- Design
- randomised, open-label phase 3 trial, planned interim analysis
- Population
- 709 children with newly diagnosed high-risk B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukaemia, randomised after consolidation
- Primary outcome
- event-free survival (resistance, relapse, second cancer or death) at 4 years
- Effect
- 83.0% (95% CI 77.4–87.4) vs 70.3% (63.8–75.9); hazard ratio 0.51 (0.35–0.73), P = 0.0002; infection 23.9% vs 69.4%
In the AIEOP-BFM ALL 2017 trial, 709 of 768 eligible children with newly diagnosed high-risk B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukaemia were randomised after consolidation, 358 to two cycles of blinatumomab and 351 to two cycles of conventional chemotherapy. The endpoint was event-free survival — resistance to protocol treatment, relapse, second cancer, or death from any cause — and the trial was designed to detect a 10 percentage point improvement at four years.
A planned interim analysis at median follow-up of 2.9 years found estimated four-year event-free survival of 83.0% (95% CI 77.4 to 87.4) with blinatumomab against 70.3% (63.8 to 75.9) with chemotherapy, hazard ratio 0.51 (0.35 to 0.73), P = 0.0002.
The toxicity comparison is as consequential as the efficacy one. Treatment-related infection occurred in 23.9% of the blinatumomab group against 69.4% of controls, and life-threatening adverse events in 0.5% against 4.7%, with one fatal event in the blinatumomab arm. The trade is not free: neurotoxic events were reported in 12.0% against 3.2%, and grade 2 or higher cytokine release syndrome in 1.1%.
So this is a substitution that improves survival and simultaneously removes most of the infectious morbidity that defines this phase of treatment for a family — the neutropenic admissions, the interrupted schooling, the line infections. In settings where supportive care for prolonged neutropenia is the binding constraint, including much of India, that second effect may matter as much as the first. Cost and access are the obstacle, not evidence.
- Raise blinatumomab substitution with the treating oncology centre for newly diagnosed high-risk B-cell ALL
- Counsel families about neurotoxicity and cytokine release syndrome as the traded risks
- Expect substantially fewer neutropenic infection admissions during these cycles
- Note this is an interim analysis at median 2.9 years against a four-year endpoint
Why it matters
It improves survival while removing most of the infectious morbidity that dominates this phase of treatment.
Don't overread it
These are four-year estimates from an interim analysis at median 2.9 years, not observed four-year outcomes.
The statistics, in plain English
A hazard ratio of 0.51 means roughly half the rate of events, and the interval of 0.35 to 0.73 keeps the benefit substantial at both ends. The four-year figures are estimates projected from a median 2.9 years of follow-up, so later events could narrow the gap. Reporting at a planned interim analysis, which stops or reports early on a strong result, tends to overstate effect size — the direction is secure, the exact magnitude less so.
Read the rest in the app
You have read your two free briefings this month. The app carries all 27 specialties, every morning, free — and this finding is waiting in it.
Scan to keep reading on your phone. No account needed to start.
Tomorrow morning, before your first patient
One edition a day for paediatrics, written by the desk, every claim tied to its paper. Six minutes.
Get the app — free