Norman, Aaron D.

BACKGROUNDThe 1996 National Cancer Institute Working Group (NCI‐WG 96) guidelines classified disease in individuals who had a B‐cell clone with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) immunophenotype as CLL if their absolute lymphocyte count was ≥5 × 109/L. The 2008 International Workshop on CLL guidelines (IWCLL 2008) classified disease as CLL if the absolute B‐cell count was ≥5 × 109/L or as monoclonal B‐cell lymphocytosis (MBL) if the absolute B‐cell count was <5 × 109/L. The objective of the current study of Olmsted County, Minnesota, was to assess the effects of these changes on incidence rates and presentation from 2000 to 2010.METHODSUsing diagnostic indices available through the Rochester Epidemiology Project and the Mayo CLL database, the authors identified all patients with newly diagnosed CLL and high‐count MBL from 2000 to 2010. Age‐specific and sex‐specific incidence rates were determined.RESULTSAccording to NCI‐WG 96 criteria, there were 115 patients with CLL and 8 patients with MBL during the period studied. Using the IWCLL 2008 classification, there were 79 patients with CLL and 40 patients with MBL. Rai stage distribution (low risk, intermediate risk, and high risk) using NCI‐WG 96 criteria was 60.9%, 33.9%, and 5.2%, respectively, compared with 43%, 49.4%, and 7.6%, respectively, using IWCLL 2008 criteria. The age‐adjusted and sex‐adjusted incidence rates (per 100,000) for CLL and MBL were 10.0 and 0.66, respectively, using NCI‐WG 96 criteria versus 6.8 and 3.5, respectively, using IWCLL 2008 criteria. The median time to treatment according to NCI‐WG 96 criteria was 9.2 years versus 6.5 years with IWCLL 2008 criteria.CONCLUSIONSUse of the IWCLL 2008 guidelines reduced the incidence of CLL, altered the distribution of initial Rai stage at diagnosis, and shortened the median time to treatment. Cancer 2014;120:2000–2005. © 2014 American Cancer Society.

Abstract Background: Our genome-wide association study (GWAS) of chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) identified 4 highly correlated intronic variants within the IRF8 gene that were associated with CLL. These results were further supported by a recent meta-analysis of our GWAS with two other GWAS of CLL, supporting the IRF8 gene as a strong candidate for CLL risk. Methods: To refine the genetic association of CLL risk, we conducted Sanger sequencing of IRF8 in 94 CLL cases and 96 controls. We then conducted fine mapping by genotyping 39 variants (of which 10 were identified from sequencing) in 745 CLL cases and 1,521 controls. We also assessed these associations with risk of other non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) subtypes. Results: The strongest association with CLL risk was observed with a common single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) located within the 3′ untranslated region (UTR) of IRF8 (rs1044873, log additive OR = 0.7, P = 1.81 × 10−6). This SNP was not associated with the other NHL subtypes (all P &gt; 0.05). Conclusions: We provide evidence that rs1044873 in the IRF8 gene accounts for the initial GWAS signal for CLL risk. This association appears to be unique to CLL with little support for association with other common NHL subtypes. Future work is needed to assess functional role of IRF8 in CLL etiology. Impact: These data provide support that a functional variant within the 3′UTR of IRF8 may be driving the GWAS signal seen on 16q24.1 for CLL risk. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 22(3); 461–6. ©2013 AACR.