The Dana-Farber Cancer Institute (DFCI) acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) Consortium Protocol 91-01 was designed to improve the outcome of children with newly diagnosed ALL while minimizing toxicity. Compared with prior protocols, post-remission therapy was intensified by substituting dexamethasone for prednisone and prolonging the asparaginase intensification from 20 to 30 weeks. Between 1991 and 1995, 377 patients (age, 0-18 years) were enrolled; 137 patients were considered standard risk (SR), and 240 patients were high risk (HR). Following a 5.0-year median follow-up, the estimated 5-year event-free survival (EFS) ± SE for all patients was 83% ± 2%, which is superior to prior DFCI ALL Consortium protocols conducted between 1981 and 1991 (P = .03). There was no significant difference in 5-year EFS based upon risk group (87% ± 3% for SR and 81% ± 3% for HR, P = .24). Age at diagnosis was a statistically significant prognostic factor (P = .03), with inferior outcomes observed in infants and children 9 years or older. Patients who tolerated 25 or fewer weeks of asparaginase had a significantly worse outcome than those who received at least 26 weeks of asparaginase (P < .01, both univariate and multivariate). Older children (at least 9 years of age) were significantly more likely to have tolerated 25 or fewer weeks of asparaginase (P < .01). Treatment on Protocol 91-01 significantly improved the outcome of children with ALL, perhaps due to the prolonged asparaginase intensification and/or the use of dexamethasone. The inferior outcome of older children may be due, in part, to increased intolerance of intensive therapy.

Introduction

During the last decade investigators have reported favorable outcomes for children with acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL), with long-term event-free survival rates for unselected patient populations ranging from 60% to 80%.1-4 Advances in the treatment of childhood ALL have resulted from clinical trials conducted by several multi-institutional groups. The Dana-Farber Cancer Institute (DFCI) ALL Consortium has conducted such trials since 1981. Treatment strategies include intensive, multi-agent induction therapy; early intensification with weekly, high-dose asparaginase; frequent pulses of vincristine and corticosteroids during continuation therapy; and for high-risk (HR) patients, doxorubicin during intensification. We have previously reported a 7-year overall event-free survival (EFS) rate of 78% for children with ALL treated between 1985 and 1987.5 Acute toxicities from our treatment approach include asparaginase-related allergic events and pancreatitis.5,6 In long-term survivors we have observed asymptomatic echocardiographic changes related to anthracycline exposure7 as well as short stature and learning disabilities of varying severity, presumably secondary to central nervous system (CNS)–directed therapy.8 

DFCI ALL Consortium Protocol 91-01 was open for enrollment between 1991 and 1995. The objective of the protocol was to improve outcome while minimizing toxicity. Based upon the reports of other investigators that high-dose intravenous (IV) 6-mercaptopurine (6-MP) improved the outcome of patients with B-lineage ALL,9,10 Protocol 91-01 randomized patients to receive pulses of either high-dose IV 6-MP or standard-dose oral 6-MP during the first year of post-remission therapy. In addition, for all patients, dexamethasone was substituted for prednisone during post-remission therapy based upon in vitro and in vivo data, which demonstrated that the former was associated with increased antileukemia activity and enhanced CNS penetration.11-14 Also, the duration of high-dose asparaginase intensification was extended from 20 weeks (in prior protocols) to 30 weeks. Patients participated in 3 additional randomizations designed to evaluate whether acute and late toxicities could be reduced. The randomizations included a comparison of (1) 2 asparaginase preparations, native and polyethylene-glycosylated (PEG) Escherichia coliasparaginase; (2) 2 doxorubicin infusion rates, continuous infusion and bolus; and (3) 2 dosing schedules of cranial radiation (once daily and twice daily fractionation). We report here the treatment outcome results for DFCI ALL Consortium Protocol 91-01 at 5 years of median follow-up.

Patients, materials, and methods

Patients

Between December 1991 and December 1995, 386 children (age, 0-18 years) with newly diagnosed ALL (excluding mature B-cell ALL) were enrolled on Protocol 91-01. Informed consent was obtained from parents or guardians prior to instituting therapy. Nine patients were ineligible because of incorrect diagnosis (mature B-cell leukemia, acute myelogenous leukemia, and no leukemia) (n = 6); pretreatment with other anti-leukemia therapy (n = 2); and absence of signed parental consent prior to therapy (n = 1). The remaining 377 patients were evaluable for results of treatment.

Patients were enrolled from the following consortium institutions: DFCI/Children's Hospital (Boston, MA), Hospital Saint Justine (Montreal, Quebec, Canada), University of Rochester Medical Center (Rochester, NY), McMaster University Medical Center (Hamilton, Ontario, Canada), San Jorge Children's Hospital (San Juan, Puerto Rico), Maine Children's Cancer Program (Portland, ME), University of Massachusetts (Worcester, MA), Mount Sinai Medical Center (New York, NY), Le Centre Hospitalier de L'Universite (Laval, Quebec, Canada) and Oschner Institutions (New Orleans, LA). The institutional review boards of each participating institution approved the protocol prior to patient enrollment.

Therapy

Three patient risk groups were used to select therapy: standard risk (SR), high risk (HR), and infant high risk (infant HR). Risk group was determined at the time of diagnosis. Infant HR included all patients who were less than 12 months of age at diagnosis. HR patients presented with one or more of the following pretreatment characteristics: (1) white blood cell (WBC) count of at least 20 × 109 cells per L (20 000 cells per μL); (2) age between one year and less than 2 years or at least 9 years; (3) presence of leukemia blasts in a cytocentrifuged cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) specimen regardless of CSF WBC count (CNS-2 or CNS-3); (4) presence of a mediastinal mass; or (5) T-cell immunophenotype. Patients with the Ph+ chromosome t(9;22)(q34;q11) were treated as HR patients, but they received an allogeneic bone marrow transplantation (BMT) during first remission. All other patients were classified as SR.

Details of therapy are shown in Table 1. For SR and HR patients, CNS therapy commenced during the first cycle of intensification therapy. During that cycle, asparaginase and dexamethasone were not administered. Cranial radiation was delivered to SR boys and all HR patients. The dose of radiation was 1800 cGy, except for those with CNS leukemia at diagnosis (CNS-2 or CNS-3), all of whom received 1980 cGy. SR girls did not receive cranial radiation. Infant HR patients received an additional month of intensive chemotherapy immediately after the remission induction phase, which included high-dose cytarabine and high-dose methotrexate.15 Cranial radiation was delayed until 12 months of age.

Table 1.

Therapy on DFCI ALL Consortium Protocol 91-01

Phase of therapy
(time period) 
Therapy  
Investigational window (3 d) Steroid × 3 d (randomized): prednisone (40 mg/m2/d) or dexamethasone (6, 18, or 150 mg/m2/d)  
 IT cytarabine* (dosage by age × 1 dose, d 0)  
Induction Vincristine (1.5 mg/m2/wk; maximum, 2 mg)  
 (4 wk) Prednisone (40 mg/m2/d) 
 Doxorubicin (30 mg/m2 per dose; d 1 and 2) 
 Methotrexate (4 gm/m2, 8-24 h after doxorubicin) with leucovorin rescue  
 IT cytarabine* (dosage by age × 1 dose, d 17)  
CNS therapy
(3 wk) 
SR girls: IT methotrexate/cytarabine* (× 4 doses for 2 wk, then q 18 wk) 
 SR boys and all HR patients: cranial XRT 1800 cGy (randomized): hyperfractionated (90 cGy bid) or conventional (180 cGy qd) with IT methotrexate/cytarabine (dosage as in SR patients) 
Intensification q 3-wk cycles  
 (30 wk) SR: vincristine (2.0 mg/m2 IV q 3 wk; maximum, 2 mg) 
  dexamethasone (6 mg/m2/d PO × 5 d) 
  methotrexate (30 mg/m2 IV or IM q wk) 
  6-MP (randomized):  
   high-dose: 1000 mg/m2 IV for 20 h, wk 1 and 2 or
  conventional: 50 mg/m2/d PO × 14 days  
  asparaginase (randomized): 
   PEG 2500 IU/m2 IM q 2 wk × 15 doses or
  E coli 25 000 IU/m2 IM q wk × 30 doses  
 HR: same as SR patients, except: 
  dexamethasone dose (18 mg/m2/d PO × 5 d) 
  no methotrexate  
  doxorubicin (30 mg/m2 q 3 wk; cumulative dose, 360 mg/m2) (randomized): 
   continuous infusion for 48 h or IV bolus 
Continuation q 3-wk cycles  
 (until 2 y CCR) SR: same as intensification, except no asparaginase; all 6-MP given via conventional dose (50 mg/m2/d × 14 d)  
 HR: same as SR patients, except dexamethasone dose (as above) 
Phase of therapy
(time period) 
Therapy  
Investigational window (3 d) Steroid × 3 d (randomized): prednisone (40 mg/m2/d) or dexamethasone (6, 18, or 150 mg/m2/d)  
 IT cytarabine* (dosage by age × 1 dose, d 0)  
Induction Vincristine (1.5 mg/m2/wk; maximum, 2 mg)  
 (4 wk) Prednisone (40 mg/m2/d) 
 Doxorubicin (30 mg/m2 per dose; d 1 and 2) 
 Methotrexate (4 gm/m2, 8-24 h after doxorubicin) with leucovorin rescue  
 IT cytarabine* (dosage by age × 1 dose, d 17)  
CNS therapy
(3 wk) 
SR girls: IT methotrexate/cytarabine* (× 4 doses for 2 wk, then q 18 wk) 
 SR boys and all HR patients: cranial XRT 1800 cGy (randomized): hyperfractionated (90 cGy bid) or conventional (180 cGy qd) with IT methotrexate/cytarabine (dosage as in SR patients) 
Intensification q 3-wk cycles  
 (30 wk) SR: vincristine (2.0 mg/m2 IV q 3 wk; maximum, 2 mg) 
  dexamethasone (6 mg/m2/d PO × 5 d) 
  methotrexate (30 mg/m2 IV or IM q wk) 
  6-MP (randomized):  
   high-dose: 1000 mg/m2 IV for 20 h, wk 1 and 2 or
  conventional: 50 mg/m2/d PO × 14 days  
  asparaginase (randomized): 
   PEG 2500 IU/m2 IM q 2 wk × 15 doses or
  E coli 25 000 IU/m2 IM q wk × 30 doses  
 HR: same as SR patients, except: 
  dexamethasone dose (18 mg/m2/d PO × 5 d) 
  no methotrexate  
  doxorubicin (30 mg/m2 q 3 wk; cumulative dose, 360 mg/m2) (randomized): 
   continuous infusion for 48 h or IV bolus 
Continuation q 3-wk cycles  
 (until 2 y CCR) SR: same as intensification, except no asparaginase; all 6-MP given via conventional dose (50 mg/m2/d × 14 d)  
 HR: same as SR patients, except dexamethasone dose (as above) 

In the table, d indicates day; IT, intrathecal; wk, week; h, hour; SR, standard risk; HR, high risk; CCR, continuous complete remission; IM, intramuscularly; IV, intravenously; q, every (quaue); bid, twice a day (bis in die); qd, every day (quaque die); and XRT, radiation therapy.

*

Indicates IT cytarabine dosage per age: less than one year: 15 mg; at least 1 year, but less than 2 years: 20 mg; at least 2 years, but less than 3 years: 30 mg; and at least 3 years: 40 mg. Patients with CNS leukemia at diagnosis received twice-weekly doses of IT cytarabine until CSF was clear of blasts cells on 3 consecutive examinations.

IT methotrexate dosage per age: less than one year: 6 mg; at least 1 year, but less than 2 years: 8 mg; at least 2 years, but less than 3 years: 10 mg; and at least 3 years: 12 mg.

Asparaginase preparation was switched after a mild allergic event (local reaction, rash). Patients receiving E coliasparaginase were switched to weekly PEG asparaginase, and those receiving PEG were switched to E coli asparaginase to complete 30 weeks of therapy. All patients were switched to twice-weekly Erwinia asparaginase (25 000 IU/m2per dose) if they experienced a subsequent allergic event. Asparaginase therapy was held until resolution of mild pancreatitis or deep venous thrombosis, and the therapy was permanently stopped after severe allergic events (bronchospasm and/or lip or tongue swelling), severe pancreatitis (abdominal pain for at least 72 hours with elevated pancreatic enzymes), CNS thrombosis, or mild allergic events to all 3 preparations (E coli, PEG, andErwinia). Therapy for all patients was discontinued after patients had achieved 24 months of continuous complete remission (CCR).

Randomizations

Patients were eligible to participate in the following 5 randomizations. All randomizations were performed centrally and occurred following enrollment, prior to the initiation of therapy.

Investigational window.

To determine differences in early leukemic cell kill, patients were randomized to receive one of 4 possible 3-day courses of corticosteroids prior to the initiation of multi-agent remission induction therapy: 40 mg/m2/d prednisolone or 6, 18, or 150 mg/m2/d dexamethasone.

Asparaginase.

To determine whether PEG asparaginase was associated with decreased toxicity, patients were randomized to receive either 2500 IU/m2 PEG asparaginase intramuscularly (IM) every other week for 15 doses or native 25 000 IU/m2E coliasparaginase IM every week for 30 doses during the intensification phase of therapy. Because PEG asparaginase was not available in Canada, children treated at Canadian institutions (n = 127) were not eligible for the asparaginase randomization and were directly assigned to receive E coli L-asparaginase during intensification.

6-MP.

To determine whether high-dose IV 6-MP would improve outcome, all patients were randomized to receive either (1) high-dose 1000 mg/m2 IV 6-MP delivered as a continuous infusion for 20 hours on weeks 1 and 2 of every 3-week chemotherapy cycle or (2) conventional 50 mg/m2/d oral 6-MP on days 1-14 of every 3-week cycle during the first year of post-remission therapy.

Doxorubicin.

To determine if continuous infusion doxorubicin was associated with a decreased incidence of late echocardiographic abnormalities, HR patients were randomized to receive doxorubicin either as a 48-hour continuous infusion or as a conventional IV bolus for 15 minutes during intensification.

Cranial radiation.

To determine whether hyperfractionated radiation was associated with a decreased incidence of neuropsychologic sequelae, those patients receiving cranial radiation (SR boys and all HR patients, including infants) were randomized to receive either twice-daily fractions of 90 cGy (hyperfractionated) or once-daily fractions of 180 cGy (conventional).

Immunophenotype and cytogenetics

BM cells from diagnostic aspirates were examined for cell surface antigens using standard indirect immunofluorescence assays and were cultured for cytogenetic analyses as previously described.15 

Statistical analysis

Fisher exact tests were used to compare presenting characteristics among patient groups.16 Outcome events were death during induction therapy, failure to achieve complete remission (defined as persistent leukemia at day 52 after diagnosis), death during remission, and relapse. EFS was the time from complete remission to the first outcome event; induction failure and induction deaths were considered events at time zero. Leukemia-free survival (LFS) was the time from complete remission to relapse; induction failure was considered a relapse at time zero. Overall survival (OS) was the time from start of treatment to death from any cause. CNS LFS was the time from complete remission to a relapse involving the CNS (whether isolated or combined with other sites).

EFS, LFS, and OS were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method,17 and the Greenwood formula was used to calculate SE.18 Univariate analyses of differences in EFS, LFS, and OS were conducted with log-rank tests.19 Multiple regression was conducted using Cox proportional hazards regression models to assess prognostic factors for EFS, LFS, and OS.20 To determine the impact of a patient's ability to tolerate asparaginase on outcome, a landmark analysis was conducted21 that included all patients with non-Ph+chromosome who were alive and event-free 40 weeks after diagnosis.

Primary randomized efficacy comparison was defined prospectively as the standard-dose versus high-dose 6-MP, and planned sample size was determined based upon this randomization. Recruitment and evaluation of 360 evaluable patients was required to detect a 45% reduction in the risk of an event with 80% power using a 2-sided 0.05 level test. Given smaller sample sizes available for other randomizations (lack of availability of PEG asparaginase in Canada, HR patients only in doxorubicin randomization, and SR girls excluded from radiation randomization), the other randomized comparisons were designed to detect reductions in toxicities. Specifically, the asparaginase randomization had 80% power to detect a reduction in the risk of toxic reaction from 20% to 8%. The doxorubicin randomization had an 80% power to detect a reduction in the incidence of echocardiographic abnormalities in long-term survivors from 50% to 25% (2-sided 0.05 level test for both). The radiation randomization had 80% power to detect a reduction in the incidence of neuropsychologic sequelae from 40% to 20% and 80% power to detect differences in CNS relapse rate (5% vs 13%) in HR patients (2-sided 0.05 level test for both).

Results

Patient characteristics

The presenting clinical characteristics of the 377 evaluable patients are summarized in Table 2. We classified 240 (64%) patients as HR (including 7 infants); the remaining 137 (36%) patients were classified as SR. Age at diagnosis ranged from 55 days to 17.9 years, with a median of 4.4 years. Initial WBC count ranged from 0.7 to 1076.4 × 109 cells per L (700 to 1 076 400 cells per μL), with a median leukocyte count of 9.8 × 109 cells per L (9800 cells per μL).

Table 2.

Patient characteristics and outcome on Protocol 91-01

 Total no. 5-y EFS ± SE, % P 
Patients 377 83 ± 2  
DFCI risk group    
 Standard risk 137 87 ± 3 .24 
 High risk 240 81 ± 3  
NCI risk group    
 Good-risk pre-B 243 85 ± 2 .66 
 Poor-risk pre-B 99 82 ± 4  
 T-cell > 1 y old 28 79 ± 8  
 Infants < 1 y old 71 ± 17 .03  
Age    
 0-11 mo 71 ± 17  
 12-23 mo 33 97 ± 3  
 24 mo to < 9 y 254 84 ± 2  
 9-18 y 83 77 ± 5 .60  
WBC count, cells × 109/L    
 < 20 000 255 84 ± 2  
 20 000 to 49 999 53 83 ± 5  
 50 000 to 99 999 28 89 ± 6  
 ≥ 100 000 41 78 ± 6 .75 
Sex    
 Male 199 84 ± 3  
 Female 178 83 ± 3 .41 
Immunophenotype    
 Pre-B 349 84 ± 2  
 T-cell 28 79 ± 8 .34 
CNS at diagnosis    
 Negative 324 84 ± 2  
 Positive 46 78 ± 6  
 Unknown 71 ± 17  
Ploidy (n = 207 assessable patients)    
 Hyperdiploid    
  ≥ 50 chromosomes 48 83 ± 6 .35  
  < 50 chromosomes 18 72 ± 11  
 Diploid 105 87 ± 3  
 Pseudodiploid 26 81 ± 8  
 Hypodiploid 10 90 ± 9  
Asparaginase tolerance
(n = 352 assessable patients) 
   
 ≤ 25 wk 43 73 ± 7 <.01  
 ≥ 26 wk 309 90 ± 2  
 Total no. 5-y EFS ± SE, % P 
Patients 377 83 ± 2  
DFCI risk group    
 Standard risk 137 87 ± 3 .24 
 High risk 240 81 ± 3  
NCI risk group    
 Good-risk pre-B 243 85 ± 2 .66 
 Poor-risk pre-B 99 82 ± 4  
 T-cell > 1 y old 28 79 ± 8  
 Infants < 1 y old 71 ± 17 .03  
Age    
 0-11 mo 71 ± 17  
 12-23 mo 33 97 ± 3  
 24 mo to < 9 y 254 84 ± 2  
 9-18 y 83 77 ± 5 .60  
WBC count, cells × 109/L    
 < 20 000 255 84 ± 2  
 20 000 to 49 999 53 83 ± 5  
 50 000 to 99 999 28 89 ± 6  
 ≥ 100 000 41 78 ± 6 .75 
Sex    
 Male 199 84 ± 3  
 Female 178 83 ± 3 .41 
Immunophenotype    
 Pre-B 349 84 ± 2  
 T-cell 28 79 ± 8 .34 
CNS at diagnosis    
 Negative 324 84 ± 2  
 Positive 46 78 ± 6  
 Unknown 71 ± 17  
Ploidy (n = 207 assessable patients)    
 Hyperdiploid    
  ≥ 50 chromosomes 48 83 ± 6 .35  
  < 50 chromosomes 18 72 ± 11  
 Diploid 105 87 ± 3  
 Pseudodiploid 26 81 ± 8  
 Hypodiploid 10 90 ± 9  
Asparaginase tolerance
(n = 352 assessable patients) 
   
 ≤ 25 wk 43 73 ± 7 <.01  
 ≥ 26 wk 309 90 ± 2  

DFCI indicates Dana-Farber Cancer Institute; NCI, National Cancer Institute; WBC, white blood cells; CNS, central nervous system; EFS, event-free survival.

Treatment results

The outcome of the 377 patients is presented in Table3. As of November 1999, median follow-up was 5.0 years. There were 370 (98%) patients who achieved CR. Of the 7 patients who failed to achieve CR, 5 had persistent leukemia, and 2 patients died of sepsis. Nine (2%) patients experienced a remission death during chemotherapy, including 4 of 137 SR patients (all of sepsis) and 5 of 240 HR/infant HR patients (sepsis, n = 3;Pneumocystis carinii pneumonia, n = 1; and unknown, n = 1). Three (1%) other patients died in CR due to BMT-related toxicities (Ph+ chromosome, n = 2, and one infant). All remission deaths occurred in patients aged less than 9 years. There were 46 (12%) patients who relapsed and 312 (84%) patients who remained in CCR.

Table 3.

Results of Protocol 91-01 for 377 children with ALL

 Total SR HR 
Patients    
 Total, no. 377 137 240 
 Total, % 100 36 64  
Induction, no.    
 Failures 
 Deaths 2  
Complete remissions    
 Total, no. 370 137 233 
 Total, % 98 100 97  
Relapse, no. 46 16 30 
 BM only 31 12 19  
 CNS only 3  
 CNS + BM 5  
 Testis 2  
 Testis + BM 1  
Remission, no.    
 Deaths 12 
 Continuous3-150 312 117 195  
5-y ± SE, %    
 EFS 83 ± 2 87 ± 3 81 ± 3 
 LFS 87 ± 2 90 ± 3 85 ± 2 
 OS 88 ± 2 92 ± 2 86 ± 2 
 Total SR HR 
Patients    
 Total, no. 377 137 240 
 Total, % 100 36 64  
Induction, no.    
 Failures 
 Deaths 2  
Complete remissions    
 Total, no. 370 137 233 
 Total, % 98 100 97  
Relapse, no. 46 16 30 
 BM only 31 12 19  
 CNS only 3  
 CNS + BM 5  
 Testis 2  
 Testis + BM 1  
Remission, no.    
 Deaths 12 
 Continuous3-150 312 117 195  
5-y ± SE, %    
 EFS 83 ± 2 87 ± 3 81 ± 3 
 LFS 87 ± 2 90 ± 3 85 ± 2 
 OS 88 ± 2 92 ± 2 86 ± 2 

HR includes HR patients and infant HR patients. See Table 1 and Table 2 for abbreviations.

F3-150

Median follow-up time was 5.0 years.

The estimated 5-year EFS ± SE was 83% ± 2% for the 377 children treated on Protocol 91-01 (Table 3 and Figure1). The 5-year EFS estimate according to the risk group was 87% ± 3% for SR patients and 81% ± 3% for HR patients (Figure 2). The difference in EFS between SR and HR patients was not statistically significant (P = .24). Excluding 7 infants and 6 patients with Ph+-chromosome disease, the 5-year EFS for the remaining 227 HR patients was 82% ± 3%. The estimated 5-year CNS LFS by risk group was 98% ± 1% for SR patients and 96% ± 1% for HR patients.

Fig. 1.

EFS for all children treated on 4 consecutive DFCI ALL Consortium protocols.

Consortium protocols shown are: 81-01 (1981-1985), 85-01 (1985-1987), 87-01 (1987-1991), and 91-01 (1991-1995). There was significant difference (P = .03) in EFS when comparing all 4 protocols, with most favorable results observed on Protocol 91-01 (5-year EFS ± SE, 83% ± 2%).

Fig. 1.

EFS for all children treated on 4 consecutive DFCI ALL Consortium protocols.

Consortium protocols shown are: 81-01 (1981-1985), 85-01 (1985-1987), 87-01 (1987-1991), and 91-01 (1991-1995). There was significant difference (P = .03) in EFS when comparing all 4 protocols, with most favorable results observed on Protocol 91-01 (5-year EFS ± SE, 83% ± 2%).

Fig. 2.

EFS on Protocol 91-01 by risk group.

The 5-year EFS ± SE for SR patients (n = 137) was 87% ± 3% and for HR patients (n = 240, including infants), 81% ± 3%. The difference between these 2 rates was not significant (P = .24).

Fig. 2.

EFS on Protocol 91-01 by risk group.

The 5-year EFS ± SE for SR patients (n = 137) was 87% ± 3% and for HR patients (n = 240, including infants), 81% ± 3%. The difference between these 2 rates was not significant (P = .24).

We also retrospectively analyzed outcome according to the age and leukocyte count criteria proposed by the Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program (CTEP) of the National Cancer Institute (NCI), Bethesda, MD.20 By those criteria, the estimated 5-year EFS for 243 patients with standard-risk B-precursor ALL (age, between 1 and 10 years, and initial WBC count, 50 × 109 cells per L [less than 50 000 cell per μL]) was 85% ± 2%, and the EFS for 99 patients with high-risk B-precursor ALL (age, at least 10 years, and/or initial WBC count, 50 × 109 cells per L [at least 50 000 cells per μL]) was 82% ± 4%. For 28 noninfant patients with T-lineage ALL, the estimated 5-year EFS was 79% ± 8%. For 7 infants, the estimated 5-year EFS was 71% ± 17%. There was no significant difference in EFS comparing the 4 groups based upon NCI risk group criteria (P = .66).

Special patient subgroups

All 6 patients with Ph+-chromosome ALL achieved CR and subsequently were treated with an allogeneic BMT in first CR. Two patients received transplantations from human leukocyte antigen (HLA)–matched sibling donors, one from a mismatched parent, and 3 from matched unrelated donors. Transplants occurred between 3-10 months after diagnosis. Two patients died of BMT-related toxicities, one patient relapsed after transplantation, and 3 patients remained alive in CCR. The estimated 5-year EFS for Ph+-chromosome patients was 50% ± 20%.

None of the 7 infants treated on Protocol 91-01 relapsed. One died in first CR of P carinii pneumonitis. Another was removed from protocol by his treating physician, received a matched unrelated donor BMT in first CR, and died of BMT-related toxicity. Five infants remained alive in CCR, with an estimated 5-year EFS of 71% ± 17%.

Prognostic factors

The results of the univariate analysis of prognostic factors for patients treated on Protocol 91-01 are presented in Table 2. Only age at diagnosis was a statistically significant prognostic factor (P = .03). The best outcome was achieved by those patients aged 12-23 months at diagnosis (n = 33), all of whom were classified and treated as HR, with a 5-year EFS of 97% ± 3%. The 5-year EFS of patients aged 12 months to less than 9 years was significantly superior to those aged 9-18 years (86% ± 2% vs 77% ± 5%;P = .03), as was the 5-year LFS (89% ± 2% vs 79% ± 5%; P = .01).

Risk group status (defined either by DFCI or NCI criteria), initial WBC count, sex, immunophenotype, and CNS status at the time of diagnosis were not statistically significant predictors of EFS. For the 207 patients on whom cytogenetic data were obtained, there was no significant difference in outcome based upon the number of chromosomes present in blast cells at diagnosis (ploidy). In multiple regression models, including age, WBC count, sex, and immunophenotype, age was the only significant factor predicting EFS, LFS, and OS (P = .02, P = .01, and P = .004, respectively).

EFS according to randomizations

There were no significant differences in presenting features among randomized patients compared with nonrandomized patients or between randomized groups (data not shown). As shown in Table4, there was no difference in EFS of randomized patients based upon investigational window corticosteroid (P = .73), asparaginase preparation (P = .29), 6-MP dosing (P = .90), or doxorubicin infusion rate (P = .23). For HR patients, the 5-year EFS and LFS were lower for those randomized to receive hyperfractionated cranial radiation (P = .05 andP = .02, respectively), although there was no difference in CNS LFS based upon randomized radiation schedule (P = .24). For SR males, there was no difference in EFS, LFS, or CNS LFS based upon CNS radiation randomization (P = .84, P = .79, and P = .36, respectively).

Table 4.

Outcome by randomizations

Group Events/patients, no. 5-y EFS ± SE, % P 
Investigational window,    
 Dexamethasone (mg/m2/d)    
  6 14/88 85  ±  4 .73  
  18 18/89 80  ±  5  
  150 17/86 79  ±  5  
 Prednisone (mg/m2/d)    
  40 13/85 87  ±  4  
Asparaginase preparation    
E coli 15/92 84  ±  4 .29  
 PEG 24/106 78  ±  4  
6-MP dosing    
 Standard dose (PO) 26/163 84  ±  3 .90  
 High dose (IV) 26/159 85  ±  3  
Doxorubicin infusion rate (HR only)    
 Bolus 20/102 80  ±  4 .23 
 Continuous infusion for 48 h 14/102 86  ±  4  
CNS radiation fractionation    
 HR only    
  Conventional 12/96 87  ±  3 .05 
  Hyperfractionation 23/97 76  ±  4  
 SR only    
  Conventional 5/31 90  ±  5 .84 
  Hyperfractionation 4/28 85  ±  7  
Group Events/patients, no. 5-y EFS ± SE, % P 
Investigational window,    
 Dexamethasone (mg/m2/d)    
  6 14/88 85  ±  4 .73  
  18 18/89 80  ±  5  
  150 17/86 79  ±  5  
 Prednisone (mg/m2/d)    
  40 13/85 87  ±  4  
Asparaginase preparation    
E coli 15/92 84  ±  4 .29  
 PEG 24/106 78  ±  4  
6-MP dosing    
 Standard dose (PO) 26/163 84  ±  3 .90  
 High dose (IV) 26/159 85  ±  3  
Doxorubicin infusion rate (HR only)    
 Bolus 20/102 80  ±  4 .23 
 Continuous infusion for 48 h 14/102 86  ±  4  
CNS radiation fractionation    
 HR only    
  Conventional 12/96 87  ±  3 .05 
  Hyperfractionation 23/97 76  ±  4  
 SR only    
  Conventional 5/31 90  ±  5 .84 
  Hyperfractionation 4/28 85  ±  7  

See Table 1 and Table 2 for abbreviations.

Toxicities

Asparaginase-related toxicities were observed in 29% of the 377 patients. The most frequent toxicities included allergic reactions (15%), pancreatitis (7%), and coagulopathy (defined as thromboses or clinical bleeding) (4.5%). One percent of the patients experienced a CNS thrombosis. Patients aged 9-18 years were more likely to experience an asparaginase-related toxicity compared with those less than 9 years (48% vs 24%; P < .01). Patients aged 9-18 years had a higher incidence of pancreatitis than younger patients (15% vs 5%;P < .01). The older patients also had a higher incidence of thromboses, including strokes (15% vs 2%; P < .01), but not allergic events (14% vs 16%; P = 1.00). Of the patients randomized to PEG asparaginase, 25% experienced a toxic reaction compared with 36% of E coli–randomized patients (P = .09). PEG asparaginase was associated with a lower incidence of mild allergic reactions (P = .02). There was no difference between the 2 preparations in the rates of dose-limiting toxicities such as severe allergic reaction (P = .22), severe pancreatitis (P = .78), or CNS thrombosis (P = 1.00).

There were 59 (16%) patients who experienced at least one bone fracture on therapy. There were no second malignancies or overt congestive heart failure observed in any patient. Follow-up time was insufficient to assess late CNS toxicity including growth parameters and neuropsychologic functioning as well as the incidence of late cardiac toxicity. Data regarding other toxicities, such as the incidence of seizures and osteonecrosis, were not prospectively collected.

Asparaginase intolerance and outcome

We analyzed the outcome of patients who were alive and in CR 40 weeks after diagnosis (and thus potentially could have received all 30 weeks of asparaginase intensification therapy) to determine whether asparaginase allergy and/or intolerance impacted subsequent outcome. Of the 352 patients included in the analysis, 54 (15%) patients experienced one or more allergic events. There was no difference in EFS when comparing those patients who developed an asparaginase allergy with those who did not (P = .31).

Of the 352 patients, 43 (12%) patients received less than 25 weeks of asparaginase. The remaining 308 (88%) patients received at least 26 weeks of asparaginase. Of the 43 patients who received less than 25 weeks of asparaginase, 37 (86%) patients experienced an asparaginase-related dose-limiting toxicity including pancreatitis (39% of 43 patients), allergy to one or more preparations (19%), CNS thrombosis/hemorrhage (12%), non-CNS deep venous thrombosis (7%), hyperglycemia (5%), hyperlipidemia (2%), and hepatitis (2%). Six (14%) patients received truncated therapy for other reasons including 2 patients with toxicities not clearly related to asparaginase (parasthesias and sepsis), 2 patients with non-protocol alteration in therapy, and 2 patients for unknown reasons. Asparaginase intolerance was associated with older age at diagnosis, but not with initial type of asparaginase (PEG or native E coli). Of 76 patients aged 9-18 years, 18 (24%) patients received less than 25 weeks of asparaginase compared with 25 (9%) of 276 patients less than 9 years of age (P < .01).

The 5-year EFS of patients who received less than 25 weeks of asparaginase therapy was significantly worse than those who received at least 26 weeks of asparaginase (73% ± 7% vs 90% ± 2%;P < .01) (Table 2). In multivariate Cox-proportional hazards model, including covariates for asparaginase intolerance, age, presenting WBC count, and immunophenotype, asparaginase intolerance was the only prognostically significant factor predicting EFS (P < .01).

Comparison with prior DFCI Consortium protocols

We compared EFS and LFS of patients treated on Protocol 91-01 with those achieved by patients treated on the 3 prior protocols conducted by the DFCI Consortium between 1981 and 1995. Details of Protocols 81-01 and 85-01 have been previously published.5,6 Risk group classification and presenting features were similar in all 4 protocols (Table 5). There was no significant difference in remission death rates (P = .74). EFS was significantly different when comparing the 4 protocols (P = .03), with the EFS and LFS for patients treated on Protocol 91-01 superior to those achieved by patients treated on prior DFCI ALL Consortium protocols conducted between 1981 and 1991 (P = .03 for EFS and P = .02 for LFS comparisons). The differences in EFS and LFS remained statistically significant when stratified by risk group (P = .03 andP = .02, respectively). EFS of Protocol 91-01 was significantly greater than Protocol 81-01 (P < .01), and there was a trend toward improved EFS on 91-01 that did not reach statistical significance when compared individually to Protocols 85-01 (P = .37) and 87-01 (P = .16).

Table 5.

Comparison of 4 consecutive DFCI Consortium Protocols (1981-1995)

 Protocols 
81-01 85-01 87-01 91-01  
Years conducted 1981-1985 1985-1987 1987-1991 1991-1995 
Patients, no. 289 220 369 377  
HR, %  62  63  62  64  
Treatment differences     
 Induction     
  Methotrexate high vs low low high vs low high  
  Asparaginase none 1 dose 1 dose none  
   Weeks of therapy during intensification  20  20  20  30  
 CNS therapy     
  SR, cGy 1800 1800 no XRT no XRT (female), 1800 (male)  
  HR, cGy 2800 2400 1800 1800  
 Post-remission steroid prednisone prednisone prednisone dexamethasone 
Remission death rate, % 3.5 3.6 2.0 3.2  
5-y ± SE, %     
 EFS 74 ± 3 78 ± 3 78 ± 2 83 ± 25-150 
 LFS 79 ± 3 82 ± 3 80 ± 2 87 ± 25-151 
 Protocols 
81-01 85-01 87-01 91-01  
Years conducted 1981-1985 1985-1987 1987-1991 1991-1995 
Patients, no. 289 220 369 377  
HR, %  62  63  62  64  
Treatment differences     
 Induction     
  Methotrexate high vs low low high vs low high  
  Asparaginase none 1 dose 1 dose none  
   Weeks of therapy during intensification  20  20  20  30  
 CNS therapy     
  SR, cGy 1800 1800 no XRT no XRT (female), 1800 (male)  
  HR, cGy 2800 2400 1800 1800  
 Post-remission steroid prednisone prednisone prednisone dexamethasone 
Remission death rate, % 3.5 3.6 2.0 3.2  
5-y ± SE, %     
 EFS 74 ± 3 78 ± 3 78 ± 2 83 ± 25-150 
 LFS 79 ± 3 82 ± 3 80 ± 2 87 ± 25-151 

Comparison of Protocol 91-01 with prior protocols:

F5-150

EFS P = .03

F5-151

LFS P = .02

See Table 1 and Table 2 for abbreviations.

Discussion

Children with ALL treated on Protocol 91-01 had a superior outcome to those treated on prior DFCI ALL Consortium protocols. The estimated 5-year EFS ± SE rate of 83% ± 2% is also superior to results reported by other investigators for similar groups of unselected patients with ALL.1-3 We also observed a significant improvement in LFS achieved on Protocol 91-01 compared to prior protocols, indicating that the superior outcome was not simply due to a reduction in remission deaths associated with advances in supportive care during the last decade.

We have previously demonstrated that early post-remission intensification with high-dose asparaginase improved outcome.22 On Protocol 91-01, duration of asparaginase intensification was extended from 20 to 30 weeks. Asparaginase intolerance (failure to receive at least 26 weeks of asparaginase) was an independent predictor of adverse outcome on multivariate analysis, suggesting that the prolongation of asparaginase therapy may have contributed to the improved outcome on Protocol 91-01. A prospective randomized trial comparing 20 versus 30 weeks of asparaginase intensification is necessary to confirm this finding. Although PEG asparaginase decreased the rate of mild allergic reactions, it was not associated with a decreased incidence of dose-limiting toxicities nor with improved outcome. Alternative asparaginase preparations or dosing strategies may mitigate severe toxicities, thereby allowing a greater proportion of patients to tolerate the extended intensification phase and improving outcome.

The other major differences between Protocol 91-01 and prior DFCI ALL Consortium protocols was the use of dexamethasone instead of prednisone during post-remission therapy and the inclusion of 5 randomized studies. None of the investigational arms of the randomized studies were associated with a statistically significant superior outcome, although, by design, only the 6-MP randomization (high versus low) was powered sufficiently to detect EFS differences.

The use of dexamethasone may have contributed to the improved outcome on Protocol 91-01, as other investigators have reported that dexamethasone has more potent in vitro antileukemic activity, higher free plasma levels, and enhanced CSF penetration, and dexamethasone may be more effective than prednisone or prednisolone in the treatment of childhood ALL.12,14,23,24 The relative toxicities of dexamethasone and prednisone have not been fully elucidated in patients with ALL. We have reported that the substitution of dexamethasone for prednisone during remission induction was associated with a high incidence of septic episodes and deaths25 and that post-remission dexamethasone may be associated with more severe neurocognitive late effects.26 The Children's Cancer Group recently reported a 9.3% incidence of osteonecrosis in patients treated with both prednisone and dexamethasone, with higher rates noted in patients receiving higher cumulative doses of dexamethasone.27 The incidence of osteonecrosis was not prospectively collected on Protocol 91-01, although we observed that 16% of patients experienced a fracture. We are currently conducting a prospective randomized comparison of dexamethasone and prednisone that could help clarify their relative efficacy and toxicity in the treatment of childhood ALL.

We observed a very low CNS relapse rate, with a 5-year CNS LFS rate of 98% in SR patients and 96% in HR patients. All patients except SR girls (80% of patients) received 1800 cGy cranial radiation. SR boys received cranial radiation because we had observed a higher-than-expected CNS relapse rate in this population when they were treated without radiation on a prior protocol. Other investigators have successfully used alternative CNS treatment strategies including the use of high-dose antimetabolite therapy and/or intensive intrathecal chemotherapy in lower risk patients4,23,28,29 and lower cranial radiation doses (12 Gy) in higher risk patients.30Although such treatments may offer comparable efficacy as conventionally fractionated 1800 cGy cranial radiation, the relative long-term neuropsychological sequelae of the various CNS treatment strategies remains unsettled.8,31,32 

On Protocol 91-01 we investigated whether hyperfractionated cranial radiation might reduce late effects without compromising efficacy. While longer follow-up is needed to assess late effects, the use of hyperfractionated radiation therapy in HR patients was associated with an inferior outcome due to a higher marrow relapse rate, but not a higher CNS relapse rate. At this time we do not have an explanation for this unexpected finding. Currently, we are using intensive intrathecal therapy (without cranial radiation) in all SR patients. We have also adopted NCI age and WBC criteria to risk-stratify patients, thereby resulting in a higher proportion of patients being considered SR, so that only 40% of patients now considered HR receive cranial radiation. We are investigating whether the dose of cranial radiation can be decreased in HR patients without compromising efficacy, as has been reported by others.1 

Other than ability to tolerate at least 26 weeks of asparaginase therapy, age at diagnosis was the only significant predictor of outcome on Protocol 91-01. The 2 age groups with relatively inferior prognoses were infants aged less than 1 year and children aged at least 9 years. The poor prognosis of infants with ALL has been reported by many investigators.33 We have previously demonstrated improved outcome for infants (50-month EFS, 54%) treated with therapy, which is nearly identical to that administered on Protocol 91-01, including the use of high-dose methotrexate and high-dose cytarabine.15Building upon these results and those of others suggesting that cytarabine may be an important component of therapy for infants with ALL, we are currently enrolling infants on an international collaborative protocol that includes high- and low-dose cytarabine during several phases of therapy.33 

Several other studies have also reported that older children and adolescents with ALL fare worse than younger patients.1,2The inferior outcome of older children may be due to differences in the underlying biology of their disease, but also to an inability to tolerate the intensive 2-year regimen. While no patient aged 9-18 years experienced a remission death, older age at diagnosis was associated with an increased risk of developing a dose-limiting asparaginase-related toxicity, which may have negatively impacted subsequent outcome. Despite this increased vulnerability to dose-limiting toxicity, the outcome of older children on Protocol 91-01 (5-year EFS, 77%) compares favorably with recent reports by other investigators (EFS rates of 60% to 70% for similarly aged patients).1,2 

There were no other statistically significant prognostic factors. For the first time, there was no significant difference in outcome based upon risk group status (P = .24). The results of Protocol 91-01 suggest that in the era of intensive multi-agent regimens, we are reaching the limits of prognostic significance of currently applied clinical risk factors. Other potentially important risk factors include early response to therapy,34,35 minimal residual disease levels at various time-points during therapy,36-38 and the presence of molecular abnormalities such as TEL-AML1 gene fusion.39-41 To meaningfully improve upon the results of Protocol 91-01, the prognostic significance of these and other factors needs to be established. In this way, more intensive regimens and novel therapies can be evaluated in children at highest risk of relapse, while attempts are made to diminish long-term toxicity in those who are successfully treated with current therapies.

We thank the patients, families, physicians, nurses, data managers, and all others who participated in this trial. We acknowledge the fundamental contributions of Kristin Barrett, Mia Donnelly, Jennifer Peppe, Molly Schwenn, Joyce Su, Sharon Thornhill, Stacy Waters, and Guangyong Zou.

Supported in part by grants CA 68484 and CA 06516 from the National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD.

The publication costs of this article were defrayed in part by page charge payment. Therefore, and solely to indicate this fact, this article is hereby marked “advertisement” in accordance with 18 U.S.C. section 1734.

References

References
1
Schrappe
M
Reiter
A
Ludwig
WD
et al. 
Improved outcome in childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia despite reduced use of anthracyclines and cranial radiotherapy: results of trial ALL-BFM 90: German-Austrian-Swiss ALL-BFM Study Group.
Blood.
95
2000
3310
3322
2
Rivera
GK
Raimondi
SC
Hancock
ML
et al. 
Improved outcome in childhood acute lymphoblastic leukaemia with reinforced early treatment and rotational combination chemotherapy.
Lancet.
337
1991
61
66
3
Chessells
JM
Bailey
C
Richards
SM
Intensification of treatment and survival in all children with lymphoblastic leukaemia: results of UK Medical Research Council trial UKALL X: Medical Research Council Working Party on Childhood Leukaemia.
Lancet.
345
1995
143
148
4
Pui
CH
Mahmoud
HH
Rivera
GK
et al. 
Early intensification of intrathecal chemotherapy virtually eliminates central nervous system relapse in children with acute lymphoblastic leukemia.
Blood.
92
1998
411
415
5
Schorin
MA
Blattner
S
Gelber
RD
et al. 
Treatment of childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia: results of Dana-Farber Cancer Institute/Children's Hospital Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia Consortium Protocol 85-01.
J Clin Oncol.
12
1994
740
747
6
Clavell
LA
Gelber
RD
Cohen
HJ
et al. 
Four-agent induction and intensive asparaginase therapy for treatment of childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia.
N Engl J Med.
315
1986
657
663
7
Lipshultz
SE
Colan
SD
Gelber
RD
Perez-Atayde
AR
Sallan
SE
Sanders
SP
Late cardiac effects of doxorubicin therapy for acute lymphoblastic leukemia in childhood.
N Engl J Med.
324
1991
808
815
8
Waber
DP
Tarbell
NJ
Fairclough
D
et al. 
Cognitive sequelae of treatment in childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia: cranial radiation requires an accomplice.
J Clin Oncol.
13
1995
2490
2496
9
Camitta
B
Mahoney
D
Leventhal
B
et al. 
Intensive intravenous methotrexate and mercaptopurine treatment of higher-risk non-T, non-B acute lymphocytic leukemia: a Pediatric Oncology Group study.
J Clin Oncol.
12
1994
1383
1389
10
Mahoney
DH
Jr
Shuster
J
Nitschke
R
et al. 
Intermediate-dose intravenous methotrexate with intravenous mercaptopurine is superior to repetitive low-dose oral methotrexate with intravenous mercaptopurine for children with lower-risk B-lineage acute lymphoblastic leukemia: a Pediatric Oncology Group phase III trial.
J Clin Oncol.
16
1998
246
254
11
Balis
FM
Lester
CM
Chrousos
GP
Heideman
RL
Poplack
DG
Differences in cerebrospinal fluid penetration of corticosteroids: possible relationship to the prevention of meningeal leukemia.
J Clin Oncol.
5
1987
202
207
12
Jones
B
Freeman
AI
Shuster
JJ
et al. 
Lower incidence of meningeal leukemia when prednisone is replaced by dexamethasone in the treatment of acute lymphocytic leukemia.
Med Pediatr Oncol.
19
1991
269
275
13
Ito
C
Evans
WE
McNinch
L
et al. 
Comparative cytotoxicity of dexamethasone and prednisolone in childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia.
J Clin Oncol.
14
1996
2370
2376
14
Kaspers
GJ
Veerman
AJ
Popp-Snijders
C
et al. 
Comparison of the antileukemic activity in vitro of dexamethasone and prednisolone in childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia.
Med Pediatr Oncol.
27
1996
114
121
15
Silverman
LB
McLean
TW
Gelber
RD
et al. 
Intensified therapy for infants with acute lymphoblastic leukemia: results from the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute Consortium.
Cancer.
80
1997
2285
2295
16
Cox
DR
Analysis of Binary Data.
1970
Methuen
London
17
Kaplan
EL
Meier
P
Nonparametric estimation from incomplete observations.
J Am Stat Assoc.
53
1958
457
481
18
Greenwood
M
The Natural Duration of Cancer: Reports on Public Health and Medical Subjects.
33
1926
Her Majesty's Stationary Office
London
19
Mantel
N
Evaluation of survival data and two new rank order statistics arising in its consideration.
Cancer Chemother Rep.
50
1996
163
170
20
Cox
DR
Regression models and life-tables (with discussion).
J R Stat Soc (B).
34
1972
187
220
21
Anderson
JR
Cain
KC
Gelber
RD
Analysis of survival by tumor response.
J Clin Oncol.
1
1983
710
719
22
Sallan
SE
Hitchcock-Bryan
S
Gelber
R
Cassady
JR
Frei
Ed
Nathan
DG
Influence of intensive asparaginase in the treatment of childhood non-T-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia.
Cancer Res.
43
1983
5601
5607
23
Veerman
AJP
Hahlen
K
Kamps
WA
et al. 
High cure rate with a moderately intensive treatment regimen in non-high risk childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia: results of Protocol ALL VI from the Dutch Childhood Leukemia Study Group.
J Clin Oncol.
14
1996
911
918
24
Bostrom
B
Gaynon
PS
Sather
H
et al. 
Dexamethasone decreases central nervous system relapse and improves event-free survival in lower risk acute lymphoblastic leukemia.
Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol.
17
1998
527a
25
Hurwitz
CA
Silverman
LB
Schorin
MA
et al. 
Substituting dexamethasone for prednisone complicates remission induction in children with acute lymphoblastic leukemia.
Cancer.
88
2000
1964
1969
26
Waber
DP
Carpentieri
SC
Klar
N
et al. 
Cognitive sequelae in children treated for acute lymphoblastic leukemia with dexamethasone or prednisone.
J Pediatr Hematol Oncol.
22
2000
206
213
27
Mattano
LA
Jr
Sather
HN
Trigg
ME
Nachman
JB
Osteonecrosis as a complication of treating acute lymphoblastic leukemia in children: a report from the Children's Cancer Group.
J Clin Oncol.
18
2000
3262
3272
28
Tubergen
DG
Gilchrist
GS
O'Brien
RT
et al. 
Prevention of CNS disease in intermediate-risk acute lymphoblastic leukemia: comparison of cranial radiation and intrathecal methotrexate and the importance of systemic therapy: a Children's Cancer Group report.
J Clin Oncol.
11
1993
520
526
29
Pullen
J
Boyett
J
Shuster
J
et al. 
Extended triple intrathecal chemotherapy trial for prevention of CNS relapse in good-risk and poor-risk patients with B-progenitor acute lymphoblastic leukemia: a Pediatric Oncology Group study.
J Clin Oncol.
11
1993
839
849
30
Schrappe
M
Reiter
A
Henze
G
et al. 
Prevention of CNS recurrence in childhood ALL: results with reduced radiotherapy combined with CNSdirected chemotherapy in four consecutive ALL-BFM trials.
Klin Padiatr.
210
1998
192
199
31
Mulhern
RK
Fairclough
D
Ochs
J
A prospective comparison of neuropsychologic performance of children surviving leukemia who received 18-Gy, 24-Gy, or no cranial irradiation.
J Clin Oncol.
9
1991
1348
1356
32
Jankovic
M
Brouwers
P
Valsecchi
MG
et al. 
Association of 1800 cGy cranial irradiation with intellectual function in children with acute lymphoblastic leukaemia: ISPACC: International Study Group on Psychosocial Aspects of Childhood Cancer.
Lancet.
344
1994
224
227
33
Biondi
A
Cimino
G
Pieters
R
Pui
CH
Biological and therapeutic aspects of infant leukemia.
Blood.
96
2000
24
33
34
Gaynon
PS
Desai
AA
Bostrom
BC
et al. 
Early response to therapy and outcome in childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia: a review.
Cancer.
80
1997
1717
1726
35
Nachman
JB
Sather
HN
Sensel
MG
et al. 
Augmented post-induction therapy for children with high-risk acute lymphoblastic leukemia and a slow response to initial therapy.
N Engl J Med.
338
1998
1663
1671
36
Cave
H
van der Werff ten Bosch
J
Suciu
S
et al. 
Clinical significance of minimal residual disease in childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia: European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer—Childhood Leukemia Cooperative Group.
N Engl J Med.
339
1998
591
598
37
van Dongen
JJ
Seriu
T
Panzer-Grumayer
ER
et al. 
Prognostic value of minimal residual disease in acute lymphoblastic leukaemia in childhood.
Lancet.
352
1998
1731
1738
38
Coustan-Smith
E
Behm
FG
Sanchez
J
et al. 
Immunological detection of minimal residual disease in children with acute lymphoblastic leukaemia.
Lancet.
351
1998
550
554
39
McLean
TW
Ringold
S
Neuberg
D
et al. 
TEL/AML-1 dimerizes and is associated with a favorable outcome in childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia.
Blood.
88
1996
4252
4258
40
Rubnitz
JE
Downing
JR
Pui
CH
et al. 
TEL gene rearrangement in acute lymphoblastic leukemia: a new genetic marker with prognostic significance.
J Clin Oncol.
15
1997
1150
1157
41
Borkhardt
A
Cazzaniga
G
Viehmann
S
et al. 
Incidence and clinical relevance of TEL/AML1 fusion genes in children with acute lymphoblastic leukemia enrolled in the German and Italian multicenter therapy trials: Associazione Italiana Ematologia Oncologia Pediatrica and the Berlin-Frankfurt-Munster Study Group.
Blood.
90
1997
571
577

Author notes

Lewis B. Silverman, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, 44 Binney St, Boston, MA 02115; e-mail:lewis_silverman@dfci.harvard.edu.