Considerable progress has been made in the treatment of acute myeloid leukemia (AML). However, current therapeutic results are still unsatisfactory in untreated high-risk patients and poorer in those with primary refractory or relapsed disease. In older patients, reluctance by clinicians to treat unfit patients, higher AML cell resistance related to more frequent adverse karyotype and/or precedent myelodysplastic syndrome, and preferential involvement of chemorefractory early hemopoietic precursors in the pathogenesis of the disease further account for poor prognosis, with median survival lower than six months. A general agreement exists concerning the administration of aggressive salvage therapy in young adults followed by allogeneic stem cell transplantation; on the contrary, different therapeutic approaches varying in intensity, from conventional salvage chemotherapy based on intermediate–high-dose cytarabine to best supportive care, are currently considered in the relapsed, older AML patient population. Either patients’ characteristics or physicians’ attitudes count toward the process of clinical decision making. In addition, several new drugs with clinical activity described as “promising” in uncontrolled single-arm studies failed to improve long-term outcomes when tested in larger randomized clinical trials. Recently, new agents have been approved and are expected to consistently improve the clinical outcome for selected genomic subgroups, and research is in progress in other molecular settings. While relapsed AML remains a tremendous challenge to both patients and clinicians, knowledge of the molecular pathogenesis of the disease is fast in progress, potentially leading to personalized therapy in most patients.

The Bcl-2/Bcl-xL/Bax and the Ras/Raf/MEK/ERK (MAPK) pathways are often deregulated in many human cancers and especially in acute lymphoblastic leukemia and acute myeloid leukemia. A result of molecular alterations of these pathways is uncontrolled cell growth and survival, ultimately resulting in oncogenic transformation and progression. Aberrant expression of Bcl-2/Bax and MAPK can lead to therapeutic resistance. In this review, the Bcl-2 and MAPK pathways are analyzed, focusing the attention on their molecular alterations, and the complex interactions between these signaling cascades are also analyzed. The observation that both MAPK and Bcl-2/Bax signaling play a central role in the pathogenesis of human cancer suggests that this kinase cascade represents a novel opportunity for the development of new anticancer targeted therapies designed to be less toxic than conventional chemotherapy. The evidence that they are often implicated in sensitivity and resistance to leukemia therapy suggests that characterization of the cancer genome may offer personalized cancer genomic information that can lead to the formulation of much more effective personalized therapy.

Central nervous system (CNS) relapse of mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) is a rare phenomenon with dismal prognosis, where no standard therapy exists. Since the covalent Bruton tyrosine kinase (BTK) inhibitor ibrutinib is effective in relapsed/refractory MCL and penetrates the blood–brain barrier (BBB), on behalf of Fondazione Italiana Linfomi and European Mantle Cell Lymphoma Network we performed a multicenter retrospective international study to investigate the outcomes of patients treated with ibrutinib or chemoimmunotherapy. In this observational study, we recruited patients with MCL with CNS involvement at relapse who received CNS-directed therapy between 2000 and 2019. The primary objective was to compare the overall survival (OS) of patients treated with ibrutinib or BBB crossing chemotherapy. A propensity score based on a multivariable binary regression model was applied to balance treatment cohorts. Eighty-eight patients were included. The median age at study entry was 65 years (range, 39-87), 76% were males, and the median time from lymphoma diagnosis to CNS relapse was 16 months (range, 1-122). Patients were treated with ibrutinib (n = 29, ibrutinib cohort), BBB crossing chemotherapy (ie, high-dose methotrexate ± cytarabine; n = 29, BBB cohort), or miscellaneous treatments (n = 30, other therapy cohort). Both median OS (16.8 vs 4.4 months; P = .007) and median progression-free survival (PFS) (13.1 vs 3.0 months; P = .009) were superior in the ibrutinib cohort compared with the BBB cohort. Multivariable Cox regression model revealed that ibrutinib therapeutic choice was the strongest independent favorable predictive factor for both OS (hazard ratio [HR], 6.8; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.2-21.3; P < .001) and PFS (HR, 4.6; 95% CI, 1.7-12.5; P = .002), followed by CNS progression of disease (POD) >24 months from first MCL diagnosis (HR for death, 2.4; 95% CI, 1.1-5.3; P = .026; HR for death or progression, 2.3; 95% CI, 1.1-4.6; P = .023). The addition of intrathecal (IT) chemotherapy to systemic CNS-directed therapy was not associated with superior OS (P = .502) as the morphological variant (classical vs others, P = .118). Ibrutinib was associated with superior survival compared with BBB-penetrating chemotherapy in patients with CNS relapse of MCL and should be considered as a therapeutic option.

No abstract

For more than 30 years after its introduction, the combination of an anthracycline, usually daunorubicin, given for 3 days with continuous infusion of cytarabine for 7 days (3 + 7) has been the standard induction regimen for patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML). In the last decade, there has been a progressive understanding of the molecular pathogenesis of the disease, which has led to discovery of potential therapeutic targets, resulting in selective treatment approaches aimed at rational and personalized treatment strategies. In the last 2 years, different new agents for AML have become widely available for newly diagnosed or relapsing/refractory patients, and others are object of clinical investigation. For most treatment‐naïve patients, it is now evident that standard 3 + 7 represents undertreatment in that the addition of new compounds results in better quality of response and improved survival. Hopefully, within few years, no patients with AML will be given standard 3 + 7 in the daily practice and a personalized approach targeting driving mutations will be widely applied.