Guidelines for the measurement of BCR-ABL1 transcripts in chronic myeloid leukaemia.

Department of Haematology,Imperial College Academic Health Science Centre, Hammersmith Hospital, Du Cane Rd., London, UK.
British Journal of Haematology (Impact Factor: 4.94). 03/2011; 153(2):179-90. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2141.2011.08603.x
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Molecular testing for the BCR-ABL1 fusion gene by real time quantitative polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR) is the most sensitive routine approach for monitoring the response to therapy of patients with chronic myeloid leukaemia. In the context of tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) therapy, the technique is most appropriate for patients who have achieved complete cytogenetic remission and can be used to define specific therapeutic milestones. To achieve this effectively, standardization of the laboratory procedures and the interpretation of results are essential. We present here consensus best practice guidelines for RT-qPCR testing, data interpretation and reporting that have been drawn up and agreed by a consortium of 21 testing laboratories in the United Kingdom and Ireland in accordance with the procedures of the UK Clinical Molecular Genetics Society.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Sixty patients with early chronic phase CML (ECPCML) received Nilotinib on a phase II study which included a comparison of the Xpert BCR-ABL Monitor™ PCR system with standardized (IS) BCR-ABL1 real-time quantitative PCR (RQ-PCR). 88% patients achieved MMR with 45% achieving MR4.5. At 3 months BCR-ABL1/ABL1 IS >1% and <10% was associated with a lower likelihood of subsequent MR4.5 compared to patients with lower levels (p=0.018). No significant difference was observed between methodologies in identifying MMR. Nilotinib induces high molecular response rates in ECPCML and the Xpert BCR-ABL Monitor™ system merits further investigation in this setting.
    Leukemia research 12/2013; · 2.36 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Clinical cancer research today often includes testing the value of biomarkers to direct treatment and for drug development. However, the practical challenges of integration of molecular information into clinical trial protocols are increasingly appreciated. Inherent difficulties include evidence gaps in available biomarker data, a paucity of robust assay methods, and the design of appropriate studies within the constraints of feasible trial operations, and finite resources. Scalable and proportionate approaches are needed to systematically cope with these challenges. Therefore, we assembled international experts from three clinical trials organisations to identify the common challenges and common solutions. We present a practical risk-assessment framework allowing targeting of scarce resources to crucial issues coupled with a library of useful resources and a simple actionable checklist of recommendations. We hope that these practical methods will be useful for running biomarker-driven trials and ultimately help to develop biomarkers that are ready for integration in routine practice.
    The Lancet Oncology 04/2014; 15(4):e184-93. · 25.12 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: More and more potent therapeutic approaches demand more and more sophisticated response monitoring. Soon after the introduction of the first tyrosine-kinase inhibitor (TKI) for chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) treatment, real time quantitative polymerase chain reaction (RQ-PCR) became the gold standard to follow the kinetics of reduction of disease burden and allow prognostic stratification. Continuous therapeutic improvement has led to increasingly ambitious treatment endpoints (now culminating in the possibility of achieving treatment free remission), which, in turn, has led to more and more refined measurement and definition of molecular response (MR) levels. Here, we will review the evolution of molecular response definitions and terminology, how specific MR levels currently provide key checkpoints in the context of optimal patient management, how molecular monitoring can best be performed nowadays and what future trends for further technological improvement can be.
    Current Hematologic Malignancy Reports 01/2014;


Available from
May 31, 2014