Annals of Hematology

, Volume 97, Issue 10, pp 2005–2008 | Cite as

Chronic lymphocytic leukemia international prognostic index (CLL-IPI) in patients receiving chemoimmuno or targeted therapy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

  • Stefano MolicaEmail author
  • Diana Giannarelli
  • Rosanna Mirabelli
  • Luciano Levato
  • Tait D. Shanafelt
Letter to the Editor

Dear Editor,

The chronic lymphocytic leukemia international prognostic index (CLL-IPI) which incorporates five parameters (age, clinical stage, TP53 status (normal vs. del (17p) and/or TP53 mutation), IGHV mutational status, and serum β2-microglobulin) was first proposed in 2016 by CLL-IPI working group to predict clinical outcome in CLL patients [1]. The validity of the CLL-IPI has been confirmed across several series including patients mostly treated with chemotherapy or chemoimmunotherapy (CIT) [2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8]. However, the index was specifically developed from large cohorts of younger patients (median age, 61 years) participating in clinical trials testing chemotherapy or CIT. Therefore, the universal value of CLL-IPI in elderly/unfit patients suitable for CIT or B cell receptor inhibitor therapy given in front-line or for relapsed/refractory (R/R) disease is unclear.

These considerations led us to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis restricted to published studies...


Author contributions

SM designed the study, selected and evaluated studies, performed data extraction, evaluated and interpreted results, and wrote the manuscript; DG selected and evaluated studies, performed data extraction, performed statistical analyses, and evaluated results; TDS evaluated and interpreted results the paper; RM and LL interpreted results; and all authors reviewed and approved the manuscript.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest disclosure

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Supplementary material

277_2018_3350_MOESM1_ESM.docx (46 kb)
ESM 1 (DOCX 46 kb)


  1. 1.
    International CLL-IPI working group (2016) An international prognostic index for patients with chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (CLL-IPI): a meta-analysis of individual patient data. Lancet Oncol 17(6):779–790CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Gentile M, Shanafelt TD, Rossi D, Laurenti L, Mauro FR, Molica S, Cutrona G, Uccello G, Campanelli M, Vigna E, Tripepi G, Chaffee KG, Parikh SA, Bossio S, Recchia AG, Innocenti I, Pasquale R, Neri A, Ferrarini M, Gaidano G, Foa R, Morabito F (2016) Validation of the CLL-IPI and comparison with the MDACC prognostic index in newly diagnosed patients. Blood 128(16):2093–2095CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    da Cunha-Bang C, Christiansen I, Niemann CU (2016) The CLL-IPI applied in a population-based cohort. Blood 128(17):2181–2183CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Goede V, Bahlo J, Kutsch N et al (2016) Evaluation of the International prognostic index for chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL-IPI) in elderly patients with comorbidities: analysis of the CLL11 study population. Blood 128:4401Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ferrer Lores B, Navarro Cubells B, Serrano Alcala A et al (2016) Prognostic impact of the new CLL-IPI Index in a single center CLL Spanish cohort. Blood 128:2019Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Delgado J, Doubek M, Baumann T, Kotaskova J, Molica S, Mozas P, Rivas-Delgado A, Morabito F, Pospisilova S, Montserrat E (2017) Chronic lymphocytic leukemia: a prognostic model comprising only two biomarkers (IGHV mutational status and FISH cytogenetics) separates patients with different outcome and simplifies the CLL-IPI. Am J Hematol 92(4):375–380CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Rigolin GM, Cavallari M, Quaglia FM, Formigaro L, Lista E, Urso A, Guardalben E, Liberatore C, Faraci D, Saccenti E, Bassi C, Lupini L, Bardi MA, Volta E, Tammiso E, Melandri A, Negrini M, Cavazzini F, Cuneo A (2017) In CLL, comorbidities and the complex karyotype are associated with an inferior outcome independently of CLL-IPI. Blood 129(26):3495–3498CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Reda G, Cassin R, Fattizzo B, Giannarelli D, Mattiello V, Barcellini W, Cortelezzi A (2017) Chronic lymphocytic leukemia and prognostic models: a bridge between clinical and biological markers. Am J Hematol 92(7):E135–E137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Molica S, Shanafelt TD, Giannarelli D, Gentile M, Mirabelli R, Cutrona G, Levato L, di Renzo N, di Raimondo F, Musolino C, Angrilli F, Famà A, Recchia AG, Chaffee KG, Neri A, Kay NE, Ferrarini M, Morabito F (2016) The chronic lymphocytic leukemia international prognostic index predicts time to first treatment in early CLL: independent validation in a prospective cohort of early stage patients. Am J Hematol 91:1090–1095CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Soumerai JD, Barrientos JC, Hallek M et al (2016) An evaluation of the chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) international prognostic index as a prognostic tool in patients with relapsed/refractory CLL in idelalisib phase 3 randomized studies. J Clin Oncol 34(15_suppl):7513CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Brander DM, Rhodes J, Pagel JM et al (2017) Applicability of the chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL)-IPI on patients treated with front-line ibrutinib in the real world: the case for new prognostic models. Blood 130:1719Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Soumerai JD, Ni A, Darif M et al (2017) A validated risk model for overall survival in relapsed/refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia applicable to patients treated with novel therapies and standard of care. Blood 130:4303Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Molica S, Giannarelli D, Mirabelli R, Levato L, Kay NE, Shanafelt TD (2018) Chronic lymphocytic leukemia international prognostic index (CLL-IPI): a systematic review and meta-analysis. Blood 131(3):365–368CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department Hematology-OncologyAzienda Ospedaliera Pugliese-CiaccioCatanzaroItaly
  2. 2.Biostatistic UnitIRCCS Regina ElenaRomeItaly
  3. 3.Department of Medicine, Division of HematologyStanford UniversityStanfordUSA

Personalised recommendations