Francisco Cezar Aquino de Moraes, Artur de Oliveira Macena Lôbo, Vitor Kendi Tsuchiya Sano, Caroline R M Pereira, Lucyana Barbosa Cardoso Leão, Thiago Xavier Carneiro, Rommel Mario Rodríguez Burbano
{"title":"Does Down syndrome affect the prognosis of acute lymphoblastic leukemia? A systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Francisco Cezar Aquino de Moraes, Artur de Oliveira Macena Lôbo, Vitor Kendi Tsuchiya Sano, Caroline R M Pereira, Lucyana Barbosa Cardoso Leão, Thiago Xavier Carneiro, Rommel Mario Rodríguez Burbano","doi":"10.1080/17474086.2025.2540401","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Down Syndrome (DS) is the most common human aneuploid abnormality. However, no association has been established between the presence of DS in Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia (ALL) patients to affect survival rates.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We searched in Medline, Scopus, and Web of Science databases for relevant studies. Binary outcomes were evaluated using risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). The risk of bias was performed using the Newcastle - Ottawa Scale (NOS). We included randomized controlled trials and cohort studies, with patients with newly diagnosed ALL and excluded studies with overlapping, reviews, animal model studies, or letters. All endpoints were analyzed using random-effect models. Heterogeneity was assessed using I<sup>2</sup> statistics. Statistical analyses were performed using R, version 4.2.3.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Sixteen studies, comprising 63,054 patients, were included. The outcomes demonstrated a significant difference favoring the ALL group for the outcomes as induction failure (RR 5.51 95% CI 3.50-8.69; <i>p</i> < 0.001); treatment-related mortality (RR 4.29 95% CI 3.38-5.45; <i>p</i> < 0.001), and total relapse (RR 1.28 95% CI 1.08-1.53; <i>p</i> = 0.004). There was no significant difference between the groups for event-free survival (5 years) groups (RR 0.91 95% CI 0.74-1.13; <i>p</i> = 0.40) and central nervous system relapse (RR 0.98 95% CI 0.55-1.72; <i>p</i> = 0.93).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This meta-analysis found a significant difference when comparing the DS-ALL group with the ALL group, the results supported a higher risk of induction failure, treatment-related mortality, and total relapse in the DS-ALL group.</p><p><strong>Registration: </strong>The protocol was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO), National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR), with registration number CRD5689342.</p>","PeriodicalId":12325,"journal":{"name":"Expert Review of Hematology","volume":" ","pages":"1-10"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Expert Review of Hematology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17474086.2025.2540401","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Introduction: Down Syndrome (DS) is the most common human aneuploid abnormality. However, no association has been established between the presence of DS in Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia (ALL) patients to affect survival rates.
Methods: We searched in Medline, Scopus, and Web of Science databases for relevant studies. Binary outcomes were evaluated using risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). The risk of bias was performed using the Newcastle - Ottawa Scale (NOS). We included randomized controlled trials and cohort studies, with patients with newly diagnosed ALL and excluded studies with overlapping, reviews, animal model studies, or letters. All endpoints were analyzed using random-effect models. Heterogeneity was assessed using I2 statistics. Statistical analyses were performed using R, version 4.2.3.
Results: Sixteen studies, comprising 63,054 patients, were included. The outcomes demonstrated a significant difference favoring the ALL group for the outcomes as induction failure (RR 5.51 95% CI 3.50-8.69; p < 0.001); treatment-related mortality (RR 4.29 95% CI 3.38-5.45; p < 0.001), and total relapse (RR 1.28 95% CI 1.08-1.53; p = 0.004). There was no significant difference between the groups for event-free survival (5 years) groups (RR 0.91 95% CI 0.74-1.13; p = 0.40) and central nervous system relapse (RR 0.98 95% CI 0.55-1.72; p = 0.93).
Conclusions: This meta-analysis found a significant difference when comparing the DS-ALL group with the ALL group, the results supported a higher risk of induction failure, treatment-related mortality, and total relapse in the DS-ALL group.
Registration: The protocol was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO), National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR), with registration number CRD5689342.
简介:唐氏综合症(DS)是最常见的人类非整倍体异常。然而,急性淋巴细胞白血病(ALL)患者中DS的存在与生存率之间没有关联。方法:在Medline、Scopus和Web of Science数据库中检索相关研究。采用95%置信区间(ci)的风险比(rr)评估二元结果。偏倚风险采用纽卡斯尔-渥太华量表(NOS)进行评估。我们纳入了随机对照试验和队列研究,纳入了新诊断的ALL患者,排除了有重叠、综述、动物模型研究或信件的研究。所有终点均采用随机效应模型进行分析。采用I2统计量评估异质性。统计分析使用R 4.2.3版本。结果:纳入16项研究,63054例患者。结果显示ALL组在诱导失败方面有显著差异(RR 5.51 95% CI 3.50-8.69;p p p = 0.004)。无事件生存(5年)组间无显著差异(RR 0.91 95% CI 0.74-1.13;p = 0.40)和中枢神经系统复发(RR 0.98 95% CI 0.55-1.72;p = 0.93)。结论:本荟萃分析发现,DS-ALL组与ALL组比较存在显著差异,结果支持DS-ALL组诱导失败、治疗相关死亡率和总复发的风险更高。注册:该方案已在国家卫生与保健研究所(NIHR)的国际前瞻性系统评价登记册(PROSPERO)上注册,注册号为CRD5689342。
期刊介绍:
Advanced molecular research techniques have transformed hematology in recent years. With improved understanding of hematologic diseases, we now have the opportunity to research and evaluate new biological therapies, new drugs and drug combinations, new treatment schedules and novel approaches including stem cell transplantation. We can also expect proteomics, molecular genetics and biomarker research to facilitate new diagnostic approaches and the identification of appropriate therapies. Further advances in our knowledge regarding the formation and function of blood cells and blood-forming tissues should ensue, and it will be a major challenge for hematologists to adopt these new paradigms and develop integrated strategies to define the best possible patient care. Expert Review of Hematology (1747-4086) puts these advances in context and explores how they will translate directly into clinical practice.