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]

Brentuximab Vedotin (BV) is a chimeric anti-CD30 antibody, conjugated to anti-tubulin mono-methyl-auristatin. The AETHERA trial revealed increased PFS when BV is used as maintenance therapy for 16 cycles in high risk Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) after autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT). However, this schedule is associated with high cost and significant toxicity. Our objective is to assess the safety and efficacy of four cycles Brentuximab Vedotin as consolidation after ASCT for relapsed/refractory (R/R) HL. We identified 20 consecutive adult patients with R/R HL treated with BV for four cycles as consolidation after ASCT. The indications for BV consolidation included primary refractory disease in 12 patients (60%), early relapse in 6 patients (30%) and extra-nodal involvement in two patients (10%). After a median follow up of 27 months, five (25%) patients relapsed. The median time to relapse was 6 months. Median PFS and OS were not reached. No significant toxicities were reported. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Cytomegalovirus reactivation is often diagnosed in allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant recipients and therefore could lead to CMV-related disease, involving many organs in these immunocompromised patients. In contrast, few studies investigated CMV reactivation and end-organ disease in patients undergoing Autologous Peripheral Blood Stem Cell Transplant (ASCT) since they are considered at low risk for both reactivation and disease. Objectives The primary outcome of the analysis was to understand the difference in incidence of CMV reactivation between MM and Lymphoma patients. Secondary outcomes included the difference between MM and Lymphoma patients when considering the effect of CMV reactivation on transplant related mortality (TRM) overall survival (OS) progression free survival (PFS), risk factors for reactivation, and median time to reactivation. Study design In this report, we retrospectively compared the incidence, risk factors, and outcome of CMV reactivation in adult patients with Myeloma (MM) and Lymphoma undergoing ASCT at the American university of Beirut Medical Center in Lebanon (AUBMC). A total of 324 consecutive ASCT were performed between January 2005 and March 2016. Serial weekly monitoring for CMV quantification was done using a quantitative PCR, starting from transplantation until the hospital discharge and afterwards based on the clinical symptoms in cases of clinical suspicion of reactivation after discharge from the hospital. Results The cumulative incidence of CMV reactivation was 16% (n = 53) with a median time of 16 (range, 4–242) days after ASCT. The incidence of reactivation was significantly higher in the MM (22%) and NHL (20%) groups, when compared to the HL (4%) (P = 0.001). There was a higher incidence of CMV reactivation according to age (≥50 vs ≤50 years) with higher incidence in the older population 24% vs 10% respectively (p = 0.0043). The mean time to CMV reactivation was significantly higher in the NHL group with a mean of 53.7 days when compared to the HL and MM groups with mean 19.75 days and 12.66 (range, 4–34) days respectively (P = 0.003). Twenty-two patients (76%) and three patients (75%) patients required specific antiviral therapy in the MM group and HL groups respectively; which was significantly higher (P < 0.001) then the NHL group with 13 (65%) patients requiring specific antiviral therapy. Five patients (1.5%) developed CMV disease at a median of 60 days (range, 7–107) post ASCT: there was significant difference in the mean-time to reactivation based on disease type MM versus lymphoma 10 versus 33 days (P = 0.007). In multivariate analysis, a higher age was associated with an increased risk of CMV reactivation; MM and NHL had higher risk of CMV reactivation when compared to HL, and progressive disease at transplant was associated with increased risk of CMV reactivation. After a median follow-up of 21.5 months (range: 1–125), there was no significant impact on PFS, however there was significant decrease in OS of lymphoma patients who had CMV reactivation when compared to those without CMV reactivation (204 and 112 days respectively P = 0.045). TRM increased from 1.1% in patients with no CMV reactivation to 13% in patients with CMV reactivation (P = 0.003). Conclusion Our data suggests that CMV reactivation is not uncommon in ASCT recipients and may contribute to increase TRM. MM patients may have a higher incidence, of CMV reactivation with more anti-viral treatment requirements when compared to lymphoma patients, especially in older population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]