All content on this site is intended for healthcare professionals only. By acknowledging this message and accessing the information on this website you are confirming that you are a Healthcare Professional. If you are a patient or carer, please visit Know AML.
The aml Hub website uses a third-party service provided by Google that dynamically translates web content. Translations are machine generated, so may not be an exact or complete translation, and the aml Hub cannot guarantee the accuracy of translated content. The aml and its employees will not be liable for any direct, indirect, or consequential damages (even if foreseeable) resulting from use of the Google Translate feature. For further support with Google Translate, visit Google Translate Help.
The AML Hub is an independent medical education platform, sponsored by Astellas, Daiichi Sankyo, Johnson & Johnson, Kura Oncology and Syndax, and has been supported through educational grants from Bristol Myers Squibb and the Hippocrate Conference Institute, an association of the Servier Group. The funders are allowed no direct influence on our content. The levels of sponsorship listed are reflective of the amount of funding given. View funders.
Now you can support HCPs in making informed decisions for their patients
Your contribution helps us continuously deliver expertly curated content to HCPs worldwide. You will also have the opportunity to make a content suggestion for consideration and receive updates on the impact contributions are making to our content.
Find out moreCreate an account and access these new features:
Bookmark content to read later
Select your specific areas of interest
View AML content recommended for you
Modern treatment paradigms in Acute Myeloid Leukemia (AML) are becoming more focused on individualizing treatment for each particular patient. There are different approaches and factors to consider in order to achieve this, which in turn carry various potential benefits. For example, high sensitivity tracking of AML residual disease is not only used to ascertain the length of treatment, but it is also useful in determining the requirement for additional “maintenance therapy” after completion of standard treatment. C. Lai, et al, wrote an editorial reviewing precision medicine for AML. Their findings were first published as an Epub in Expert Review of Hematology in October 2015.
It is becoming widely accepted that identifying the location of mutations within the hierarchical clonal architecture of AML will be important to determine the most efficacious targets.
At present, it is not always possible to effectively design individualized patient therapy against a particular target or pathway. Instead, investigators have employed high-throughput methods to screen a host of drugs for the ability to preferentially destroy ex-vivo AML cells from a specific patient compared with normal bone marrow. The advantage of this approach relies on the fact that treatment can then be selected as a result of preclinical evidence for a specific patient. In addition, biomarkers can be identified.
Present AML response criteria are insufficient to stratify patients for risk of subsequent relapse and death. However, detailed sequential information regarding the amount of disease remaining to treat is equally as important as identifying the type of disease to be treated in any truly precision medicine strategy for AML. Also, the clonal composition of residual leukemia during or after treatment may provide predictive information in the form of biology, mutations or phenotype that are associated with response or treatment resistance to a therapy or combination therapy.
In summary, precision medicine for AML involves more than choosing the correct drug, or correctly characterizing the malignant clone. This paradigm is entrenched on the need to select the right treatment, for the right patient, at the right time – and repeating this process while monitoring for changes in disease burden and biology over time.
References