Font Size
A
A
A

Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia Treatment (Professional) (cont.)

Stage I, II, III, and IV Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia

Note: Some citations in the text of this section are followed by a level of evidence. The PDQ editorial boards use a formal ranking system to help the reader judge the strength of evidence linked to the reported results of a therapeutic strategy. (Refer to the PDQ summary on Levels of Evidence for more information.)

Treatment options:

Several decades of large, randomized, prospective trials of previously untreated patients have demonstrated statistically significant improvements in response rates, event-free survival, and progression-free survival (PFS) with comparison of combinations of drugs versus single-agent alkylators,[1,2] but only two trials have shown statistically significant improvement in overall survival (OS).[3,4]

The first trial, a comparison of chlorambucil versus fludarabine, after 15 years of median follow-up, showed improved median OS for patients on the fludarabine regimen at 63 months versus 59 months (P = .04), and an improved percentage of patients were alive at 8 years (31% vs. 19%, P = .04).[3,5][Level of evidence: 1iiA] The second trial, which had 817 patients, compared FCR (fludarabine + cyclophosphamide + rituximab) versus FC (fludarabine + cyclophosphamide) with a median follow-up of 38 months and showed improved OS at 3 years for the rituximab combination (i.e., 87% vs. 83%, P = .01.[4][Level of evidence: 1iiA] Yet neither fludarabine nor FCR has been compared in a randomized study against watchful waiting in asymptomatic or minimally affected patients.

The improvements in response rates from more intensive regimens have maximized the clearance of minimal residual disease. The surrogate endpoint of such clearance of residual disease, however, has not been shown to improve survival in a randomized prospective trial; the necessary study would take patients who fail to completely clear the marrow with induction therapy and randomly assign them to further alternative treatment versus the same treatment later at relapse, looking at OS as the primary endpoint.[1,2] The sequencing of the following treatment options cannot be determined from the current set of completed clinical trials. When patients become symptomatic or require treatment, FCR has become the most frequently chosen option outside of a clinical trial, mostly on the basis of the previously described prospective study.[4]

Note: These options are roughly ordered by level of toxic effects, starting with the least toxic options.

  1. Observation in asymptomatic or minimally affected patients.[6] Outside of the context of a clinical trial, treatment for asymptomatic or minimally affected patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) is observation. No data exist as yet to suggest any harm with a delay in therapy until the patient becomes symptomatic or develops serious cytopenias despite growth factor support. Because the rate of progression may vary from patient to patient, with long periods of stability and sometimes spontaneous regressions, frequent and careful observation is required to monitor the clinical course.
  2. Rituximab, a murine anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody.[7,8,9,10,11] When used alone, higher doses of rituximab or increased frequency or duration of therapy is required for comparable responses to those seen for other indolent lymphomas.
  3. Ofatumomab is a human anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody.[12] A trial of 138 patients previously treated with fludarabine and alemtuzumab showed overall response rates around 50% in a patient group that historically showed less than 20% responses to rituximab.[12][Level of evidence: 3iiiDiv]
  4. Oral alkylating agents with or without corticosteroids.[13] The French Cooperative Group on CLL randomly assigned 1,535 patients with previously untreated stage A disease to receive either chlorambucil or no immediate treatment and found no survival advantage for chlorambucil.[14][Level of evidence: 1iiA] A meta-analysis of six trials of immediate versus deferred therapy with chlorambucil (including the aforementioned trial by the French Cooperative Group) showed no difference in OS at 10 years.[6][Level of evidence: 1iiA]
  5. Fludarabine, 2-chlorodeoxyadenosine, or pentostatin as seen in the CLB-9011 trial, for example.[15,16,17,18,19,20]

    Several randomized trials have compared the purine analogs with chlorambucil; with cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and prednisone; or with cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (CHOP) in previously untreated patients.[5,21,22,23,24] All of these trials showed higher or equivalent response rates for the purine analog and most showed an improvement in PFS, with one reaching significance in OS favoring fludarabine.[3,21,22,23,24,25][Level of evidence: 1iiDiii] A comparison of chlorambucil versus fludarabine, after 15 years' median follow-up, showed patients with improved median OS with fludarabine at 63 versus 59 months (P = .04) and an improved percentage of patients alive at 8 years (31% vs. 19%, P = .04).[3][Level of evidence: 1iiA] All of the trials demonstrated higher toxic effects with the purine analogs, especially granulocytopenic infections, herpes infections, autoimmune hemolytic anemia, and persistent thrombocytopenia.[26] The increased risk of infection may persist for months or years after treatment with a purine analog.[25,27] Although empiric evidence is lacking, some investigators recommend prophylaxis with trimethoprim-sulfa during therapy and for 6 to 12 months afterwards to prevent pneumocystis infection. In a similar way, other investigators employ prophylaxis (e.g., acyclovir) for the herpes viruses.[27] Purine analogs cause less hair loss or nausea than combination chemotherapy, including alkylators and anthracyclines.[23]

  6. Bendamustine.

    Bendamustine is a cytotoxic agent with bifunctional properties of an alkylator and a purine analogue.[28] In previously treated and untreated patients, bendamustine with rituximab has shown response rates around 70% to 90%.[29,30][Level of evidence: 3iiiDiii]

    In a randomized comparison with chlorambucil in 319 previously treated patients, bendamustine showed a better response rate (68% vs. 31%, P < .0001) and PFS (21.6 months vs. 8 months) with a median follow-up of 35 months.[31][Level of evidence: 1iiDiii] The German CLL Study Group is comparing bendamustine plus rituximab versus FCR as first-line therapy in patients with CLL who require therapy.[29]

  7. Combination chemotherapy.

    A trial of 817 patients comparing FCR versus FC with a median follow-up of 38 months showed improved OS at 3 years for the rituximab combination (87% vs. 83%, P = .01).[4][Level of evidence: 1iiA] FCR has never been compared to watchful waiting up front in asymptomatic or minimally affected patients. The improvements in response rates from more intensive regimens have maximized the clearance of minimal residual disease (MRD). But the surrogate endpoint of MRD clearance has not been proven to be a valid surrogate for improved survival in a randomized prospective trial; the necessary study would take patients who fail to completely clear the marrow with induction therapy and randomly assign them to further alternative treatment versus the same treatment later at relapse looking at OS as the primary endpoint.[1,2]

    • Fludarabine plus cyclophosphamide plus rituximab.[4,32,33,34]
    • Fludarabine plus rituximab as seen in the CLB-9712 and CLB-9011 trials.[35]
    • Fludarabine plus cyclophosphamide versus fludarabine plus cyclophosphamide plus rituximab.[4,36]
    • Pentostatin plus cyclophosphamide plus rituximab as seen in the MAYO-MC0183 trial, for example.[37,38]
    • CVP: cyclophosphamide plus vincristine plus prednisone.[39]
    • CHOP: cyclophosphamide plus doxorubicin plus vincristine plus prednisone.[40]
    • Fludarabine plus cyclophosphamide versus fludarabine as seen in the E2997 trial [NCT00003764] and the LRF-CLL4 trial, for example.[41,42]
    • Fludarabine plus chlorambucil as seen in the CLB-9011 trial, for example.[43]

    A meta-analysis of ten trials comparing combination chemotherapy (before the availability of rituximab) to chlorambucil alone showed no difference in OS at 5 years.[6][Level of evidence: 1iiA]

  8. Involved-field radiation therapy. Relatively low doses of radiation therapy will affect an excellent response for months or years. Sometimes radiation therapy to one nodal area or the spleen will result in abscopal effect (i.e., the shrinkage of lymph node tumors in untreated sites).
  9. Alemtuzumab, the monoclonal antibody directed at CD52, shows activity in the setting of chemotherapy-resistant disease or high-risk untreated patients with 17p deletion or p53 mutation.[44,45] A phase II trial in previously untreated patients of six cycles of fludarabine plus rituximab followed by subcutaneous alemtuzumab resulted in excessive infectious toxicities and death with no apparent improvement in efficacy.[46][Level of evidence: 3iiiDiv] Another phase II trial in heavily pretreated patients utilized a combination of cyclophosphamide, fludarabine, rituximab, and intravenous alemtuzumab; excess infectious toxicities and death suggested no benefits for PFS or OS.[47][Level of evidence: 3iiiDiv] The subcutaneous route of delivery is preferred to the intravenous route in patients because of the similar efficacy and decreased adverse effects, including less acute allergic reactions that were shown in some nonrandomized reports.[48,49,50]. Profound and long-lasting immunosuppression has been seen, which mandates monitoring for reactivation of cytomegalovirus and prophylaxis for pneumocystis and herpes virus infections.[51,52]
  10. Bone marrow and peripheral stem cell transplantations are under clinical evaluation.[53,54,55,56,57,58] Patients with adverse prognostic factors are very likely to die from CLL. These types of patients are candidates for clinical trials that employ high-dose chemotherapy and immunotherapy with autologous peripheral stem cell support or myeloablative and nonmyeloablative allogeneic peripheral stem cell transplantation.[53,54,55,56,57,58,59,60,61,62,63,64,65,66] Although most patients who attain complete remission after autologous stem cell transplantation eventually relapse, a survival plateau for allogeneic stem cell support suggests an additional graft-versus-leukemia effect.[66]

Current Clinical Trials

Check for U.S. clinical trials from NCI's list of cancer clinical trials that are now accepting patients with stage I chronic lymphocytic leukemia, stage II chronic lymphocytic leukemia, stage III chronic lymphocytic leukemia and stage IV chronic lymphocytic leukemia. The list of clinical trials can be further narrowed by location, drug, intervention, and other criteria.

General information about clinical trials is also available from the NCI Web site.

References:

  1. Developments in the treatment of lymphoproliferative disorders: rising to the new challenges of CLL therapy. A report of a symposium presented during the 48th American Society of Hematology Annual Meeting and Exposition, December 8, 2006, Orlando, Florida. Clin Adv Hematol Oncol 5 (3 Suppl 5): 1-14; quiz 15-6, 2007.
  2. Montserrat E, Moreno C, Esteve J, et al.: How I treat refractory CLL. Blood 107 (4): 1276-83, 2006.
  3. Rai KR, Peterson, Frederick R. Appelbaum BL, Appelbaum FR, et al.: Long-term survival analysis of the North American Intergroup Study C9011 comparing fludarabine (F) and chlorambucil (C) in previously untreated patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). [Abstract] Blood 114 (22): A-536, 2009.
  4. Hallek M, Fischer K, Fingerle-Rowson G, et al.: Addition of rituximab to fludarabine and cyclophosphamide in patients with chronic lymphocytic leukaemia: a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial. Lancet 376 (9747): 1164-74, 2010.
  5. Rai KR, Peterson BL, Appelbaum FR, et al.: Fludarabine compared with chlorambucil as primary therapy for chronic lymphocytic leukemia. N Engl J Med 343 (24): 1750-7, 2000.
  6. Chemotherapeutic options in chronic lymphocytic leukemia: a meta-analysis of the randomized trials. CLL Trialists' Collaborative Group. J Natl Cancer Inst 91 (10): 861-8, 1999.
  7. Mavromatis B, Cheson BD: Monoclonal antibody therapy of chronic lymphocytic leukemia. J Clin Oncol 21 (9): 1874-81, 2003.
  8. O'Brien SM, Kantarjian H, Thomas DA, et al.: Rituximab dose-escalation trial in chronic lymphocytic leukemia. J Clin Oncol 19 (8): 2165-70, 2001.
  9. Byrd JC, Murphy T, Howard RS, et al.: Rituximab using a thrice weekly dosing schedule in B-cell chronic lymphocytic leukemia and small lymphocytic lymphoma demonstrates clinical activity and acceptable toxicity. J Clin Oncol 19 (8): 2153-64, 2001.
  10. Hainsworth JD, Litchy S, Barton JH, et al.: Single-agent rituximab as first-line and maintenance treatment for patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia or small lymphocytic lymphoma: a phase II trial of the Minnie Pearl Cancer Research Network. J Clin Oncol 21 (9): 1746-51, 2003.
  11. Castro JE, Sandoval-Sus JD, Bole J, et al.: Rituximab in combination with high-dose methylprednisolone for the treatment of fludarabine refractory high-risk chronic lymphocytic leukemia. Leukemia 22 (11): 2048-53, 2008.
  12. Wierda WG, Kipps TJ, Mayer J, et al.: Ofatumumab as single-agent CD20 immunotherapy in fludarabine-refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia. J Clin Oncol 28 (10): 1749-55, 2010.
  13. A randomized clinical trial of chlorambucil versus COP in stage B chronic lymphocytic leukemia. The French Cooperative Group on Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia. Blood 75 (7): 1422-5, 1990.
  14. Dighiero G, Maloum K, Desablens B, et al.: Chlorambucil in indolent chronic lymphocytic leukemia. French Cooperative Group on Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia. N Engl J Med 338 (21): 1506-14, 1998.
  15. O'Brien S, Kantarjian H, Beran M, et al.: Results of fludarabine and prednisone therapy in 264 patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia with multivariate analysis-derived prognostic model for response to treatment. Blood 82 (6): 1695-700, 1993.
  16. Tallman MS, Hakimian D, Zanzig C, et al.: Cladribine in the treatment of relapsed or refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia. J Clin Oncol 13 (4): 983-8, 1995.
  17. Saven A, Lemon RH, Kosty M, et al.: 2-Chlorodeoxyadenosine activity in patients with untreated chronic lymphocytic leukemia. J Clin Oncol 13 (3): 570-4, 1995.
  18. Dillman RO, Mick R, McIntyre OR: Pentostatin in chronic lymphocytic leukemia: a phase II trial of Cancer and Leukemia group B. J Clin Oncol 7 (4): 433-8, 1989.
  19. Morrison VA, Rai KR, Peterson BL, et al.: Impact of therapy with chlorambucil, fludarabine, or fludarabine plus chlorambucil on infections in patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia: Intergroup Study Cancer and Leukemia Group B 9011. J Clin Oncol 19 (16): 3611-21, 2001.
  20. Robak T, Blonski JZ, Gora-Tybor J, et al.: Cladribine alone and in combination with cyclophosphamide or cyclophosphamide plus mitoxantrone in the treatment of progressive chronic lymphocytic leukemia: report of a prospective, multicenter, randomized trial of the Polish Adult Leukemia Group (PALG CLL2). Blood 108 (2): 473-9, 2006.
  21. Robak T, Blonski JZ, Kasznicki M, et al.: Cladribine with prednisone versus chlorambucil with prednisone as first-line therapy in chronic lymphocytic leukemia: report of a prospective, randomized, multicenter trial. Blood 96 (8): 2723-9, 2000.
  22. Johnson S, Smith AG, Löffler H, et al.: Multicentre prospective randomised trial of fludarabine versus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and prednisone (CAP) for treatment of advanced-stage chronic lymphocytic leukaemia. The French Cooperative Group on CLL. Lancet 347 (9013): 1432-8, 1996.
  23. Leporrier M, Chevret S, Cazin B, et al.: Randomized comparison of fludarabine, CAP, and ChOP in 938 previously untreated stage B and C chronic lymphocytic leukemia patients. Blood 98 (8): 2319-25, 2001.
  24. Eichhorst BF, Busch R, Stilgenbauer S, et al.: First-line therapy with fludarabine compared with chlorambucil does not result in a major benefit for elderly patients with advanced chronic lymphocytic leukemia. Blood 114 (16): 3382-91, 2009.
  25. Steurer M, Pall G, Richards S, et al.: Purine antagonists for chronic lymphocytic leukaemia. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 3: CD004270, 2006.
  26. Dearden C, Wade R, Else M, et al.: The prognostic significance of a positive direct antiglobulin test in chronic lymphocytic leukemia: a beneficial effect of the combination of fludarabine and cyclophosphamide on the incidence of hemolytic anemia. Blood 111 (4): 1820-6, 2008.
  27. Perkins JG, Flynn JM, Howard RS, et al.: Frequency and type of serious infections in fludarabine-refractory B-cell chronic lymphocytic leukemia and small lymphocytic lymphoma: implications for clinical trials in this patient population. Cancer 94 (7): 2033-9, 2002.
  28. Leoni LM, Bailey B, Reifert J, et al.: Bendamustine (Treanda) displays a distinct pattern of cytotoxicity and unique mechanistic features compared with other alkylating agents. Clin Cancer Res 14 (1): 309-17, 2008.
  29. Fischer K, Cramer P, Stilgenbauer S, et al.: Bendamustine combined with rituximab (BR) in first-line therapy of advanced CLL: a multicenter phase II trial of the German CLL Study Group (GCLLSG). [Abstract] Blood 114 (22): A-205, 2009.
  30. Bendamustine in combination with rituximab (BR) for patients with relapsed chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL): a multicentre phase II trial of the German CLL Study Group (GCLLSG). Blood 112 (11): A-330, 2008.
  31. Knauf WU, Lissichkov T, Aldaoud A, et al.: Phase III randomized study of bendamustine compared with chlorambucil in previously untreated patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia. J Clin Oncol 27 (26): 4378-84, 2009.
  32. Lamanna N, Jurcic JG, Noy A, et al.: Sequential therapy with fludarabine, high-dose cyclophosphamide, and rituximab in previously untreated patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia produces high-quality responses: molecular remissions predict for durable complete responses. J Clin Oncol 27 (4): 491-7, 2009.
  33. Foon KA, Boyiadzis M, Land SR, et al.: Chemoimmunotherapy with low-dose fludarabine and cyclophosphamide and high dose rituximab in previously untreated patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia. J Clin Oncol 27 (4): 498-503, 2009.
  34. Tam CS, O'Brien S, Wierda W, et al.: Long-term results of the fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab regimen as initial therapy of chronic lymphocytic leukemia. Blood 112 (4): 975-80, 2008.
  35. Byrd JC, Rai K, Peterson BL, et al.: Addition of rituximab to fludarabine may prolong progression-free survival and overall survival in patients with previously untreated chronic lymphocytic leukemia: an updated retrospective comparative analysis of CALGB 9712 and CALGB 9011. Blood 105 (1): 49-53, 2005.
  36. Robak T, Dmoszynska A, Solal-Céligny P, et al.: Rituximab plus fludarabine and cyclophosphamide prolongs progression-free survival compared with fludarabine and cyclophosphamide alone in previously treated chronic lymphocytic leukemia. J Clin Oncol 28 (10): 1756-65, 2010.
  37. Kay NE, Geyer SM, Call TG, et al.: Combination chemoimmunotherapy with pentostatin, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab shows significant clinical activity with low accompanying toxicity in previously untreated B chronic lymphocytic leukemia. Blood 109 (2): 405-11, 2007.
  38. Shanafelt TD, Lin T, Geyer SM, et al.: Pentostatin, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab regimen in older patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia. Cancer 109 (11): 2291-8, 2007.
  39. Raphael B, Andersen JW, Silber R, et al.: Comparison of chlorambucil and prednisone versus cyclophosphamide, vincristine, and prednisone as initial treatment for chronic lymphocytic leukemia: long-term follow-up of an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group randomized clinical trial. J Clin Oncol 9 (5): 770-6, 1991.
  40. Is the CHOP regimen a good treatment for advanced CLL? Results from two randomized clinical trials. French Cooperative Group on Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia. Leuk Lymphoma 13 (5-6): 449-56, 1994.
  41. Flinn IW, Neuberg DS, Grever MR, et al.: Phase III trial of fludarabine plus cyclophosphamide compared with fludarabine for patients with previously untreated chronic lymphocytic leukemia: US Intergroup Trial E2997. J Clin Oncol 25 (7): 793-8, 2007.
  42. Catovsky D, Richards S, Matutes E, et al.: Assessment of fludarabine plus cyclophosphamide for patients with chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (the LRF CLL4 Trial): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet 370 (9583): 230-9, 2007.
  43. Morrison VA, Rai KR, Peterson BL, et al.: Therapy-related myeloid leukemias are observed in patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia after treatment with fludarabine and chlorambucil: results of an intergroup study, cancer and leukemia group B 9011. J Clin Oncol 20 (18): 3878-84, 2002.
  44. Moreton P, Kennedy B, Lucas G, et al.: Eradication of minimal residual disease in B-cell chronic lymphocytic leukemia after alemtuzumab therapy is associated with prolonged survival. J Clin Oncol 23 (13): 2971-9, 2005.
  45. Parikh SA, Keating MJ, O'Brien S, et al.: Frontline chemoimmunotherapy with fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, alemtuzumab, and rituximab for high-risk chronic lymphocytic leukemia. Blood 118 (8): 2062-8, 2011.
  46. Lin TS, Donohue KA, Byrd JC, et al.: Consolidation therapy with subcutaneous alemtuzumab after fludarabine and rituximab induction therapy for previously untreated chronic lymphocytic leukemia: final analysis of CALGB 10101. J Clin Oncol 28 (29): 4500-6, 2010.
  47. Badoux XC, Keating MJ, Wang X, et al.: Cyclophosphamide, fludarabine, alemtuzumab, and rituximab as salvage therapy for heavily pretreated patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia. Blood 118 (8): 2085-93, 2011.
  48. Stilgenbauer S, Zenz T, Winkler D, et al.: Subcutaneous alemtuzumab in fludarabine-refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia: clinical results and prognostic marker analyses from the CLL2H study of the German Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia Study Group. J Clin Oncol 27 (24): 3994-4001, 2009.
  49. Cortelezzi A, Pasquini MC, Gardellini A, et al.: Low-dose subcutaneous alemtuzumab in refractory chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (CLL): results of a prospective, single-arm multicentre study. Leukemia 23 (11): 2027-33, 2009.
  50. Osterborg A, Fo R, Bezares RF, et al.: Management guidelines for the use of alemtuzumab in chronic lymphocytic leukemia. Leukemia 23 (11): 1980-8, 2009.
  51. Elter T, Vehreschild JJ, Gribben J, et al.: Management of infections in patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia treated with alemtuzumab. Ann Hematol 88 (2): 121-32, 2009.
  52. Byrd JC, Peterson BL, Rai KR, et al.: Fludarabine followed by alemtuzumab consolidation for previously untreated chronic lymphocytic leukemia: final report of Cancer and Leukemia Group B study 19901. Leuk Lymphoma 50 (10): 1589-96, 2009.
  53. Doney KC, Chauncey T, Appelbaum FR, et al.: Allogeneic related donor hematopoietic stem cell transplantation for treatment of chronic lymphocytic leukemia. Bone Marrow Transplant 29 (10): 817-23, 2002.
  54. Schetelig J, Thiede C, Bornhauser M, et al.: Evidence of a graft-versus-leukemia effect in chronic lymphocytic leukemia after reduced-intensity conditioning and allogeneic stem-cell transplantation: the Cooperative German Transplant Study Group. J Clin Oncol 21 (14): 2747-53, 2003.
  55. Ritgen M, Stilgenbauer S, von Neuhoff N, et al.: Graft-versus-leukemia activity may overcome therapeutic resistance of chronic lymphocytic leukemia with unmutated immunoglobulin variable heavy-chain gene status: implications of minimal residual disease measurement with quantitative PCR. Blood 104 (8): 2600-2, 2004.
  56. Moreno C, Villamor N, Colomer D, et al.: Allogeneic stem-cell transplantation may overcome the adverse prognosis of unmutated VH gene in patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia. J Clin Oncol 23 (15): 3433-8, 2005.
  57. Khouri IF, Keating MJ, Saliba RM, et al.: Long-term follow-up of patients with CLL treated with allogeneic hematopoietic transplantation. Cytotherapy 4 (3): 217-21, 2002.
  58. Pavletic SZ, Khouri IF, Haagenson M, et al.: Unrelated donor marrow transplantation for B-cell chronic lymphocytic leukemia after using myeloablative conditioning: results from the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant research. J Clin Oncol 23 (24): 5788-94, 2005.
  59. Sorror ML, Maris MB, Sandmaier BM, et al.: Hematopoietic cell transplantation after nonmyeloablative conditioning for advanced chronic lymphocytic leukemia. J Clin Oncol 23 (16): 3819-29, 2005.
  60. Toze CL, Galal A, Barnett MJ, et al.: Myeloablative allografting for chronic lymphocytic leukemia: evidence for a potent graft-versus-leukemia effect associated with graft-versus-host disease. Bone Marrow Transplant 36 (9): 825-30, 2005.
  61. Milligan DW, Fernandes S, Dasgupta R, et al.: Results of the MRC pilot study show autografting for younger patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia is safe and achieves a high percentage of molecular responses. Blood 105 (1): 397-404, 2005.
  62. Khouri IF, Saliba RM, Admirand J, et al.: Graft-versus-leukaemia effect after non-myeloablative haematopoietic transplantation can overcome the unfavourable expression of ZAP-70 in refractory chronic lymphocytic leukaemia. Br J Haematol 137 (4): 355-63, 2007.
  63. Sorror ML, Storer BE, Sandmaier BM, et al.: Five-year follow-up of patients with advanced chronic lymphocytic leukemia treated with allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation after nonmyeloablative conditioning. J Clin Oncol 26 (30): 4912-20, 2008.
  64. Schetelig J, van Biezen A, Brand R, et al.: Allogeneic hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation for chronic lymphocytic leukemia with 17p deletion: a retrospective European Group for Blood and Marrow Transplantation analysis. J Clin Oncol 26 (31): 5094-100, 2008.
  65. Malhotra P, Hogan WJ, Litzow MR, et al.: Long-term outcome of allogeneic stem cell transplantation in chronic lymphocytic leukemia: analysis after a minimum follow-up of 5 years. Leuk Lymphoma 49 (9): 1724-30, 2008.
  66. Dreger P, Döhner H, Ritgen M, et al.: Allogeneic stem cell transplantation provides durable disease control in poor-risk chronic lymphocytic leukemia: long-term clinical and MRD results of the German CLL Study Group CLL3X trial. Blood 116 (14): 2438-47, 2010.
eMedicineHealth Public Information from the National Cancer Institute

This information is produced and provided by the National Cancer Institute (NCI). The information in this topic may have changed since it was written. For the most current information, contact the National Cancer Institute via the Internet web site at http://cancer.gov or call 1-800-4-CANCER

This information is not intended to replace the advice of a doctor. Healthwise disclaims any liability for the decisions you make based on this information.

Some material in CancerNet™ is from copyrighted publications of the respective copyright claimants. Users of CancerNet™ are referred to the publication data appearing in the bibliographic citations, as well as to the copyright notices appearing in the original publication, all of which are hereby incorporated by reference.






Medical Dictionary