Search

The phase III study was designed to compare event-free survival (EFS) after treosulfan-based conditioning with a widely applied reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) busulfan regimen in older or comorbid patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) or myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) undergoing allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT). A previously reported confirmatory interim analysis of the randomized clinical study including 476 patients demonstrated statistically significant noninferiority for treosulfan with clinically meaningful improvement in EFS. Here, the final study results and pre-specified subgroup analyses of all 570 randomized patients with completed longer-term follow-up are presented. Patients presenting HCT-specific comorbidity index >2 or aged >= 50 years were randomly assigned (1:1) to intravenous (IV) fludarabine with either treosulfan (30 g/m(2) IV) or busulfan (6.4 mg/kg IV) after stratification by disease risk group, donor type, and participating institution. The primary endpoint was EFS with disease recurrence, graft failure, or death from any cause as events. EFS of patients (median age 60 years) was superior after treosulfan compared to RIC busulfan: 36-months-EFS rate 59.5% (95% CI, 52.2-66.1) vs. 49.7% (95% CI, 43.3-55.7) with a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.64 (95% CI, 0.49-0.84), p = 0.0006. Likewise, overall survival (OS) with treosulfan was superior compared to busulfan: 36-month-OS rate 66.8% vs. 56.3%; HR 0.64 (95% CI, 0.48-0.87), p = 0.0037. Post hoc analyses revealed that these differences were consistent with the confirmatory interim analysis, and thereby the treosulfan regimen appears particularly suitable for older AML and MDS patients.

For over two decades, the EBMT has updated recommendations on indications for haematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) practice based on clinical and scientific developments in the field. This is the eighth special EBMT report on the indications for HCT for haematological diseases, solid tumours and immune disorders. Our aim is to provide general guidance on HCT indications according to prevailing clinical practice in EBMT countries and centres. In order to inform patient decisions, these recommendations must be considered in conjunction with the risk of the disease, risk of HCT procedure and non-transplant strategies, including evolving cellular therapies. HCT techniques are constantly evolving and we make no specific recommendations, but encourage harmonisation of practice, where possible, to ensure experience across indications can be meaningfully aggregated via registry outputs. We also recommend working according to JACIE accreditation standards to maintain quality in clinical and laboratory components of practice, including benchmarking of survival outcomes. Since the last edition, the COVID-19 pandemic has affected clinical decision making and activity across indications. Although the full impact of the pandemic is yet to be determined, we recommend that decision making across indications is delivered with ongoing reference to EBMT and national COVID-19 guidance, in accordance with current local conditions.

We investigated the incidence and outcome of anti-CD19 chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cells-associated Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) ≥grade 3 cytopenia. In the EBMT CAR-T registry, we identified 398 adult patients with large B-cell lymphoma who had been treated with CAR-T-cells with axicel (62%) or tisacel (38%) before August 2021 and had cytopenia status documented for the first 100 days. Most patients had received two or three previous lines of therapy, however, 22.3% had received four or more. Disease status was progressive in 80.4%, stable in 5.0% and partial/complete remission in 14.6%. 25.9% of the patients had received a transplantation before. Median age was 61.4 years (min–max; IQR=18.7–81; (52.9–69.5)).The cumulative incidence of ≥grade 3 cytopenia was 9.0% at 30 days (95% CI (6.5 to 12.1)) and 12.1% at 100 days after CAR T-cell infusion (95% CI (9.1 to 15.5)). The median time from CAR-T infusion to cytopenia onset was 16.5 days (min–max; IQR=1–90; (4–29.8)). Grade 3 and grade 4 CTCAE cytopenia occurred in 15.2% and 84.8%, respectively. In 47.6% there was no resolution.Severe cytopenia had no significant impact on overall survival (OS) (HR 1.13 (95% CI 0.74 to 1.73), p=0.57). However, patients with severe cytopenia had a poorer progression-free survival (PFS) (HR 1.54 (95% CI 1.07 to 2.22), p=0.02) and a higher relapse incidence (HR 1.52 (95% CI 1.04 to 2.23), p=0.03). In those patients who developed severe cytopenia during the first 100 days (n=47), OS, PFS, relapse incidence and non-relapse mortality at 12 months after diagnosis of severe cytopenia were 53.6% (95% CI (40.3 to 71.2)), 20% (95% CI (10.4 to 38.6)), 73.5% (95% CI (55.2 to 85.2)) and 6.5% (95% CI (1.7 to 16.2)), respectively.In multivariate analysis of severe cytopenia risk factors, only year of CAR-T infusion (HR=0.61, 95% CI (0.39 to 0.95), p=0.028) and total number of treatment lines before CAR-T infusion (one or two lines vs three or more, HR=0.41, 95% CI (0.21 to 0.83), p=0.013) had a significant positive association with the incidence of cytopenia. Other factors, such as previous transplantation, disease status at time of CAR-T, patient age and patient sex, had no significant association.Our data provide insight on frequency and clinical relevance of severe cytopenia after CAR T-cell therapy in the European real-world setting.

The outcome of patients undergoing HLA-matched unrelated donor allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation following reduced-intensity conditioning or myeloablative regimens is reported to be equivalent; however, it is not known if the intensity of the conditioning impacts outcomes after mismatched unrelated donor transplantation for acute myeloid leukemia. Eight hundred and eighty three patients receiving reduced-intensity conditioning were compared with 1041 myeloablative conditioning regimen recipients in the setting of mismatched unrelated donor transplantation. The donor graft was HLA-matched at 9/10 in 872 (83.8%) and at 8/10 in 169 (16.2%) myeloablative conditioning recipients, while in the reduced-intensity conditioning cohort, 754 (85.4%) and 129 (14.6%) were matched at 9/10 and 8/10 loci, respectively. Myeloablative conditioning regimen recipients were younger, 70% being