OnCo

Sign in to keep your watchlist

Your watched pages live in this browser. Sign in with an email link and OnCo keeps the same list on every device you use. Only your email address and your watchlist are stored.

Philadelphia chromosome-like acute lymphoblastic leukaemia: the decisions you may face

4 treatment settings, 3 with more than one named option. Each section lays out the options the standard of care names, what each is for, the trials behind them with their recorded results, the side effects and cautions on record, and questions to ask. Built from the cancer page's standard-of-care rows; nothing here is advice for your case.

Screen every B-ALL without BCR::ABL1 for the Ph-like signature and identify the kinase lesion; treat as high risk with MRD monitoring.

The options, in plain words

Sequencing hundreds of cancer genes at once from a biopsy to find the mutations a drug can target.

  • One test, all actionable alterations
  • Trial matching

Flow cytometry MRD counts leukaemia cells in the bone marrow one at a time by their surface proteins, down to one in ten thousand.

  • Broadly applicable, fast (same day)
  • Works without a molecular marker

Sequencing the unique genetic barcode of a patient's leukaemia to find one cancer cell in a million.

  • 10^-5 to 10^-6 sensitivity
  • Blood-based monitoring in many settings
The evidence behind it

No trial record is attached to this row yet. The trials tab lists what is recruiting and the landmark trials for this cancer.

The main trade-offs on record
  • Tissue quantity
  • VUS interpretation
  • 2-3 week turnaround
  • Operator and lab dependent
  • Sensitivity below molecular methods; immunophenotype shift after therapy
  • Requires a baseline sample to identify the clone
  • Persisting pre-leukaemic clones (CHIP) confound AML MRD
Questions to ask about this decision
  1. Between Comprehensive genomic profiling, Multiparameter flow cytometry MRD and NGS-based MRD (clonoSEQ and molecular MRD), which do you recommend for me, and what about my case would make you choose differently?
    Why: Guidelines list several reasonable options; the choice turns on details of your tumour, your health and your priorities.
  2. What is each option trying to achieve: cure, long control, or relief of symptoms, and over what time?
    Why: The aim shapes how much side effect and disruption is worth accepting.
  3. What happens if I delay, or decline this step for now? Is the decision reversible?
    Why: Some decisions can wait for a second opinion or a trial slot; others cannot. Knowing which is part of the choice.
  4. Does your recommendation follow the current guideline (NCI PDQ: Childhood Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia Treatment (health professional version)), and if it departs from it, why?
    Why: Departures from guidelines are sometimes right for an individual; they should be explained.
  5. For my situation (diagnosis), which of the standard options do you recommend and why?
    Why: Guideline options include: Screen every B-ALL without BCR::ABL1 for the Ph-like signature and identify the kinase lesion; treat as high risk with MRD monitoring.

Add these to your appointment list, or take the full question set for this cancer.

Other settings

ABL-class fusions

Dasatinib or imatinib added to high-risk chemotherapy from induction, as for Ph-positive ALL.

The options, in plain words

Dasatinib is a second-generation BCR::ABL1 pill that, combined with the immunotherapy blinatumomab, can put Ph-positive ALL into deep remission with no chemotherapy at all.

The drug that started the targeted therapy era in 2001, turning chronic myeloid leukaemia into a manageable condition with near-normal life expectancy.

Also referenced:PDGFRB
The evidence behind it

No trial record is attached to this row yet. The trials tab lists what is recruiting and the landmark trials for this cancer.

The main trade-offs on record
Side effectAny gradeGrade 3+
Pleural effusion · CML long-term data28%-
  • Known QT prolongation. Avoid other QT-prolonging drugs where possible; check ECG and correct potassium and magnesium before and during treatment.

Rates from the label or pivotal trial as recorded on the product page; each grade 3+ figure links to its source.

  • Take with a meal and a large glass of water.
Questions to ask about this decision
  1. Between Dasatinib and Imatinib, which do you recommend for me, and what about my case would make you choose differently?
    Why: Guidelines list several reasonable options; the choice turns on details of your tumour, your health and your priorities.
  2. What is each option trying to achieve: cure, long control, or relief of symptoms, and over what time?
    Why: The aim shapes how much side effect and disruption is worth accepting.
  3. Which side effects of Dasatinib are most likely for me, which are reversible, and which would make us stop?
    Why: The recorded rates below come from labels and trials; your own risk depends on dose, other medicines and your health.
  4. What happens if I delay, or decline this step for now? Is the decision reversible?
    Why: Some decisions can wait for a second opinion or a trial slot; others cannot. Knowing which is part of the choice.
  5. Does your recommendation follow the current guideline (NCI PDQ: Childhood Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia Treatment (health professional version)), and if it departs from it, why?
    Why: Departures from guidelines are sometimes right for an individual; they should be explained.
  6. For my situation (abl-class fusions), which of the standard options do you recommend and why?
    Why: Guideline options include: Dasatinib or imatinib added to high-risk chemotherapy from induction, as for Ph-positive ALL.
  7. Am I a candidate for Dasatinib, Imatinib, and what side effects should I expect?
    Why: Knowing the expected toxicities helps you plan work, family, and supportive care.

Add these to your appointment list, or take the full question set for this cancer.

Other settings

CRLF2, JAK2 or EPOR lesions

One path named

High-risk chemotherapy; ruxolitinib added in trials (AALL1521).

The path, in plain words

Ruxolitinib was the first JAK inhibitor: it shrinks the spleen and relieves symptoms in myelofibrosis and controls blood counts in polycythaemia vera, without eliminating the disease clone.

The evidence behind it

No trial record is attached to this row yet. The trials tab lists what is recruiting and the landmark trials for this cancer.

The main trade-offs on record
  • Reduce dose for CrCl below 60 with platelets under 150; dialysis dosing after each session.
Questions to ask about this decision
  1. Is Ruxolitinib the only reasonable path for me, or is there a trial, a different sequence or a wait-and-see option?
    Why: A single standard does not mean a single choice; timing and trials are decisions too.
  2. What is each option trying to achieve: cure, long control, or relief of symptoms, and over what time?
    Why: The aim shapes how much side effect and disruption is worth accepting.
  3. What happens if I delay, or decline this step for now? Is the decision reversible?
    Why: Some decisions can wait for a second opinion or a trial slot; others cannot. Knowing which is part of the choice.
  4. Does your recommendation follow the current guideline (NCI PDQ: Childhood Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia Treatment (health professional version)), and if it departs from it, why?
    Why: Departures from guidelines are sometimes right for an individual; they should be explained.
  5. For my situation (crlf2, jak2 or epor lesions), which of the standard options do you recommend and why?
    Why: Guideline options include: High-risk chemotherapy; ruxolitinib added in trials (AALL1521).
  6. Am I a candidate for Ruxolitinib, and what side effects should I expect?
    Why: Knowing the expected toxicities helps you plan work, family, and supportive care.

Add these to your appointment list, or take the full question set for this cancer.

Other settings

Persistent residual disease

Blinatumomab or CD19 CAR T-cells to clear residual disease, then allogeneic transplant.

The options, in plain words

Blinatumomab was the first T-cell engager (2014), and is now given to children and adults with leukaemia even when in remission, because it improves survival.

Tisagenlecleucel was the first CAR-T therapy ever approved (2017), for children and young adults whose leukaemia had come back after everything else.

Allogeneic stem cell transplantation replaces a patient's blood system with a donor's after conditioning chemotherapy, so donor immune cells hunt down leukaemia left behind. It remains the only cure for adverse-risk acute myeloid leukaemia, high-risk acute lymphoblastic leukaemia and Richter transformation, at the price of graft-versus-host disease.

  • Curative for otherwise incurable leukaemia
  • Graft-versus-leukaemia is an antigen-agnostic immune therapy
The evidence behind it

No trial record is attached to this row yet. The trials tab lists what is recruiting and the landmark trials for this cancer.

The main trade-offs on record
Side effectAny gradeGrade 3+
Febrile neutropenia · Relapsed/refractory adult ALL31%28%
Infections · Relapsed/refractory adult ALL28%15%
Neurological toxicities · Relapsed/refractory adult ALL65%13%
Pyrexia · Relapsed/refractory adult ALL55%6%

Rates from the label or pivotal trial as recorded on the product page; each grade 3+ figure links to its source.

Side effectAny gradeGrade 3+
Cytokine release syndrome · ELIANA, Penn grading77%46%

Rates from the label or pivotal trial as recorded on the product page; each grade 3+ figure links to its source.

  • Treatment-related mortality 10-20%
  • Chronic GVHD
  • Relapse remains the main cause of failure
Questions to ask about this decision
  1. Between Blinatumomab, Tisagenlecleucel and Allogeneic stem cell transplantation, which do you recommend for me, and what about my case would make you choose differently?
    Why: Guidelines list several reasonable options; the choice turns on details of your tumour, your health and your priorities.
  2. What is each option trying to achieve: cure, long control, or relief of symptoms, and over what time?
    Why: The aim shapes how much side effect and disruption is worth accepting.
  3. Which side effects of Blinatumomab or Tisagenlecleucel are most likely for me, which are reversible, and which would make us stop?
    Why: The recorded rates below come from labels and trials; your own risk depends on dose, other medicines and your health.
  4. What happens if I delay, or decline this step for now? Is the decision reversible?
    Why: Some decisions can wait for a second opinion or a trial slot; others cannot. Knowing which is part of the choice.
  5. Does your recommendation follow the current guideline (NCI PDQ: Childhood Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia Treatment (health professional version)), and if it departs from it, why?
    Why: Departures from guidelines are sometimes right for an individual; they should be explained.
  6. For my situation (persistent residual disease), which of the standard options do you recommend and why?
    Why: Guideline options include: Blinatumomab or CD19 CAR T-cells to clear residual disease, then allogeneic transplant.
  7. Am I a candidate for Blinatumomab, Tisagenlecleucel, and what side effects should I expect?
    Why: Knowing the expected toxicities helps you plan work, family, and supportive care.

Add these to your appointment list, or take the full question set for this cancer.

How to read this page. Options and results come from OnCo records with their sources; the settings are the standard-of-care rows on the cancer page, and the lines of therapy are on the sequencing grid. Where a setting names one path, the choice is usually about timing, trials and where to be treated: see expert centres. OnCo is orientation, not medical advice.