New agent development rests on the fundamental assumption that candidate agents or drug combinations that induce objective responses after relapse will prevent relapse, if applied prior to relapse. However, cumulative experience now includes at least 5 examples of interventions with post-relapse objective response rates greater than 50% that failed to improve outcomes when applied prior to relapse. Emerging insights into oligoclonality provide some explanation. In acute lymphoblastic leukaemia, the predominant clones at relapse differ from the predominant clones at presentation. Arguably, the more highly proliferative clones that predominate at relapse differ in drug sensitivity from the less proliferative clones that escape primary therapy. Interventions effective against the predominant clones at relapse may have no effect on the antecedent escapee clones. Response is not sufficient in new agent development. Duration of response has attracted less attention because of variability in post-remission therapy but some patient subsets have such a uniformly dismal outcome that details of post-remission therapy may be irrelevant. Benchmarks are needed. Are recovering blasts members of the same clone or do they represent a new clone? When you eradicate the predominant clones you get a response. When you eradicate all clones, you get a cure.
Keywords: acute lymphoblastic leukaemia; new drug development; oligoclonality.
© 2016 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.