2018
DOI: 10.1111/bjh.15460
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Guideline for the treatment of chronic lymphocytic leukaemia

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
29
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
1
1
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 30 publications
(30 citation statements)
references
References 106 publications
1
29
0
Order By: Relevance
“…According to most practice guidelines today, TP53 disruption remains the lone predictive biomarker in CLL [38][39][40][41] and should be analyzed prior to treatment initiation in all patients owing to the large body of evidence demonstrating that patients either do not respond to initial chemoimmunotherapy (CIT) or experience relapse soon after remission [42] (Table 2). The most comprehensive data addressing the predictive capacity of TP53 disruption comes from an analysis of the CLL-8 trial [43], a phase 3, randomized (1:1) study comparing treatment with fl a phase and cyclophosphamide (FC) or FC with rituximab (FCR) in 817 previously untreated patients in which Stilgenbauer et al, showed that patients with TP53 disruption experienced poorer clinical responses, minimal residual disease (MRD) negativity, progression-free survival (PFS) and OS after treatment with FC and FCR [44] and that anti-CD20 therapy added no OS benefit.…”
Section: Tp53 Disruptionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…According to most practice guidelines today, TP53 disruption remains the lone predictive biomarker in CLL [38][39][40][41] and should be analyzed prior to treatment initiation in all patients owing to the large body of evidence demonstrating that patients either do not respond to initial chemoimmunotherapy (CIT) or experience relapse soon after remission [42] (Table 2). The most comprehensive data addressing the predictive capacity of TP53 disruption comes from an analysis of the CLL-8 trial [43], a phase 3, randomized (1:1) study comparing treatment with fl a phase and cyclophosphamide (FC) or FC with rituximab (FCR) in 817 previously untreated patients in which Stilgenbauer et al, showed that patients with TP53 disruption experienced poorer clinical responses, minimal residual disease (MRD) negativity, progression-free survival (PFS) and OS after treatment with FC and FCR [44] and that anti-CD20 therapy added no OS benefit.…”
Section: Tp53 Disruptionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We support the use of FCR in younger, fit patients with M IGHV given its potential for long-term remission and we recommend targeted therapy with a novel pathway inhibitor in patients with UM IGHV with case-by-case determinations being made in the setting of older and less fit CLL patients. Society guideline recommendations for the analysis of IGHV gene mutational status can be found in Table 2 [38][39][40][41].…”
Section: Immunoglobulin Mutational Statusmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Reassessment at each pretreatment time point should be undertaken as clonal evolution can occur 24. As already stated, the assessment of del(17 p) by FISH is routinely performed.…”
Section: Current Testing Regimens In Routine Practicementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Disruption of TP53 either via deletion, mutation or both has also been shown to be a poor prognostic factor in CLL associated with primary refractoriness to chemo-immunotherapy, even if the aberration is in a small subclone [127,128]. In such cases, small molecular inhibitors targeting BTK, PI3K or BCL2 are preferred [129]. Deep sequencing using NGS panels can detect subclonal mutations, which may ultimately confer resistance to these inhibitors, many months before relapse, e.g.…”
Section: Chronic Lymphocytic Leukaemiamentioning
confidence: 99%