Search

Objective: Allogeneic stem cell transplantation (allo‐SCT) may have a curative potential due to the graft versus lymphoma effect. In this study, we aimed to compare transplant outcomes between refractory‐T‐NHL (ref‐NHL) and Chemosensitive‐T‐NHL (CS‐T‐NHL). Materials and Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the records of 26 ref‐NHL and 29 CS‐T‐NHL consecutive patients who underwent allo‐SCT at our center and compared the transplant outcomes between the groups. Results: All patients were heavily pretreated with 27% of patients relapsing post‐auto‐SCT and two patients in the ref‐T‐NHL post‐allo‐SCT. Patients were transplanted mainly from unrelated donors. There were no differences in leucocytes and platelet engraftment between the two groups. At 3 years, the relapse incidence was 34% in Ref‐TNHL and 19% in CS‐TNHL (p =.33), with non‐relapse mortality rates of 28% and 22%, respectively (p =.52). Female patients and those with a previous auto‐SCT had lower relapse incidence (p =.045, p =.003). The 3‐year overall survival was 39% in Ref‐TNHL and 56% in CS‐TNHL (p =.15). Trends for improved progression‐free survival (PFS) and graft‐versus‐host disease relapse‐free survival (GRFS) were observed in the CS‐TNHL group (PFS: 60% vs. 30%, p =.075; GRFS: 38% vs. 21%, p =.1). Conclusion: Acknowledging the retrospective nature of our study, our results indicate that allo‐SCT has a curative potential in patients with T‐NHL even in refractory status. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Pre‐transplant minimal residual disease (MRD) impacts negatively on post‐transplant relapse risk in acute myeloid leukemia (AML). Therapeutic drug monitoring by calculating area under the curve (AUC) was developed to optimize busulfan (Bu) exposure. Here, we compared post‐transplant outcomes after individualized versus fixed busulfan dosage in intermediate‐risk AML who achieved CR prior to allograft focusing on pre‐transplant flow‐MRD. Eighty‐seven patients (median, 56 years) with intermediate‐risk AML and pre‐transplant flow‐MRD ("different from normal") were included. Thirty‐two patients received individualized busulfan; 54 fixed dosages. Individualized dosage was adjusted in 25/32 patients: increased, n = 18/25 (72%); decreased: n = 7/25 (28%). After median follow‐up of 27 months, we observed lower 3‐year relapses (6%, 2%–19% vs. 35%, 23%–49% p = 0.02), improved 3‐year leukemia‐free survival (LFS) (78%, 54%–91% vs. 55%, 40%–70% p = 0.009) and − overall survival (OS) (82%, 60%–93% vs. 69%, 54%–81% p = 0.05) after individualized compared to fixed Bu. Non‐relapsed mortality (NRM) and acute graft versus host disease (GvHD) were not different. In multivariate analysis, fixed Bu showed unfavorable impact on OS (hazard ratio [HR] 4.6, p = 0.044), LFS (HR 3.6, p = 0.018) and relapses (HR 3.6, p = 0.033). Fixed Bu also had unfavorable impact on LFS (3.6, 1.1–12.6, p = 0.041) in pre‐transplant MRD‐positive patients. Individualized, AUC‐based, busulfan is associated with lower relapses in intermediate‐risk AML patients allografted in CR and may overcome pre‐transplant MRD‐positivity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Sorafenib has shown encouraging results in patients with Fms-like tyrosine kinase 3 (FLT3)-positive acute myeloid leukemia. Its role after allogeneic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) has been reported in a few cases with encouraging results.Methods: The authors describe the use of sorafenib as a maintenance agent after HSCT in 27 patients with FLT3-positive acute myeloid leukemia.Results: The median age of the patients was 46 years (range, 15-57 years). Sorafenib was introduced at a median of 70 days (range, 29-337 days) after HSCT. The median treatment duration was 8.4 months (range, 0.2-46 months). Eleven patients experienced treatment toxicities, mainly of grade 1 to 2 (graded according to the National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria [version 4.0]). Dose reduction or withdrawal was required in 4 patients and 4 patients, respectively. The persistence of toxicity prompted treatment withdrawal in 1 patient. Clinical improvement followed dose modifications. Thirteen patients experienced chronic graft-versus-host disease (limited in 9 patients and extensive in 4 patients), resulting in dose reduction in 5 patients followed by withdrawal in 1 of these individuals. At a median follow-up of 18 months (range, 4-48 months), 25 patients were alive (all of whom were in complete molecular remission) and 18 were still receiving treatment, with 1-year overall survival and progression-free survival rates of 92% ± 6% and 92% ± 5%, respectively.Conclusions: Sorafenib treatment after HSCT appears to be feasible and highly effective with dose individualization according to patient tolerability. Further analysis is needed to evaluate the immunomodulating role of sorafenib after HSCT. The data from the current support prospective controlled trials of sorafenib after HSCT. Cancer 2017;123:2867-74. © 2017 American Cancer Society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]