Using prognostic models in CLL to personalize approach to clinical care: Are we there yet?

Alain Mina, Jose Sandoval Sus, Elsa Sleiman, Javier Pinilla-Ibarz, Farrukh T. Awan, Mohamed A. Kharfan-Dabaja

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

5 Scopus citations

Abstract

Four decades ago, two staging systems were developed to help stratify CLL into different prognostic categories. These systems, the Rai and the Binet staging, depended entirely on abnormal exam findings and evidence of anemia and thrombocytopenia. Better understanding of biologic, genetic, and molecular characteristics of CLL have contributed to better appreciating its clinical heterogeneity. New prognostic models, the GCLLSG prognostic index and the CLL-IPI, emerged. They incorporate biologic and genetic information related to CLL and are capable of predicting survival outcomes and cases anticipated to need therapy earlier in the disease course. Accordingly, these newer models are helping develop better informed surveillance strategies and ultimately tailor treatment intensity according to presence (or lack thereof) of certain prognostic markers. This represents a step towards personalizing care of CLL patients. We anticipate that as more prognostic factors continue to be identified, the GCLLSG prognostic index and CLL-IPI models will undergo further revisions.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)159-166
Number of pages8
JournalBlood Reviews
Volume32
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 2018
Externally publishedYes

Keywords

  • Chronic lymphocytic leukemia
  • Prognostic staging systems
  • Survival

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Hematology
  • Oncology

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Using prognostic models in CLL to personalize approach to clinical care: Are we there yet?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

  • Cite this

    Mina, A., Sandoval Sus, J., Sleiman, E., Pinilla-Ibarz, J., Awan, F. T., & Kharfan-Dabaja, M. A. (2018). Using prognostic models in CLL to personalize approach to clinical care: Are we there yet? Blood Reviews, 32(2), 159-166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.blre.2017.10.003