Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Klassifikation von Leukämien

Classification of Leukemias

  • REVIEW
  • Published:
Onkopipeline

Zusammenfassung

Sowohl die akuten Leukämien als auch die chronischen Leukämien sind sehr heterogene Krankheiten, welche sich auf der Grundlage ihrer morphologischen, immunologischen und genetischen Eigenschaften in eine Vielzahl von Subtypen gliedern lassen. Nur eine Kombination verschiedener Methoden der hämatologischen Diagnostik ist in der Lage, diese Subtypen korrekt zu erfassen und dem jeweiligen prognostischen Profil zuzuordnen. Dabei wirken die Zytomorphologie, die Zyto- und Molekulargenetik sowie die Immunphänotypisierung mit der Multiparameter-Durchflusszytometrie zusammen. Moderne Klassifikationssysteme wie die WHO-Klassifikation aus dem Jahre 2001 beziehen all diese Methoden ein, stützen sich aber auch auf bereits länger etablierte, vorwiegend morphologisch begründete Systeme wie die FAB-Klassifikation der akuten myeloischen Leukämie (AML).

Angesichts der kontinuierlichen Erweiterung des Spektrums bekannter genetischer Marker und aufgrund tieferer Einsichten in die Leukämogenese werden auch in Zukunft immer wieder Revisionen der gängigen Klassifikationssysteme notwendig sein. Dies kann am Beispiel der AML verdeutlicht werden, bei welcher die Identifizierung der Nucleophosmin-(NPM1-)Mutation bei der Mehrheit der Patienten mit normalem Karyotyp bald eine eigenständige Kategorie für diese Subgruppe erfordern wird. Bei der chronischen lymphatischen Leukämie (CLL) gelingt auf molekularer Basis eine Risikostratifizierung auf der Basis des Mutationsstatus der Gene, welche für die Schwerketten der Immunglobuline kodieren. Somit sind alle Klassifikationssysteme für Leukämien einem ständigen Wandel unterworfen.

Diese Übersicht stellt dar, welche Parameter derzeit zur Klassifikation der akuten und chronischen Leukämien relevant sind, welcher diagnostischen Methoden es bedarf, um die notwendigen Informationen bei den jeweiligen Entitäten zu liefern, und welche aktuellen Erkenntnisse richtungweisend für künftige Klassifikationssysteme sind.

Abstract

Acute and chronic leukemias represent heterogeneous disorders which are divided in a variety of subtypes based on morphological, immunologic, and genetic characteristics. A combination of diverse diagnostic methods is necessary to perform a correct classification of these subtypes and to correlate them to the respective prognostic profiles: cytomorphology, cyto- and molecular genetics, and immunophenotyping by multiparameter flow cytometry. Modern classification systems such as the WHO classification (2001) integrate all these methods, although they are based on previous classification systems using preferentially cytomorphological criteria such as the FAB classification of acute myeloid leukemia (AML).

However, in consideration of the continuous expansion of the spectrum of known genetic markers and due to deeper insights into the mechanisms of leukemogenesis, these classification systems need to be revised already in the near future. This can be illustrated by the recent detection of the nucleophosmin (NPM1) mutations in the majority of AML patients with a normal karyotype which might soon be followed by an own category for this subgroup within a revised WHO classification. In chronic lymphatic leukemia (CLL) the definition of the molecular mutation status of the genes coding for the immunoglobulin heavy chain by molecular methods was able to improve risk stratification. Thus, all systems for leukemia classification are in continuous change.

This review presents a survey of the parameters which are relevant for the classification of the acute and chronic leukemias, of the diagnostic methods which are essential to guarantee the relevant information, and, finally, of recent results of leukemia research which might influence future classification systems.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Literatur

  1. Baldus CD, Tanner SM, Ruppert AS, et al. BAALC expression predicts clinical outcome of de novo acute myeloid leukemia patients with normal cytogenetics: a Cancer and Leukemia Group B study. Blood 2003;102:1613–1618.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Bene MC, Bernier M, Castoldi G, et al. Impact of immunophenotyping on management of acute leukemias. Haematologica 1999;84:1024–1034.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Bennett JM, Catovsky D, Daniel MT, et al. Proposals for the classification of the acute leukaemias. French-American-British (FAB) Co-operative Group. Br J Haematol 1976;33:451–458.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Bennett JM, Catovsky D, Daniel MT, et al. Proposed revised criteria for the classification of acute myeloid leukemia. A report of the French-American-British Cooperative Group. Ann Intern Med 1985;103:620–625.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Bloomfield CD, Shuma C, Regal L, et al. Long-term survival of patients with acute myeloid leukemia: a third follow-up of the Fourth International Workshop on Chromosomes in Leukemia. Cancer 1997;80:Suppl:2191–2198.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Falini B, Nicoletti I, Martelli MF, et al. Acute myeloid leukemia carrying cytoplasmic/mutated nucleophosmin (NPMc+ AML): biologic and clinical features. Blood 2007;109:874–885.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Gilliland DG. Hematologic malignancies. Curr Opin Hematol 2001;8:189–191.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Haferlach T, Kern W, Schnittger S, et al. Modern diagnostics in acute leukemias. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol 2005;56:223–334.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Haferlach T, Schoch C, Loffler H, et al. Morphologic dysplasia in de novo acute myeloid leukemia (AML) is related to unfavorable cytogenetics but has no independent prognostic relevance under the conditions of intensive induction therapy: results of a multiparameter analysis from the German AML Cooperative Group studies. J Clin Oncol 2003;21:256–265.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Jabbour E, Kantarjian HM, Abruzzo LV, et al. Chromosomal abnormalities in Philadelphia chromosome negative metaphases appearing during imatinib mesylate therapy in patients with newly diagnosed chronic myeloid leukemia in chronic phase. Blood 2007;110:2991–2995.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Jaffe ES, Harris NL, Stein H, et al. World Health Organization classification of tumours: pathology and genetics of tumours of haematopoietic and lymphoid tissues. Lyon: IARC Press, 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Mauerer K, Zahrieh D, Gorgun G, et al. Immunoglobulin gene segment usage, location and immunogenicity in mutated and unmutated chronic lymphocytic leukaemia. Br J Haematol 2005;129:499–510.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Schlenk RF, Dohner K, Krauter J, et al. Mutations and treatment outcome in cytogenetically normal acute myeloid leukemia. N Engl J Med 2008;358:1909–1918.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Schnittger S, Schoch C, Dugas M, et al. Analysis of FLT3 length mutations in 1003 patients with acute myeloid leukemia: correlation to cytogenetics, FAB subtype, and prognosis in the AMLCG study and usefulness as a marker for the detection of minimal residual disease. Blood 2002;100:59–66.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Schnittger S, Schoch C, Kern W, et al. Nucleophosmin gene mutations are predictors of favorable prognosis in acute myelogenous leukemia with a normal karyotype. Blood 2005;106:3733–3739.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Schoch C, Kern W, Schnittger S, et al. Karyotype is an independent prognostic parameter in therapy-related acute myeloid leukemia (t-AML): an analysis of 93 patients with t-AML in comparison to 1091 patients with de novo AML. Leukemia 2004;18:120–125.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Schoch C, Schnittger S, Bursch S, et al. Comparison of chromosome banding analysis, interphase- and hypermetaphase-FISH, qualitative and quantitative PCR for diagnosis and for follow-up in chronic myeloid leukemia: a study on 350 cases. Leukemia 2002;16:53–59.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Swansbury GJ, Lawler SD, Alimena G, et al. Long-term survival in acute myelogenous leukemia: a second follow-up of the Fourth International Workshop on Chromosomes in Leukemia. Cancer Genet Cytogenet 1994;73:1–7.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Wandt H, Schakel U, Kroschinsky F, et al. MLD according to the WHO classification in AML has no correlation with age and no independent prognostic relevance as analyzed in 1766 patients. Blood 2008;111:1855–1861.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Yanada M, Matsuo K, Suzuki T, et al. Prognostic significance of FLT3 internal tandem duplication and tyrosine kinase domain mutations for acute myeloid leukemia: a meta-analysis. Leukemia 2005;19:1345–1349.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Zenz T, Dohner H, Stilgenbauer S. Genetics and risk-stratified approach to therapy in chronic lymphocytic leukemia. Best Pract Res Clin Haematol 2007;20:439–453.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Torsten Haferlach.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Bacher, U., Haferlach, C., Kern, W. et al. Klassifikation von Leukämien. Onkopipeline 1, 41–48 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s15035-008-0121-0

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s15035-008-0121-0

Schlüsselwörter:

Key Words:

Navigation