Summary of Reports of Incidence of TEL/AML1Fusion in Newly Diagnosed Pediatric Patients
| Author . | Type of Analysis . | Rx Reg. . | All Pts* . | B Lineage . | TA+ (% B-cell) . | TA+ Relapse . |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| McLean 3 | R | DFCI | 81 | 68 | 22 (32%) | 0 |
| 80-01 | ||||||
| 81-01 | ||||||
| 85-01 | ||||||
| 87-01 | ||||||
| Shurtleff12 | R/P | SJCRH | 160 | 126 | 35 (28%)† | Not reported |
| Romana10 | R | EORTC | 36 | 36 | 8 (22%) | 2 |
| Kobayashi5 | R | Saitama, Japan | 93 | 75 | 9 (12%) | 2 |
| Raynaud9 | R | France | 66 | 50 | 17 (34%)‡ | 3 |
| Liang6 | R | Taiwan | 41 | 36 | 7 (19%) | 0 |
| POG | ||||||
| Nakao7 | R | CCLSG | ||||
| Japan | 108 | 70 | 11 (16%) | 1 | ||
| Cayuela16 | R | FRALLE 93 | 76 | 69 | 16 (23%) | Not reported |
| Borkhardt4 | R | BFM-90 | ||||
| AEIOP-91 | 342 | 337 | 99 (29%) | 3 | ||
| P | BFM-95 | |||||
| AEIOP-95 | 334 | 2801-153 | 63 (22%) | Not reported | ||
| Rubnitz11 | R | SJCRH XI | 188 | 188 | 44 (23%)1-155 | 3 |
| SJCRH XII | ||||||
| Lanza13 | R/P | AEIOP | 51 | Not reported | 11 (22%) | 2 |
| Author . | Type of Analysis . | Rx Reg. . | All Pts* . | B Lineage . | TA+ (% B-cell) . | TA+ Relapse . |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| McLean 3 | R | DFCI | 81 | 68 | 22 (32%) | 0 |
| 80-01 | ||||||
| 81-01 | ||||||
| 85-01 | ||||||
| 87-01 | ||||||
| Shurtleff12 | R/P | SJCRH | 160 | 126 | 35 (28%)† | Not reported |
| Romana10 | R | EORTC | 36 | 36 | 8 (22%) | 2 |
| Kobayashi5 | R | Saitama, Japan | 93 | 75 | 9 (12%) | 2 |
| Raynaud9 | R | France | 66 | 50 | 17 (34%)‡ | 3 |
| Liang6 | R | Taiwan | 41 | 36 | 7 (19%) | 0 |
| POG | ||||||
| Nakao7 | R | CCLSG | ||||
| Japan | 108 | 70 | 11 (16%) | 1 | ||
| Cayuela16 | R | FRALLE 93 | 76 | 69 | 16 (23%) | Not reported |
| Borkhardt4 | R | BFM-90 | ||||
| AEIOP-91 | 342 | 337 | 99 (29%) | 3 | ||
| P | BFM-95 | |||||
| AEIOP-95 | 334 | 2801-153 | 63 (22%) | Not reported | ||
| Rubnitz11 | R | SJCRH XI | 188 | 188 | 44 (23%)1-155 | 3 |
| SJCRH XII | ||||||
| Lanza13 | R/P | AEIOP | 51 | Not reported | 11 (22%) | 2 |
Review of published reports assessing incidence and prognosis ofTEL/AML1 rearrangement at de novo diagnosis of ALL.
Abbreviations: R, retrospective; P, prospective; Rx reg., treatment regimen; DFCI, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute; SJCRH, St. Jude Childrens Research Hospital; EORTC, European Organization for Research & Treatment of Cancer—Childhood Leukemia Cooperative Group; Taiwan POG, Taiwan Pediatric Oncology Group; CCLSG, Children’s Cancer and Leukemia Study Group, Japan; BFM, Berlin-Frankfurt-Muenster; AEIOP, Associazonie Italiana Ematologia Oncologia Pediatrica; TA+,TEL/AML1-positive; TA−, TEL/AML1negative.
When available, “All pts” data are given as the number of pediatric ALL patients.
Three additional patients had TEL rearrangement but were negative for TEL/AML1 by RT-PCR.
One additional patient had TEL rearrangement but was negative for TEL/AML1 by FISH or RT/PCR.
This number was derived by subtracting T-cell, mature B, and unknown immunophenotyped ALL from the total 334 patients analyzed.
Four additional patients had TEL rearrangement but three did not have samples for RT-PCR and one was negative forTEL/AML1 by RT-PCR. The remaining 44 were RT-PCR positive for TEL/AML1. Additionally, 38 of these 48 patients were previously reported by Shurtleff et al.12