Search

Objectives: Dysregulation of BCL‐2 family members has been reported in acute lymphocytic leukemia (ALL), with various BH3‐dependencies of the leukemic clone. We conducted a multicenter retrospective cohort of patients with relapsed/refractory B or T ALL, with ven‐chemotherapy or ven‐navitoclax combinations, to assess efficacy and safety. Methods: Seventeen patients were included in the analysis, median age was 32 years, with 6 B‐ALL and 11 T‐ALL patients. Nine patients received venetoclax combined with chemotherapy, and 13 patients received venetoclax in combination with navitoclax, vincristine and asparaginase, of which 5 were already exposed to venetoclax in previous lines. Results: ORR was 55% and 46% among the ven‐chemotherapy and the ven‐navitoclax‐chemotherapy, respectively. Most of the responders proceeded to an allogenic bone marrow transplant in both cohorts. The most common adverse effects of the ven‐navitoclax combination were infectious complications and hepatotoxicity. Conclusions: Our data demonstrated the possible efficacy of ven‐chemotherapy and ven‐navitoclax in r/r ALL with moderate toxicity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Chemotherapy-based approaches still constitute an essential feature in the treatment paradigm of adult acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL). The German Multicenter Study Group (GMALL) is a well-established protocol for ALL. In this study, we assessed our recent experience with the GMALL 07/2003 protocol reviewing all adult ALL patients who were treated with GMALL in three major centers in Israel during 2007–2020. The analysis comprised 127 patients with a median age of 41 years (range 17–83). Sixty-two were B-ALL (49%), 20 (16%) patients were Philadelphia chromosome positive ALL, and 45 (35%) were T-ALL. The 2-year and 5-year overall survival rates were 71% and 57%, respectively. The 2-year relapse rate was 30% with 2-year and 5-year leukemia-free survival rates of 59% and 50%, respectively. Adolescents and young adults experienced significantly longer overall survival (84 months versus 51 months; p=0.047) as well as leukemia-free survival compared with older patients (66 months versus 54 months, p=0.003; hazard ratio=0.39, 95% confidence interval, 0.19–0.79; p=0.009). T-ALL patients had longer survival compared to B-ALL patients while survival was comparable among Philadelphia chromosome positive patients and Philadelphia chromosome negative patients. An increased number of cytogenetic clones at diagnosis were tightly associated with adverse prognosis (15-month survival for ≥2 clones versus 81 months for normal karyotype; p=0.003). Positive measurable residual disease studies following consolidation were predictive for increased risk of relapse (64% versus 22%; p=0.003) and shorter leukemia-free survival (11 months versus 42 months; p=0.0003). While GMALL is an effective adult regimen, a substantial patient segment still experiences relapse. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: The use of haploidentical hematopoietic cell transplantation (haplo‐HCT) with posttransplantation cyclophosphamide prophylaxis is gaining traction in patients with acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL). METHODS: The Acute Leukemia Working Party/European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation registry was used to evaluate the outcomes of adult patients with ALL who underwent haplo‐HCT during 2011 through 2015 and compared them with the outcomes of those who underwent transplantation during 2016 through 2018. RESULTS: The analysis consisted of 195 patients, including 79 who underwent transplantation during 2011 through 2015 and 116 who underwent transplantation during 2016 through 2018. Overall, the 2‐year leukemia‐free survival and relapse incidence rates were 56.5% and 21%, respectively. The 100‐day incidence of grade 2 through 4 acute graft‐vs‐host disease (GVHD) was 34.5%. The rates of nonrelapse mortality (NRM) and overall survival (OS) were 22.5% and 64.7%, respectively. Patients who underwent transplantation during 2016 through 2018 experienced improved rates of leukemia‐free survival (64.9% vs 47.3%; P =.019) and OS (75.5% vs 53.5%; P =.006). Patients who underwent transplantation during 2016 through 2018 developed more grade 2 through 4 acute GVHD (42% vs 26.4%; P =.047). The incidence of relapse, GVHD‐free/relapse‐free survival, grade 3 and 4 acute GVHD, chronic GVHD, and extensive chronic GVHD did not differ significantly between groups. In multivariate analysis, more recently transplanted patients had a significantly reduced risk of NRM (hazard ratio, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.22‐0.89; P =.022) and improved OS (hazard ratio, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.26‐0.86; P =.014). A comparable analysis of patients who had acute myeloid leukemia during the same timeframes did not reveal any statistically significant differences in any outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: The outcome of adult patients with ALL who receive posttransplant cyclophosphamide has improved over time, with an impressive 2‐year OS of 75% and, most recently, an NRM rate of only 17%. In patients with acute lymphocytic leukemia who undergo haploidentical transplantation with posttransplantation cyclophosphamide prophylaxis, significant improvements in leukemia‐free survival and survival are observed in more recently transplanted patients. A nonrelapse mortality rate of 17% is reported in recently transplanted patients with acute lymphocytic leukemia who receive posttransplantation cyclophosphamide prophylaxis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Non-T-cell depleted haploidentical hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HaploSCT) is being increasingly used in acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) with improving patient outcomes. We have recently reported that outcomes of adult patients (pts) with ALL in complete remission (CR) receiving HaploSCT are comparable to unrelated donor transplants. We now compared HaploSCT and matched sibling donor (MSD) transplants in pts with ALL. Aim: To assess transplantation outcomes of HaploSCT and MSD transplants in pts with ALL in CR. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed adult patients (≥ 18 years) with ALL who underwent their first allogeneic stem cell transplantation (alloSCT) in first or second CR between 2012 and 2018, either from a T cell replete Haplo or MSD donor, and whose data were reported to the Acute Leukemia Working Party (ALWP) of the European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation (EBMT). Multivariate analysis (MVA) adjusting for differences between the groups was performed using the Cox proportional hazards regression model. Propensity score matching was also performed to reduce confounding effects. Results: The analysis comprised 2304 patients: HaploSCT-413; MSD-1891. Median follow-up was 25 months. Median age was 37 (range 18–75) and 38 (18–76) years in HaploSCT and MSD, respectively. HaploSCT patients were transplanted more recently than those transplanted from MSD (2016 vs 2015, p < 0.0001). A higher rate of HaploSCT was in CR2 (33.4% vs 16.7%, p < 0.0001), respectively, and fewer received myeloablative conditioning (68% vs 83.2%, p < 0.0001). Cytomegalovirus (CMV) seropositivity was lower in HaploSCT patients (22% vs 28%, p = 0.01) and donors (27.1% vs 33%, p < 0.02), and a higher proportion of the HaploSCTs were performed using a bone marrow (BM) graft (46.2% vs 18.6%, p < 0.0001). The 2 groups did not differ with regard to gender, Karnofsky performance status score, ALL phenotype, Philadelphia chromosome (Ph) positivity and pre-alloSCT measurable residual disease (MRD). Graft versus host disease (GVHD) prophylaxis was mainly post-transplant cyclophosphamide (PTCy) based (92.7%) in the HaploSCT setting, while it was mostly pharmacologic in the setting of MSD (18.7% received ATG). Cumulative incidence of engraftment at day 60 was higher in MSD transplants compared to HaploSCT (98.7% vs 96.3%, p = 0.001), respectively. Day 180 incidence of acute (a) GVHD II-IV and III-IV was higher in HaploSCT vs. MSD: 36.3% vs 28.9% (p = 0.002 and 15.2% vs 10.5% (p = 0.005), respectively. Conversely, the 2-year chronic (c) GVHD and extensive cGVHD were 32% vs 38.8% (p = 0.009) and 11.9% vs 19.5% (p = 0.001) in HaploSCT vs MSD, respectively. Main causes of death were leukemia (31.8% vs 45%), infection (33.1% vs 19.7%) and GVHD (16.6% vs 19.7%) for HaploSCT and MSD, respectively. Two-year relapse incidence (RI), non-relapse mortality (NRM), leukemia-free survival (LFS), overall survival (OS) and GVHD-free, relapse-free survival (GRFS) were 26% vs 31.6%, 22.9% vs 13%, 51% vs 55.4%, 58.8% vs 67.4% and 40.6% vs 39% for HaploSCT and MSD, respectively. In the MVA, RI was significantly lower in HaploSCT in comparison with MSD, hazard ratio (HR) = 0.66 (95% CI 0.52–0.83, p = 0.004), while NRM was significantly higher, HR = 1.9 (95% CI 1.43–2.53, p < 0.0001). aGVHD grade II-IV and grade III-IV were higher in HaploSCT than in MSD HR = 1.53 (95% CI 1.23–1.9, p = 0.0002) and HR = 1.54 (95% CI 1.1–2.15, p = 0.011), respectively. Extensive cGVHD was lower in HaploSCT compared with MSD, HR = 0.61 (95% CI 0.43–0.88, p = 0.007), while total cGVHD did not differ significantly, HR = 0.94 (95% CI 0.74–1.18, p = 0.58). LFS, OS and GRFS did not differ significantly between the 2 transplant groups, HR = 0.96 (95% CI 0.81–1.14, p = 0.66); HR = 1.18 (95% CI 0.96–1.43, p = 0.11) and HR = 0.93 (95% CI 0.79–1.09, p = 0.37), respectively. These results were confirmed in a matched-pair analysis. Conclusions: Outcomes of adult patients with ALL in CR receiving alloSCT from haploidentical donors are not significantly different from those receiving transplants from MSD in terms of LFS, OS and GRFS. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]