scholarly journals Survival after T-Cell Replete Haploidentical Related Donor Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation (Haplo-HCT) Using Post-Transplant Cyclophosphamide (PT-CY) Compared with HLA-Matched Related Donor (MRD) Transplant for Lymphomas

2016 ◽  
Vol 22 (3) ◽  
pp. S75-S76 ◽  
Author(s):  
Reem Karmali ◽  
Nilanjan Ghosh ◽  
Vanderson G. Rocha ◽  
Kwang Woo Ahn ◽  
Alyssa DiGilio ◽  
...  
Hematology ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 2008 (1) ◽  
pp. 412-417 ◽  
Author(s):  
Frederick R. Appelbaum

AbstractAlthough for many patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) from a matched related donor provides the best, and sometimes the sole chance for cure, only about 30% of individuals have HLA-matched family members. Fortunately, recent advances on a number of fronts have expanded the acceptable donor pool. With the use of high-resolution typing, HCT outcomes using unrelated donors matched at HLA-A, -B, -C and -DRB1 give results very similar to those expected with matched related donors. A single mismatch, as determined either by low- or high-resolution testing, results in modestly worse outcomes, with mismatches at B or C better tolerated than mismatches at A or DRB1. Initial results of umbilical cord blood transplantation for adults showed a clear association of cell dose and outcome, limiting the procedure to a minority of adults where cord bloods with at least 2.5 or 3 × 107 total nucleated cells/kg could be found. More recently, the use of double cord transplants has shown considerable promise, lowering the risk of graft rejection and possibly the risk of relapse as well. Haploidentical transplantation using T-cell–replete marrow and post-transplant high-dose cyclophosphamide, or T-cell–depleted peripheral blood and marrow containing high doses of CD34+ cells is under investigation. Together, these various approaches are broadening the transplant options for patients with AML.


Blood ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 126 (23) ◽  
pp. 1967-1967
Author(s):  
Melhem Solh ◽  
Xu Zhang ◽  
Stacey Brown ◽  
Lawrence E. Morris ◽  
H. Kent Holland ◽  
...  

Abstract Relapse of hematologic malignancies remains a major cause of treatment failure and mortality among patients receiving allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT). Patients relapsing after a matched related or unrelated donor transplantation may benefit from donor lymphocyte infusion (DLI) as part of their post relapse therapy. DLI post-relapse has less frequently been utilized among recipients of HIDT presumably due to the potential for severe GVHD if high T-cell doss are administered without immunosuppression. However, reluctance to administer DLI may limit the possibility of remission following disease relapse in HIDT. We compared the frequency of use of DLI and survival outcomes for patients relapsing after HIDT using post-transplant cyclophosphamide to those relapsing after MRD or MUD HCT at our institution. 195 consecutive HCT recipients with relapse of hematologic malignancy occurring after HIDT (N=35), MUD (N=74) and MRD (N=81) between 1998 and 2014 were included in this analysis. The median age was 50 years (19-77 years) and median time to relapse was 159 days (25-2465 days) post HCT. Patients receiving HIDT had similar median time to relapse (5.1 vs 5.2 vs 5.2 months, p=0.638), Dana-Farber/CIBMTR disease risk index (DRI), comorbidity index (CMI) scores, longer times to neutrophil engraftment (17 vs 14 vs 14 days, p<0.001), and platelet engraftment (28 vs 19 vs 18 days, p<0.001) when compared to MUD and MRD recipients respectively. Post-relapse survival at 1 year was worse among HIDT recipients when compared to MRD (9% versus 41%, p=0.008) and MUD (9% vs 35%, p=0.025). DLI was used in 3 (8%) relapsed HIDT patients, 48 MRD patients (59%) and 28 (38%) MUD recipients. Among patients relapsing post MRD and MUD HCT, use of DLI was associated with a better post relapse survival (p=0.04). In a multivariate analysis, donor type (HIDT), time to relapse (<3 months versus > 3months post-transplant) and comorbidity index (CMI score >= 3) were all predictive of worse post relapse survival. This analysis shows that relapse post HIDT carries a worse prognosis than relapse post MRD and MUD. Efforts such as post-transplant maintenance and haploidentical DLI infusions should be investigated further in the HIDT setting. Figure 1. Figure 1. Figure 2. Figure 2. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.


Blood ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 124 (21) ◽  
pp. 2566-2566
Author(s):  
Ronald M. Sobecks ◽  
Dawn Thomas ◽  
Aiwen Zhang ◽  
Mostafa Mohammed Saleh ◽  
Lisa Rybicki ◽  
...  

Abstract Although outcomes after allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (alloHCT) for AML have improved, this has mainly been attributed to a reduction in transplant-related mortality rather than reduced leukemia relapse. NK cell alloreactivity is regulated by inhibitory and activating signals mediated through cell-surface receptors including the killer immunoglobulin-like receptors (KIRs). Group A and B KIR haplotypes have distinct centromeric (Cen) and telomeric (Tel) gene-content motifs and donor Cen group B KIR haplotypes have been reported to be associated with decreased relapse and improved survival in AML patients undergoing unrelated donor alloHCT. We hypothesized that donor KIR genotype may also be predictive of outcomes after matched related donor (MRD) alloHCT. We evaluated 93 AML patients in CR1/CR2 who underwent T-cell replete alloHCT using HLA- matched related donors at our institution from 1/2000-3/2013. Sixty-six had myeloablative conditioning (MAC) that that was busulfan/cyclophosphamide-based and 27 had reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) with fludarabine/total body irradiation or busulfan/fludarabine. Donors were KIR genotyped to assign haplotypes A/A vs. B/X and the distinctive Cen and Tel gene-content motifs of group A and B KIR haplotypes according to the presence or absence of one or more B haplotype-defining KIR genes. KIR B–content score for each KIR genotype was defined as the number of Cen and Tel gene-content motifs containing B haplotype–defining genes (range, 0-4). As compared to those with haplotypes B/X (n=40; B content scores of 1-4) those with haplotype A/A (n=25; B content score of 0) undergoing MAC had significantly lower 100-day, 6-, 12- and 24-month non-relapse mortality (NRM) (8% vs. 0%, 13% vs. 0%, 15% vs. 0%, 25% vs. 0%, respectively, Figure 1) which was confirmed on multivariable analysis (HR 9.19, p=0.03). There were no differences between these groups regarding patient and transplant-related characteristics, or for acute or chronic GVHD, relapse, or survival. The causes of death in the group with haplotypes B/X were most commonly attributed to infection and then GVHD. However, within the group with B/X haplotypes, the B motif content score (1-4) was not associated with significant differences in NRM (HR 0.79, p=0.56). No difference in outcomes was observed for those undergoing RIC. The number of donor activating KIR genes (2SD1, 2DS2, 2DS3, 2DS4, 2DS5, and 3DS1) was then assessed. As compared to those with 3-6 activating KIR genes (n=20) those with 0-2 (n=41) undergoing MAC had significantly lower 100-day, 6-, 12- and 24-month non-relapse mortality (NRM) (15% vs. 0%, 15% vs. 5%, 15% vs. 5%, 29% vs. 8%, respectively, Figure 2) which was confirmed on multivariable analysis (HR 4.07, p=0.01). There were no differences in other post-transplant outcomes when comparing these groups or when considering those undergoing RIC. An increase of 1 donor activating KIR also was highly associated with NRM (HR 1.37, p=0.008). Overall, these results suggest that in the MRD MAC alloHCT setting donor KIR genotype may be predictive of increased NRM risk, particularly for those with B/X haplotypes and greater numbers donor activating KIRs. No comparable effects were observed in the RIC setting. Future strategies to further enhance immune reconstitution post-transplant may be appropriate to pursue for these higher risk patients. These results may have potential implications to improve donor selection for those AML patients with multiple HLA-matched related donors and need to be validated in larger cohorts. Figure 1 Figure 1. Figure 2 Figure 2. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document