| 1. |
- Mehta, Rohtesh S., et al.
(author)
-
Composite GRFS and CRFS Outcomes After Adult Alternative Donor HCT
- 2020
-
In: Journal of Clinical Oncology. - : American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO). - 0732-183X .- 1527-7755. ; 38:18, s. 2062-2076
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- PURPOSE There is no consensus on the best choice of an alternative donor (umbilical cord blood [UCB], haploidentical, one-antigen mismatched [7/8]-bone marrow [BM], or 7/8-peripheral blood [PB]) for hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) for patients lacking an HLA-matched related or unrelated donor.METHODS We report composite end points of graft-versus-host disease (GVHD)-free relapse-free survival (GRFS) and chronic GVHD (cGVHD)-free relapse-free survival (CRFS) in 2,198 patients who underwent UCB (n = 838), haploidentical (n = 159), 7/8-BM (n = 241), or 7/8-PB (n = 960) HCT. All groups were divided by myeloablative conditioning (MAC) intensity or reduced intensity conditioning (RIC), except haploidentical group in which most received RIC. To account for multiple testing, P < .0071 in multivariable analysis and P < .00025 in direct pairwise comparisons were considered statistically significant.RESULTS In multivariable analysis, haploidentical group had the best GRFS, CRFS, and overall survival (OS). In the direct pairwise comparison of other groups, among those who received MAC, there was no difference in GRFS or CRFS among UCB, 7/8-BM, and 7/8-PB with serotherapy (alemtuzumab or antithymocyte globulin) groups. In contrast, the 7/8-PB without serotherapy group had significantly inferior GRFS, higher cGVHD, and a trend toward worse CRFS (hazard ratio [HR], 1.38; 95% CI, 1.13 to 1.69; P = .002) than the 7/8-BM group and higher cGVHD and trend toward inferior CRFS (HR, 1.36; 95% CI, 1.14 to 1.63; P = .0006) than the UCB group. Among patients with RIC, all groups had significantly inferior GRFS and CRFS compared with the haploidentical group.CONCLUSION Recognizing the limitations of a registry retrospective analysis and the possibility of center selection bias in choosing donors, our data support the use of UCB, 7/8-BM, or 7/8-PB (with serotherapy) grafts for patients undergoing MAC HCT and haploidentical grafts for patients undergoing RIC HCT. The haploidentical group had the best GRFS, CRFS, and OS of all groups.
|
|
| 2. |
- DeFilipp, Zachariah, et al.
(author)
-
Maintenance Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors Following Allogeneic Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation for Chronic Myelogenous Leukemia : A Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research Study
- 2020
-
In: Biology of blood and marrow transplantation. - : Elsevier. - 1083-8791 .- 1523-6536. ; 26:3, s. 472-479
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- It remains unknown whether the administration of tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) targeting BCR-ABL1 after allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) is associated with improved outcomes for patients with chronic myelogenous leukemia (CML). In this registry study, we analyzed clinical outcomes of 390 adult patients with CML who underwent transplantation between 2007 and 2014 and received maintenance TKI following HCT (n = 89) compared with no TKI maintenance (n = 301), as reported to the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research. All patients received TKI therapy before HCT. The majority of patients had a disease status of first chronic phase at HCT (n = 240; 62%). The study was conducted as a landmark analysis, excluding patients who died, relapsed, had chronic graft-versus-host disease, or were censored before day +100 following HCT. Of the 89 patients who received TKI maintenance, 77 (87%) received a single TKI and the other 12 (13%) received multiple sequential TKIs. The most common TKIs used for maintenance were dasatinib (n = 50), imatinib (n = 27), and nilotinib (n = 27). As measured from day +100, the adjusted estimates for 5-year relapse (maintenance, 35% versus no maintenance, 26%; P = .11), leukemia-free survival (maintenance, 42% versus no maintenance, 44%; P = .65), or overall survival (maintenance, 61% versus no maintenance, 57%; P = .61) did not differ significantly between patients receiving TKI maintenance or no maintenance. These results remained unchanged in multivariate analysis and were not modified by disease status before transplantation. In conclusion, our data from this day +100 landmark analysis do not demonstrate a significant impact of maintenance TKI therapy on clinical outcomes. The optimal approach to TKI administration in the post-transplantation setting in patients with CML remains undetermined.
|
|
