13 EVALUACION DE LA TOXICIDAD

En cada fase se evaluarán los siguientes parámetros, adaptados de la escala WHO de toxicidad. Se indicará el grado de afectación máxima.

Toxicidad: Hematológica: Hemoglobina (g/dl): 0. >=11 g/dl; 1. 9,5-10,9 g/dl; 2. 8-9,4 g/dl; 3. 6,5-7,9 g/dl; 4. <6,6 g/dl Neutrófilos (mm3_{): 0. >=2.000; 1. 1.500-1.900; 2. 1.000-1.400; 3. 500-900; 4. <500} Plaquetas (mm3_{): 0. >=100.000; 1. 75.000-99.000; 2. 50.000-74.000;} 3. 25.000-49.000; 4. <25.000 Digestiva: Bilirrubina: 0. <1,25xN*; 1. 1,26-2,5xN*; 2. 2,6-5xN*; 3. 5,1-10xN*; 4. >10xN* GOT/GPT: 0. <1,25xN*; 1. 1,26-2,5xN*; 2. 2,6-5xN*; 3. 5,1-10xN*; 4. >10xN*

Mucositis: 0. no; 1. dolor, eritema; 2. eritema, ulceras (puede comer sólidos); 3. úlceras (sólo dieta líquida); 4. alimentación imposible

Diarrea: 0. no; 1. transitoria <2 días; 2. tolerable, pero >2 días; 3. intolerable, precisa tto. 4. hemorragia, deshidratación

Náuseas / Vómitos: 0. no; 1. náuseas; 2. vómitos pasajeros; 3. vómitos que requieren tto.;

4. vómitos intratables

Renal: Creatinina: 0. <1,25xN*; 1. 1,26-2,5xN*; 2. 2,6-5xN*; 3. 5,1-10xN*; 4. >10xN*

Neurológica: Neuropatía periférica: Convulsiones:

Ileo paralítico: SIADH:

Otras Toxicidades: Hiperglucemia: Alt. Coagulación: Tiflitis:

Hipoproteinemia: Exantema: Hemorragia Digestiva:

R. Anafiláctica: Cardiotoxicidad: Hemorragia Cerebral:

Otras:

Infección / Fiebre: Nº de episodios:

Episodio nº 1: 1. fiebre sin foco; 2. con foco

Localización: 1. Sepsis 2. Cutánea 3. Gastroenteritis 4. Neumonía 5. Urinaria 6. ORL 7. Catéter 8. Meningitis 9. Otros Germen: 1. Bacteria 2. Virus 3. Hongo 4. Parásito Especificar germen:

Episodio nº 2: 1. fiebre sin foco; 2. con foco

Localización: 1. Sepsis 2. Cutánea 3. Gastroenteritis 4. Neumonía 5. Urinaria 6. ORL 7. Catéter 8. Meningitis 9. Otros Germen 1. Bacteria 2. Virus 3. Hongo 4. Parásito Especificar germen

Nº Transfusiones Hematíes: Nº Transfusiones Plaquetas:

N* = límite alto de la normalidad N* = límite alto de la normalidad 1. Sí 2. No 1. Sí 2. No 1. Sí 2. No

14.-BIBLIOGRAFIA

1.Bene MC et al for European Group for the Immunological characterization of Leukemias. Proposals for the immunological classification of acute leukemias. Leukemia 1995; 9. 1783-6.

2.-Raimondi SC. Current status of cytogenetic research in childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Blood 1993; 81: 2237-51.

3.-Schlieben S et al. Incidence and clinical outcome of children with BCR/ABL-positive ALL. A prospective RT-PCR study based on 673 patients enrolled in the german pediatric multicenter therapy trials ALL-BFM-90 and CoALL-05-92. Leukemia 1996; 10: 957-63.

4.-Chessells JM et al. The impact of age on outcome in lymphoblastic leukaemia, MRC UKALL X and Xa compared. A report from MRC Paediatric and Adult Working Parties. Leukemia 1998; 12. 463-73. 5.-Rubnitz JE et al. Molecular genetics of childhood leukemias. J Pediatr Hematol/Oncol 1998; 20: 1- 11.

6.-Borkhardt A et al, for the “Associazione italiana ematología oncología pediátrica” and the “Berlín- Frankfurt–Münster” Study group: Incidence and clinical relevance of TEL-AML1 fusion genes in children with ALL enrolled in the German and Italian multicenter therapy trials. Blood. 1997; 90: 571-7. 7.-Takahashi Y et al. Prognostic significance of TEL/AML1 fusion transcript in childhoood B-precursor acute lymphoblastic leukemia. J Pediatr Hematol/Oncol 1998; 20: 190-5.

8.-Rubnitz JE et al. The role of TEL fusion genes in pediatric leukemias. Leukemia 1999; 13: 6-13. 9.-Marks Dl et al. High incidence of potential p53 inactivation in poor outcome childhood acute limphoblastic leukemia at diagnosis. Blood 1996; 87: 1155-61.

10.-Lilleyman JS et al. Clearance of marrow infiltration after 1 week of therapy for childhood lymphoblastic leukaemia. Clinical importance and the effect of daunorubicin. Br J Haematol 1997, 97. 603-6.

11.-Gaynon PS et al. Improved therapy for children with acute lymphoblastic leukemia and unfavourable presenting features: A follow-up report of the Childrens Cancer study Group CCG-106. J Clin Oncol 1993; 11. 2234-42.

12.-Reiter A et al. Chemotherapy in 998 unselected childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia patients. Results of the multicenter trial ALL-BFM 86. Blood 1994; 84: 3122-33.

13.-Uckun FM et al. Clinical features and treatment outcome of childhood T-lineage acute lymphoblastic leukemia according to the apparent maturational stage of T-lineage leukemic blasts: A Children’s Cancer Group study. J Clin Oncol 1997; 15. 2214-21.

14.-Richards S at al. Improved survival with early intensification: combined results from the Medical Research council Childhood ALL randomised trials, UKALL X and UKALL XI. Leukemia 1998; 12: 1031-6.

15.-Nachman J et al. Response of children with high-risk acute lymphoblastic leukemia treated with and without cranial irradiation: A report from the Children’s Cancer group. J Clin Oncol 1998; 16: 920- 30.

16.-Kamps WA et al. Intensive treatment of children with acute lymphoblastic leukemia according to ALL-BFM-86 without cranial radiotherapy: Results of Dutch childhood Leukemia study Group Protocol ALL-7 (1988-1991). Blood 1999; 94: 1226-36.

17.-Dibenedetto SP et al. Assessment of the value of treatment with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor in children with acute lymphoblastic leukemia: a randomized clinical trial. Eur J Haematol 1995; 55: 93-6.

18.-Welte K et al. A randomized phase-III study of the efficacy of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor in children with high-risk acute lymphoblastic leukemia. BFM Study Group. Blood 1996; 87: 3143-50. 19.-Vieira Pinheiro JP et al. Pharmacokinetic dose adjustment of erwinia asparaginase in protocol II of the paediatric ALL/NHL-BFM protocols. Br J Haematol 1999; 104. 313-20.

20.-Boos J. Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of asparaginase. En el libro Acute Leukemias VII. Hiddemann et al (eds). Edit . Springer-Verlag Heidelberg, 1998.

21.-Asselin B et al. Prognostic significance of early response to a single dose of asparaginase in childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia. J Pediatr Hematol/Oncol 1999, 21: 6-12.

22.-Foroni L et al. Molecular detection of minimal residual disease in acute lymphoblastic leukaemia reveals differences in treatment responses. Leukemia 1997; 11: 1732-41.

23.-Ciudad J et al. Prognostic value of immunophenotypic detection of minimal residual disease in acute lymphoblastic leukemia. J Clin Oncol 1998; 16: 3774-81.

24.-Lo Nigro l et al. Clonal stability in children with acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) who relapsed five or more years after diagnosis. Leukemia 1999, 13: 190-5.

25.-Pui CH, Ewans WE. Acute lymphoblastic leukemia. N Engl J Med 1998; 339: 606-15.

26.-Pui CH, Crist WM. Acute lymphoblastic leukemia.En el libro Childhood leucemias. Editor Pui CH. Editorial Cambrige University Press, 1999. pág: 288-312.

27.-Rubnitz JE et al. TEL gene rearrangement in acute lymphoblastic leukemia: a new genetic marker with prognostic significance. J Clin Oncol 1997;15:1150-7.

28.-Pui CH, Crist WM. Biology and treatment of acute lymphoblastic leukemia. J Pediatr 1994;124:491-503.

29.-Smith M et al. Uniform approach to risk classification and treatment assigment for children with acute lymphoblastic leukemia. J Clin Oncol 1996;14:18-24.

30.-Yeoh EJ et al. Classification of pediatric acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Cancer Cell 2002;1:133- 43.

31.-Gajjar A et al. Persistente of circulating blasts after 1 week of multiagent chemotherapy confers a poor prognosis in childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Blood 1995; 86:1292-5.

32.-Schrappe M et al. Long-term results of tour consecutive trials in childhood ALL performed by the ALL-BFM study group from 1981 to 1995. Berlin-Frankfurt-Munster. Leukemia 2000;14:2205-22. 33.-Donadieu J, Hill J. Early response to chemotherapy as a prognostic factor in childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia: a methodological review. Br J Haematol 2001;115:35-45.

34.-Silverman LB, Sallan SE. Newly diagnosed childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia: update on prognostic factors and treatment. Current opinión Hematol 2003;10:290-6.

35.-Potter MN. The detection of minimal residual disease in acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Blood Rev 1992; 6:68-82

36.-Cave H et al. Clinical significance of minimal residual disease in childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia N Engl J.Med 1998; 339:591-8.

37.-Faderl S et al. Detection of residual disease in childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia. N Engl J Med 1999; 340:152–4

38.-Levett D et al. A demographic study of the clinical significance of minimal residual disease in children with acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Med. Pediatr Oncol 2001; 36:365-71

39.-Pui CH, Campana D. New definition of remission in childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Leukemia 2000; 14:783 -5.

40.-Ciudad J et al. Prognostic Value of Immunophenotypic Detection of Minimal Residual Disease in Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia. J Clin Oncol 1998; 16:3774-81

41.-Campana D et al. Detection of minimal residual disease in acute lymphoblastic leukemia: the ST Jude experience. Leukemia 2001; 15:278–9

42.-Scrideli CA et al. Minimal residual disease in Brazilian children with acute lymphoid leukemia: comparison of three detection methods by PCR. Leuk Res 2002; 26 :431-8.

43.-Vidrales MB et al. Minimal residual disease monitoring by flor cytometry. Best Practice & Research Clinical Haematology 2003; 16:599-612.

44.-Campana D, Coustan-Smith E. Advances in the immunological monitoring of childhood acute lymphoblastic leukaemia. Balliere’s Clinical Haematology 2002; 15:1-19.

45.-Moppett J et al. The clinical relevante of detection of minimal residual disease in childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia. J Clin Pathol 2003; 56:249-53.

46.-Coustan-Smith E et al. Clinical importante of minimal residual disease in childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Blood 2000; 96:2691-6.

47.-Neale GA et al. Tandem application of flor cytometry and polymerase Caín reaction for comprehensive detection of minimal residual disease in childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Leukemia 1999; 13:1221-6.

48.-Van Dongen JJ et al. Prognostic value of minimal residual disease in acute lymphoblastic leukaemia in childhood. Lancet 1998; 352:1731-8.

49.-Dworzak MN et al. Prognostic significance and modalities of flor cytometric minimal residual disease detection in childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Blood 2002; 99:1952-8.

50.-Knechtli CJ et al. Minimal residual disease status befote allogeneic bone marrow transplantation is an important determinant of successful outcome for children and adolescents with acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Blood 1998; 92:4072-9.

51.-Uzunel M et al. The significance of graft-versus-host disease and pretransplantation minimal residual disease status to outcome after allogeneic stem cell transplantation in patients with acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Blood 2001; 98:1982-4.

52.-Bader P et al. Minimal residual disease (MRD) status prior to allogeneic ítem cell transplantation is a powerful predictor for post transplant outcome in children with ALL. Leukemia 2002; 16:1668-72.

53.-Bezanilla Jl, Cubells J, Muñoz A, et al. Treatment of acute lymphoblastic leukemia with the SHOP- 89 protocol: Preliminary results. Med Pediatr Oncol 1992; 20:407.

54.-Torras A, Cubells J, Muñoz A, et al. Resultados del protocolo de estudio y tratamiento de la leucemia aguda linfoblástica SHOP-89 en 259 pacientes. Sangre 1995; 40 (sup 4): 52.

55.-Badell I, Cubells J. Experiencia de grupos cooperativos españoles en el tratamiento de la leucosis aguda linfoblástica infantil. En el libro: Hematología y Oncología Pediátricas. Editores L. Madero y A. Muñoz. Editorial Ergon. 1997; págs 406-9.

56.-Cubells J. Protocolo de estudio y tratamiento de la leucemia aguda linfoblástica en pediatría (LAL/SHOP-99). Rev Esp Pediatr 2001; 57:523-33.

57.-Winick NJ et al. Childhood leukemia. New advances and challengues. N Engl J Med 2004; 357:601-3.

58.-Lowe EL et al. Early complications in children with acute lymphoblastc leukemia presenting with hyperleukocytosis. Pediatr Blood Cancer 2005; 44:1-6.

59.-Rubnitz JE. Death during induction therapy and first remission of acute leukemia in childhood. Cancer 2004; 101:1677-84.

60.-Pui CH et al. Improved outcome for children with acute lymphoblastic leukemia: results of total therapy study XIIIB at St Jude Children’s Research Hospital. Blood 2004; 104:2690-6.

61.-Arico M et al. Outcome of treatment in chldren with Philadelphia chromosome-positive acute lymphoblastic leukemia. N Engl J Med 2000; 342:998-1006.

62.-Champagne MA et al. Imatinib mesylate (STI571) for treatment of children with Philadelphia chromosome-positive leukemia: results from a Children’s Oncology Group phase 1 study. Blood 2004; 104:2655-60.

63.-Jeha S et al. Efficacy and safety of rasburicase, a recombinant urate oxidasa in the management of malignancy associated hyperuricemia in pediatric and adult patients: final results of a multinenter compassionate use trial. Leukemia 2005; 19: 34-8.

64.-De Bout JM et al. Significant difference in outcome for adolescents with acute lymphoblastic leukemia treated on pediatric vs adult protocols in Netherlands. Leukemia 2004; 18:2032-5.

65.-Shiffer ChA et al. Differences in outcome in adolescents with acute lymphoblastic leukemia: A consequence of better regimens? Better doctors? Both?. J Clin Oncol 2003; 21:760-1.

66.-Jaffe et al. Tumours of Haematopoietic and Lymphoid tissues. WHO. IARC Press Lyon 2001. 67.-Sharathkumar A et al. Allogeneic bone marrow transplantation vs chemotherapy for children with Philadelphia chromosome-positive acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Bone Marrow Transpl 2004;33:39- 45.

68.-Rocha JC. Pharmacogenetics of outcome in children with acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Blood 2005; 105:4752-58.

69.-Shin HJ et al. Imatinib interim therapy between chemotherapeutic cycles and in vivo purging prior to autologous ítem cell transplantation, followed by maintenance therapy is a feasible treatment strategy in Philadelphia chromosome-positive acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Bone Marrow Transpl 2005;36:917-8.