Back to Search Start Over

Myeloablative vs reduced intensity T-cell–replete haploidentical transplantation for hematologic malignancy

Authors :
Scott R. Solomon
Andrew St. Martin
Nirav N. Shah
Giancarlo Fatobene
Monzr M. Al Malki
Karen K. Ballen
Asad Bashey
Nelli Bejanyan
Javier Bolaños Meade
Claudio G. Brunstein
Zachariah DeFilipp
Richard E. Champlin
Ephraim J. Fuchs
Mehdi Hamadani
Peiman Hematti
Christopher G. Kanakry
Joseph P. McGuirk
Ian K. McNiece
Stefan O. Ciurea
Marcelo C. Pasquini
Vanderson Rocha
Rizwan Romee
Sagar S. Patel
Sumithira Vasu
Edmund K. Waller
John R. Wingard
Mei-Jie Zhang
Mary Eapen
Source :
Blood Advances, Vol 3, Iss 19, Pp 2836-2844 (2019)
Publication Year :
2019
Publisher :
Elsevier, 2019.

Abstract

Abstract: In the absence of prospective studies that examine the effect of conditioning regimen intensity after T-cell–replete haploidentical transplant for acute myeloid leukemia (AML), acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL), and myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS), a retrospective cohort analysis was performed. Of the 1325 eligible patients (AML, n = 818; ALL, n = 286; and MDS, n = 221), 526 patients received a myeloablative regimen and 799 received a reduced-intensity regimen. Graft-versus-host disease prophylaxis was uniform with posttransplant cyclophosphamide, a calcineurin inhibitor, and mycophenolate mofetil. The primary end point was disease-free survival. Cox regression models were built to study the effect of conditioning regimen intensity on transplant outcomes. For patients aged 18 to 54 years, disease-free survival was lower (hazard ratio [HR], 1.34; 42% vs 51%; P = .007) and relapse was higher (HR, 1.51; 44% vs 33%; P = .001) with a reduced-intensity regimen compared with a myeloablative regimen. Nonrelapse mortality did not differ according to regimen intensity. For patients aged 55 to 70 years, disease-free survival (HR, 0.97; 37% vs 43%; P = .83) and relapse (HR, 1.32; 42% vs 31%; P = .11) did not differ according to regimen intensity. Nonrelapse mortality was lower with reduced-intensity regimens (HR, 0.64; 20% vs 31%; P = .02). Myeloablative regimens are preferred for AML, ALL, and MDS; reduced-intensity regimens should be reserved for those unable to tolerate myeloablation.

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
24739529
Volume :
3
Issue :
19
Database :
Directory of Open Access Journals
Journal :
Blood Advances
Publication Type :
Academic Journal
Accession number :
edsdoj.063425ac32074716842f8376472a505e
Document Type :
article
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1182/bloodadvances.2019000627