Current Hematologic Malignancy Reports

, Volume 5, Issue 4, pp 200–206

Prognostic Factors in Pediatric Acute Myeloid Leukemia



Acute myeloid leukemia (AML), a heterogeneous group of diseases with variable responses to the same therapy, comprises nearly a quarter of childhood acute leukemias. Although historically very few prognostic markers have been incorporated into therapeutic decision making in AML, recent advances in technology have enabled identification of numerous factors associated with disease outcome. This review provides a detailed analysis of most clinically relevant factors associated with disease outcome in childhood AML.


AML Children Cytogenetics Molecular Response Prognosis 


Papers of particular ineterest, published recently, have been highlighted as:• Of importance

  1. 1.
    De Angulo G, Yuen C, Palla SL, et al.: Absolute lymphocyte count is a novel prognostic indicator in ALL and AML: implications for risk stratification and future studies. Cancer 2008, 112:407–415.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    De Botton S, Coiteux V, Chevret S, et al.: Outcome of childhood acute promyelocytic leukemia with all-trans-retinoic acid and chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol 2004, 22:1404–1412.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Gamis AS, Woods WG, Alonzo TA, et al.: Increased age at diagnosis has a significantly negative effect on outcome in children with Down syndrome and acute myeloid leukemia: a report from the Children’s Cancer Group Study 2891. J Clin Oncol 2003, 21:3415–3422.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kaspers GJ, Zwaan CM: Pediatric acute myeloid leukemia: towards high-quality cure of all patients. Haematologica 2007, 92(11):1519–1532.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Meshinchi S, Arceci RJ: Prognostic factors and risk-based therapy in pediatric acute myeloid leukemia. Oncologist 2007, 12:341–355.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Creutzig U, Ritter J, Riehm H, et al.: Improved treatment results in childhood acute myelogenous leukemia: a report of the German Cooperative Study AML-BFM-78. Blood 1985, 65:298–304.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lange BJ, Smith FO, Feusner J, et al.: Outcomes in CCG-2961, a Children’s Oncology Group phase 3 trial for untreated pediatric acute myeloid leukemia: a report from the Children’s Oncology Group. Blood 2008, 111:1044–1053.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Aplenc R, Alonzo TA, Gerbing RB, et al.: Ethnicity and survival in childhood acute myeloid leukemia: a report from the Children’s Oncology Group. Blood 2006, 108:74–80.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Rubnitz JE, Lensing S, Razzouk BI, et al.: Effect of race on outcome of white and black children with acute myeloid leukemia: the St. Jude experience. Pediatr Blood Cancer 2007, 48:10–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Davies SM, Robison LL, Buckley JD, et al.: Glutathione S-transferase polymorphisms and outcome of chemotherapy in childhood acute myeloid leukemia. J Clin Oncol 2001, 19(5):1279–1287.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Damm F, Heuser M, Morgan M, et al.: Single nucleotide polymorphism in the mutational hotspot of WT1 predicts a favorable outcome in patients with cytogenetically normal acute myeloid leukemia. J Clin Oncol 2010, 28:578–585.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lange BJ, Gerbing RB, Feusner J, et al.: Mortality in overweight and underweight children with acute myeloid leukemia. JAMA 2005, 293:203–211.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Chessells JM, Harrison CJ, Kempski H, et al.: Clinical features, cytogenetics and outcome in acute lymphoblastic and myeloid leukaemia of infancy: report from the MRC Childhood Leukaemia Working Party. Leukemia 2002, 16:776–784.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Cheson BD, Bennett JM, Kopecky KJ, et al.: Revised recommendations of the International Working Group for Diagnosis, Standardization of Response Criteria, Treatment Outcomes, and Reporting Standards for Therapeutic Trials in Acute Myeloid Leukemia. J Clin Oncol 2003, 21:4642–4649.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Sievers EL, Lange BJ, Alonzo TA, et al.: Immunophenotypic evidence of leukemia after induction therapy predicts relapse: results from a prospective Children’s Cancer Group study of 252 patients with acute myeloid leukemia. Blood 2003, 101:3398–3406.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Grimwade D, Hills RK: Independent prognostic factors for AML outcome. Hematology Am Soc Hematol Educ Program 2009, 385–395.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Wheatley K, Burnett AK, Goldstone AH, et al.: A simple, robust, validated and highly predictive index for the determination of risk-directed therapy in acute myeloid leukaemia derived from the MRC AML 10 trial. United Kingdom Medical Research Council’s Adult and Childhood Leukaemia Working Parties. Br J Haematol 1999, 107:69–79.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Elliott MA, Litzow MR, Letendre LL, et al.: Early peripheral blood blast clearance during induction chemotherapy for acute myeloid leukemia predicts superior relapse-free survival. Blood 2007, 110:4172–4174.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Wells RJ, Arthur DC, Srivastava A, et al.: Prognostic variables in newly diagnosed children and adolescents with acute myeloid leukemia: Children’s Cancer Group Study 213. Leukemia 2002, 16:601–607.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Coustan-Smith E, Ribeiro RC, Rubnitz JE, et al.: Clinical significance of residual disease during treatment in childhood acute myeloid leukaemia. Br J Haematol 2003, 123:243–252.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Langebrake C, Creutzig U, Dworzak M, et al.: Residual disease monitoring in childhood acute myeloid leukemia by multiparameter flow cytometry: the MRD-AML-BFM Study Group. J Clin Oncol 2006, 24:3686–3692.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    • Meshinchi S, Alonzo T, Gerbing RB, et al.: Minimal residual disease detection by four-color multidimensional flow cytometry identifies pediatric AML patients at high risk of relapse [abstract]. Blood (ASH Annual Meeting Abstracts) 2007, 110:Abstract 1429. Four-color flow MRD is now being considered as an important method that will significantly change our future risk stratification and how we manage AML. Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Maurillo L, Buccisano F, Del Principe MI, et al.: Toward optimization of postremission therapy for residual disease-positive patients with acute myeloid leukemia. J Clin Oncol 2008, 26:4944–4951.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Avivi I, Rowe JM: Prognostic factors in acute myeloid leukemia. Curr Opin Hematol 2005, 12:62–67.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Grimwade D, Walker H, Oliver F, et al.: The importance of diagnostic cytogenetics on outcome in AML: analysis of 1,612 patients entered into the MRC AML 10 trial. The Medical Research Council Adult and Children’s Leukaemia Working Parties. Blood 1998, 92:2322–2333.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Hann IM, Webb DK, Gibson BE, et al.: MRC trials in childhood acute myeloid leukaemia. Ann Hematol 2004, 83(Suppl 1):S108–S112.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Hasle H, Alonzo TA, Auvrignon A, et al.: Monosomy 7 and deletion 7q in children and adolescents with acute myeloid leukemia: an international retrospective study. Blood 2007, 109:4641–4647.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Löwenberg B, Downing JR, Burnett A: Acute myeloid leukemia. N Engl J Med 1999, 341:1051–1062.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Breems DA, Van Putten WL, De Greef GE, et al.: Monosomal karyotype in acute myeloid leukemia: a better indicator of poor prognosis than a complex karyotype. J Clin Oncol 2008, 26:4791–4797.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Raimondi SC, Chang MN, Ravindranath Y, et al.: Chromosomal abnormalities in 478 children with acute myeloid leukemia: clinical characteristics and treatment outcome in a Cooperative Pediatric Oncology Group Study—POG 8821. Blood 1999, 94(11):3707–3716.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    • Balgobind BV, Raimondi SC, Harbott J, et al.: Novel prognostic subgroups in childhood 11q23/MLL-rearranged acute myeloid leukemia: results of an international retrospective study. Blood 2009, 114(12):2489–2496. This paper emphasizes our evolving knowledge of cytogenetics and molecular genetics and how these risk factors are better delineated through large cooperative studies. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Bacher U, Haferlach C, Kern W, et al.: Prognostic relevance of FLT3-TKD mutations in AML: the combination matters—an analysis of 3082 patients. Blood 2008, 111(5):2527–2537.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Mrozek K, Marcucci G, Paschka P, et al.: Clinical relevance of mutations and gene-expression changes in adult acute myeloid leukemia with normal cytogenetics: Are we ready for a prognostically prioritized molecular classification? Blood 2007, 109:431–448.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Meshinchi S, Alonzo TA, Stirewalt DL, et al.: Clinical implications of FLT3 mutations in pediatric AML. Blood 2006, 108:3654–3661.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Stone RM: Prognostic factors in AML in relation to (ab)normal karyotype. Best Pract Res Clin Haematol 2009, 22:523–528.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Hollink IH, Zwaan CM, Zimmermann M, et al.: Favorable prognostic impact of NPM1 gene mutations in childhood acute myeloid leukemia, with emphasis on cytogenetically normal AML. Leukemia 2009, 23(2):262–270.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Schiffer CA: Molecular characterization of AML: a significant advance or just another prognostic factor? Best Pract Res Clin Haematol 2008, 21:621–628.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Frohling S, Schlenk RF, Stolze I, et al.: CEBPA mutations in younger adults with acute myeloid leukemia and normal cytogenetics: prognostic relevance and analysis of cooperating mutations. J Clin Oncol 2004, 22:624–633.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Marcucci G, Mrozek K, Ruppert AS, et al.: Prognostic factors and outcome of core binding factor acute myeloid leukemia patients with t(8;21) differ from those of patients with inv(16): a Cancer and Leukemia Group B study. J Clin Oncol 2005, 23:5705–5717.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Ho PA, Alonzo TA, Gerbing RB, et al.: Prevalence and prognostic implications of CEBPA mutations in pediatric acute myeloid leukemia (AML): a report from the Children’s Oncology Group. Blood 2009, 113:6558–6566.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Noronha SA, Farrar JE, Alonzo TA, et al.: WT1 expression at diagnosis does not predict survival in pediatric AML. Pediatr Blood Cancer 2009, 53:1136–1139.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Paschka P, Marcucci G, Ruppert AS, et al.: Wilms’ tumor 1 gene mutations independently predict poor outcome in adults with cytogenetically normal acute myeloid leukemia: a Cancer and Leukemia Group B study. J Clin Oncol 2008, 26:4595–4602.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Gaidzik VI, Schlenk RF, Moschny S, et al.: Prognostic impact of WT1 mutations in cytogenetically normal acute myeloid leukemia: a study of the German-Austrian AML Study Group. Blood 2009, 113(19):4505–4511.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Pollard JA, Zeng R, Ho P, et al.: Prevalence and prognostic implications of WT1 mutations in pediatric AML: a report from Children’s Oncology Group [abstract]. Blood (ASH Annual Meeting Abstracts) 2008, 112:Abstract 143.Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Cairoli R, Beghini A, Grillo G, et al.: Prognostic impact of c-KIT mutations in core binding factor leukemias: an Italian retrospective study. Blood 2006, 107:3463–3468.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Shimada A, Taki T, Tabuchi K, et al.: KIT mutations, and not FLT3 internal tandem duplication, are strongly associated with a poor prognosis in pediatric acute myeloid leukemia with t(8;21): a study of the Japanese Childhood AML Cooperative Study Group. Blood 2006, 107:1806–1809.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Paschka P, Marcucci G, Ruppert AS, et al.: Adverse prognostic significance of KIT mutations in adult acute myeloid leukemia with inv(16) and t(8;21): a Cancer and Leukemia Group B Study. J Clin Oncol 2006, 24:3904–3911.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Paschka P, Du J, Schlenk RF, et al.: Type and number of secondary molecular lesions improve outcome prediction in acute myeloid leukemia (AML) with inv(16) or t(16;16): a study of the German-Austrian AML Study Group (AMLSG) [abstract]. Blood (ASH Annual Meeting Abstracts) 2009, 114:Abstract 824.Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    • Pollard JA, Alonzo TA, Gerbing RB: Prevalence and prognostic significance of KIT mutations in pediatric patients with core binding factor AML enrolled on serial pediatric cooperative trials for de novo AML. Blood 2010, 115(12):2372–2379. These data emphasize that one needs to validate initial findings (ie, they need to be generalizable to pediatric patients and they need to be reproducible) before incorporating them into stratification and therapeutic decisions. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Children’s Mercy HospitalKansas CityUSA
  2. 2.Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research CenterSeattleUSA

Personalised recommendations