Intensification D#52 Sepsis Gram negative bacillus 9 14 M Delayed Intensification D#22 Sepsis AALL0932 (Standard Risk) 1 7.3 M Induction Febrile neutropenia, hypotension, cardiorespiratory failure None reported 2 3.0 F Induction Febrile neutropenia, sepsis, liver failure Viridans group Strepococcus coagulase negative staphylococcus HSV, EBV and HHV 3 3.4 M Consolidation Meningitis, brainstem infarction None reported 4 9.7 F Interim Maintenance I Sepsis, Stevens Johnson syndrome/TEN None reported 5 7.2 M Interim Maintenance II Death NOS None reported RER, rapid early responder; SER, slow early responder; CHD, congenital heart disease; AV, atrioventricular; ARDS, acute respiratory distress syndrome; HMPV, human metapneumovirus; TEN, toxic epidermal necrolysis; HSV, herpes simplex virus; EBV, Epstein-Barr virus; HHV, human herpesvirus. Disclosures Hunger: Sigma Tau: Consultancy; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Merck: Equity Ownership; Spectrum Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy.

AALL08P1 was designed to determine whether biweekly intensified pegaspargase (I-PEG) was feasible and safe in pediatric patients with newly diagnosed high-risk B-precursor lymphoblastic leukemia when given with Children’s Oncology Group hemiaugmented BFM therapy. High-risk average (HR-Avg) patients received standard pegaspargase dosing (6 doses), whereas high-risk high (HR-High) patients received I-PEG biweekly from the start of Consolidation until day 1 of Maintenance. Feasibility and safety were defined in advance as ≥65% of patients tolerating at least 8 doses of I-PEG and 90% requiring ≤49 weeks from day 1 of Consolidation to the initiation of Maintenance. Targeted toxicities included allergic reactions, anaphylaxis, pancreatitis, thrombosis, bleeding, central nervous system events, and sepsis. AALL08P1 enrolled 104 patients; 54 were classified as HR-Avg and 30 as HR-High after completion of induction therapy. Only 53% (16/30) of the HR-High patients received ≥8 total doses of I-PEG and 50% (15/30) took ≤49 weeks from start of Consolidation to the initiation of Maintenance. I-PEG did not significantly increase grade 2 to 5 targeted toxicities. I-PEG was not feasible or safe as defined in AALL08P1. Complete assessment of this regimen was limited due to removal of patients from I-PEG regimen and early closure of the study.