» Articles » PMID: 37971549

Outcome Improvement over Time in Reduced Intensity Conditioning Hematopoietic Transplantation: a 20-year Experience

Abstract

The current study includes all consecutive patients (N = 484) who received a reduced-intensity conditioning regimen (RIC) allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation in our center from 1999 to 2020. Conditioning regimens were based on fludarabine with melphalan or busulfan, with low-dose thiotepa and pharmacological GVHD prophylaxis consisted of cyclosporine A (CsA)-methotrexate (MTX)/mofetil (MMF) (n = 271), tacrolimus-sirolimus (n = 145), and post-transplantation cyclophosphamide (PTCy)-tacrolimus (n = 68). The median time of overall follow-up in survivors was 8 years (1-22 years) and was at least 3 years in all three GVHD prophylaxis groups. Thirty-three percent had a high or very high disease risk index, 56% ≥ 4 European bone marrow transplantation risk, and 65% ≥ 3 hematopoietic stem cell transplantation comorbidity index score-age score. Neutrophil and platelet engraftment was longer for PTCy-tacro (p 0.0001). Cumulative incidence of grade III-IV aGVHD was 17% at 200 days, and that of moderate-severe cGvHD was 36% at 8 years. GVHD prophylaxis was the only prognostic factor in the multivariable analyses for the development of aGVHD and moderate-severe cGVHD (p 0.0001). NRM and relapse incidences were 29% and 30% at 8 years, while OS and PFS rates were 43% and 39% at 8 years. At 3 years, OS was highest in the PTCy-tacro group (68%) than in the tacro-siro (61%) and CsA-MTX/MMF (49%) cohorts (p < 0.01). In the three groups, respectively, the 200-day incidence of grade III-IV aGvHD (6% vs. 12% vs. 23%) and 3-year moderate-severe cGVHD (8% vs. 40% vs. 38%) were lower in the PTCy cohort. These better outcomes were confirmed in multivariable analyses. Based on our recent results, the PTCy could be considered as a real GvHD prophylaxis in the RIC setting due to improve best 3-year GvHD and survival outcomes.

Citing Articles

Safety and efficacy of G-CSF after allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation using post-transplant cyclophosphamide: clinical and in vitro examination of endothelial activation.

Escribano-Serrat S, Pedraza A, Suarez-Lledo M, Charry P, De Moner B, Martinez-Sanchez J Bone Marrow Transplant. 2024; 59(10):1466-1476.

PMID: 39117736 DOI: 10.1038/s41409-024-02388-y.


Role and limitation of cell therapy in treating neurological diseases.

Li Y, Li P, Tao Q, Abuqeis I, Xiyang Y Ibrain. 2024; 10(1):93-105.

PMID: 38682022 PMC: 11045202. DOI: 10.1002/ibra.12152.

References
1.
Copelan E . Hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation. N Engl J Med. 2006; 354(17):1813-26. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMra052638. View

2.
Nakamura R, Forman S . Reduced intensity conditioning for allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation: considerations for evidence-based GVHD prophylaxis. Expert Rev Hematol. 2014; 7(3):407-21. DOI: 10.1586/17474086.2014.898561. View

3.
Giralt S, Thall P, Khouri I, Wang X, Braunschweig I, Ippolitti C . Melphalan and purine analog-containing preparative regimens: reduced-intensity conditioning for patients with hematologic malignancies undergoing allogeneic progenitor cell transplantation. Blood. 2001; 97(3):631-7. DOI: 10.1182/blood.v97.3.631. View

4.
Slavin S, Nagler A, Naparstek E, Kapelushnik Y, Aker M, CIVIDALLI G . Nonmyeloablative stem cell transplantation and cell therapy as an alternative to conventional bone marrow transplantation with lethal cytoreduction for the treatment of malignant and nonmalignant hematologic diseases. Blood. 1998; 91(3):756-63. View

5.
McSweeney P, Niederwieser D, Shizuru J, Sandmaier B, Molina A, Maloney D . Hematopoietic cell transplantation in older patients with hematologic malignancies: replacing high-dose cytotoxic therapy with graft-versus-tumor effects. Blood. 2001; 97(11):3390-400. DOI: 10.1182/blood.v97.11.3390. View