Skip to main content
Top

15-11-2016 | Acute leukemia | Book chapter | Article

Diagnostic criteria, classification, and prognosis of acute leukemias

Author: Klaus Metzeler

The currently accepted classification of acute leukemias was published in 2008 as part of the 4th edition of the World Health Organization (WHO) classification of tumors of hematopoietic and lymphoid tissues [1]. A revision has recently been published [2]. The aim of the WHO classification is to define distinct, non-overlapping, and reproducible entities based on clinical features, morphology, immunophenotype, and genetic information. It is important to note that the WHO system is aimed at assigning mutually exclusive diagnostic categories, and not primarily intended for risk stratification or treatment selection. Thus, additional classification systems are useful in clinical practice.

Literature
  1. Swerdlow SH, Campo E, Harris NL, et al, eds. WHO Classification of Tumours of Haematopoietic and Lymphoid Tissues. 4th edn. Lyon, France: IARC; 2008.
  2. Arber DA, Orazi A, Hasserjian R, et al. The 2016 revision to the World Health Organization (WHO) classification of myeloid neoplasms and acute leukemia. Blood. 2016;127:2391-2405.
  3. Miesner M, Haferlach C, Bacher U, et al. Multilineage dysplasia (MLD) in acute myeloid leukemia (AML) correlates with MDS-related cytogenetic abnormalities and a prior history of MDS or MDS/MPN but has no independent prognostic relevance: a comparison of 408 cases classified as “AML not otherwise specified” (AML-NOS) or “AML with myelodysplasia-related changes” (AML-MRC). Blood. 2010;116:2742-2751.
  4. Lindsley RC, Mar BG, Mazzola E, et al. Acute myeloid leukemia ontogeny is defined by distinct somatic mutations. Blood. 2015;125:1367-1376.
  5. Kayser S, Dohner K, Krauter J, et al. The impact of therapy-related acute myeloid leukemia (AML) on outcome in 2853 adult patients with newly diagnosed AML. Blood. 2011;117:2137-2145.
  6. Mauritzson N, Albin M, Rylander L, et al. Pooled analysis of clinical and cytogenetic features in treatment-related and de novo adult acute myeloid leukemia and myelodysplastic syndromes based on a consecutive series of 761 patients analyzed 1976-1993 and on 5098 unselected cases reported in the literature 1974-2001. Leukemia. 2002;16:2366-2378.
  7. Walter RB, Othus M, Burnett AK, et al. Significance of FAB subclassification of “acute myeloid leukemia, NOS” in the 2008 WHO classification: analysis of 5848 newly diagnosed patients. Blood. 2013;121:2424-2431.
  8. Vardiman JW, Thiele J, Arber DA, et al. The 2008 revision of the World Health Organization (WHO) classification of myeloid neoplasms and acute leukemia: rationale and important changes. Blood. 2009;114:937-951.
  9. Bakst RL, Tallman MS, Douer D, Yahalom J. How I treat extramedullary acute myeloid leukemia. Blood. 2011;118:3785-3793.
  10. McGregor S, McNeer J, Gurbuxani S. Beyond the 2008 World Health Organization classification: the role of the hematopathology laboratory in the diagnosis and management of acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Semin Diagn Pathol. 2012;29:2-11.
  11. Roberts KG, Morin RD, Zhang J, et al. Genetic alterations activating kinase and cytokine receptor signaling in high-risk acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Cancer Cell. 2012;22:153-166.
  12. Bene MC, Castoldi G, Knapp W, et al. Proposals for the immunological classification of acute leukemias. European Group for the Immunological Characterization of Leukemias (EGIL). Leukemia. 1995;9:1783-1786.
  13. Grimwade D, Hills RK, Moorman AV, et al. Refinement of cytogenetic classification in acute myeloid leukemia: determination of prognostic significance of rare recurring chromosomal abnormalities among 5876 younger adult patients treated in the United Kingdom Medical Research Council trials. Blood. 2010;116:354-365.
  14. Mrozek K, Marcucci G, Nicolet D, et al. Prognostic significance of the European LeukemiaNet standardized system for reporting cytogenetic and molecular alterations in adults with acute myeloid leukemia. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30:4515-4523.
  15. Dohner H, Estey EH, Amadori S, et al. Diagnosis and management of acute myeloid leukemia in adults: recommendations from an international expert panel, on behalf of the European LeukemiaNet. Blood. 2010;115:453-474.
  16. Dufour A, Schneider F, Metzeler K, et al. Acute myeloid leukemia with biallelic CEBPA gene mutations and normal karyotype represents a distinct genetic entity associated with a favorable clinical outcome. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28:570-577.
  17. Dohner H, Weisdorf DJ, Bloomfield CD. Acute Myeloid Leukemia. N Engl J Med. 2015;373:1136-1152.
  18. Roug AS, Hansen MC, Nederby L, Hokland P. Diagnosing and following adult patients with acute myeloid leukaemia in the genomic age. Br J Haematol. 2014;167:162-176.
  19. Haferlach T. How does one work-up an acute myeloid leukemia patient in the molecular era? http://​learningcenter.​ehaweb.​org/​eha/​2015/​20th/​103570/​torsten.​haferlach.​how.​does.​one. work.up.an.aml.patient.in.the.molecular.era.html?f=m6t1576. Accessed August 12, 2016.
  20. Klepin HD. Geriatric perspective: how to assess fitness for chemotherapy in acute myeloid leukemia. Hematology Am Soc Hematol Educ Program. 2014;2014:8-13.
  21. Krug U, Rollig C, Koschmieder A, et al. Complete remission and early death after intensive chemotherapy in patients aged 60 years or older with acute myeloid leukaemia: a web-based application for prediction of outcomes. Lancet. 2010;376:2000-2008.
  22. Grimwade D, Freeman SD. Defining minimal residual disease in acute myeloid leukemia:which platforms are ready for “prime time”? Blood. 2014;124:3345-3355.
  23. Ivey A, Hills RK, Simpson MA, et al. Assessment of minimal residual disease in standard-risk AML. N Engl J Med. 2016;374:422-433.