Search

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.

Reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) allows for the use of allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) in older patients with acute myelogenous leukemia (AML). We compared outcomes between 713 patients age ≥70 years and 16,161 patients age 50 to 69 years who underwent HSCT between 2004 and 2014. A higher proportion of the older patients were male and had secondary AML, active disease, a peripheral blood stem cell graft, a matched unrelated donor, an RIC regimen, and a lower Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS) score (P< .001). In multivariate analysis, the incidences of acute and chronic graft-versus-host disease and relapse were similar in the 2 age groups. Nonrelapse mortality at 2 years was 34% (95% confidence interval [CI], 31% to 38%) in patients age ≥70 years and 24% (95% CI, 25% to 32%) in those age 50 to 69 years (P< .001). Survival at 2 years in the 2 groups was 38% (95% CI, 34% to 42%) and 50% (95% CI, 49% to 50%), respectively (P< .001). In patients with active disease, the corresponding percentages were 35% (95% CI, 29% to 41%) in those age ≥70 years and 33% (95% CI, 31% to 34%) in those age <70 years (P = .36). In patients age ≥70 years, a KPS score of ≥80% was associated with improved survival (hazard ratio, 1.53; 95% CI, 1.14 to 2.06; P = .003). In summary, patients age ≥70 years had worse outcomes, except for those with active AML., (Copyright © 2019 American Society for Transplantation and Cellular Therapy. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Allogeneic haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (alloHSCT) is considered a standard treatment for patients with Philadelphia chromosome-positive acute lymphoblastic leukaemia (Ph+ ALL) achieving complete remission after induction containing tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs)., Methods: We retrospectively compared results of myeloablative alloHSCT from either matched sibling donor (MSD) or unrelated donor (URD) with autologous (auto) HSCT for adults with Ph+ ALL in molecular remission, treated between 2007 and 2014., Results: In univariate analysis, the incidence of relapse at 2 years was 47% after autoHSCT, 28% after MSD-HSCT and 19% after URD-HSCT (P = 0.0002). Respective rates of non-relapse mortality were 2%, 18%, and 22% (P = 0.001). The probabilities of leukaemia-free survival were 52%, 55% and 60% (P = 0.69), while overall survival rates were 70%, 70% and 69% (P = 0.58), respectively. In multivariate analysis, there was a trend towards increased risk of overall mortality after MSD-HSCT (hazard ratio [HR], 1.5, P = 0.12) and URD-HSCT (HR, 1.6, P = 0.08) when referred to autoHSCT. The use of total body irradiation (TBI)-based regimens was associated with reduced risk of relapse (HR, 0.65, P = 0.02) and overall mortality (HR, 0.67, P = 0.01)., Conclusion: In the era of TKIs, outcomes of myeloablative autoHSCT and alloHSCT for patients with Ph+ ALL in first molecular remission are comparable. Therefore, autoHSCT appears to be an attractive treatment option potentially allowing for circumvention of alloHSCT sequelae. Irrespective of the type of donor, TBI-based regimens should be considered the preferable type of conditioning for Ph+ ALL., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)