scholarly journals Philadelphia Chromosome-Positive Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia: To Allogeneic Stem Cell Transplantation or Not? a Single Center Experience

Blood ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 128 (22) ◽  
pp. 2308-2308 ◽  
Author(s):  
xiao-Jun Huang ◽  
Jing Wang ◽  
Qian Jiang ◽  
Huan Chen ◽  
Lanping Xu ◽  
...  

Abstract Objectives: Compare the outcomes of allogeneic stem cell transplantation (allo-HSCT) versus a combination of imatinib and chemotherapy in patients with Philadelphia chromosome-positive acute lymphoblastic leukemia (Ph+ALL). Explore prognostic factors and indentify those who may enjoy long-term survival without the risk of allo-HSCT. Methods: Between May 2006 to November 2015, data of consecutive newly-diagnosed Ph+ALL patients <65 years treated at Peking University People's Hospital were analyzed retrospectively. Patients received imatinib 400mg daily plus CODP regimen as induction chemotherapy. After achieving a complete remission (CR), they received imatinib with 8 cycles of alternating reduced-intensity hyper-CVAD regimen as consolidation chemotherapy. Patients in CR continued maintenance imatinib, vincristine, and prednisone for 2 years, which was followed by imatinib indefinitely. Patients eligible for allo-HSCT underwent it based on their own choice after at least 2 cycles of consolidation regimen during their first CR. Minimal residual disease (MRD) for BCR-ABL by quantitative polymerase chain reaction was monitored after each cycle of induction and consolidation chemotherapy and every 3 months later. Dasatinib was used as the second-line tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) once imatinib-resistance occurred. Results: 122 Ph+ALL patients were included. 64 patients were male (52.5%). Median age was 36 years (range, 14-65 years). 2 patients (1.6%) died before response assessment, and 115 (95.8%) achieved CR. With a median followed-up period of 20 months (range, 1-98 months) in all patients and 28 months (range, 4-98 months) in 99 survivors, 65 patients (56.5%) underwent allo-HSCT and 50 (43.5%) received continuous imatinib with chemotherapy. Cumulative incidence of relapse (CIR), disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) rates at 3 years were 17.3%, 79.0% and 81.5%, respectively. Multivariate analyses in the total CR patients showed that BCR-ABL reduction <3 logs from baseline after 2 cycles of consolidation chemotherapy (defined as MRD high level; HR=7.7, 95%CI 2.0-25.0, P=0.002; HR=2.9, 95%CI 1.1-7.1, P=0.026; HR=7.6, 95%CI 1.6-13.7, P=0.009) and imatinib plus chemotherapy (HR=7.1, 95%CI 2.6-20.0, P<0.001; HR=6.1, 95%CI 2.4-15.8, P<0.001; HR=5.6, 95%CI 2.0-15.8, P=0.001) were factors associated with increasing CIR and shorter DFS and OS. In addition, WBC equal or more than 30 X 109/L at diagnosis (HR=2.3, 95%CI 1.1-6.2, P=0.032; HR=4.1, 95%CI 1.3-13.2, P=0.016) was associated with shorter DFS and OS. In an attempt to determine whether choice of therapy contributed to outcome differences among patients with or without common poor prognostic factors (WBC equal or more than 30 X 109/L at diagnosis and MRD high level) for DFS and OS, we categorized the entire cohort into low-risk (possessing none of the factors, n=33), intermediate-risk (possessing any one of the factors, n=45), or high-risk (possessing at least 2 factors, n=24). In the low-risk cohort, choice of therapy did not influence the outcomes. In the intermediate- and high- risk cohorts, treatment with allo-HSCT was significantly superior to imatinib plus chemotherapy, with 3-year CIR, DFS and OS rates of 3.4% versus 44.3% (P=0.001) and 6.2% versus 55.6% (P=0.009); 88.2% versus 51.3% (P=0.001) and 93.8% versus 37.5% (P=0.027); 91.7% versus 56.3% (P=0.001) and 93.8% versus 41.0% (P=0.021), respectively. (Figure) Conclusions Our data suggest that allo-HSCT is a viable option for all patients with Ph+ALL. It is superior to a combination of imatinib and chemotherapy, conferring significant survival advantages to intermediate- and high-risk patients. However, the outcomes of imatinib plus chemotherapy and allo-HSCT are equally good in low-risk patients. For such patients, allo-HSCT may be considered as a salvage potion if there is evidence of TKI(s) resistance so long as the MRD is carefully monitored. Outcomes between allogeneic stem cell transplantation versus a combination of imatinib and chemotherapy. Outcomes between allogeneic stem cell transplantation versus a combination of imatinib and chemotherapy. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 6533-6533
Author(s):  
Satoshi Nishiwaki ◽  
Koichi Miyamura ◽  
Kazuteru Ohashi ◽  
Mineo Kurokawa ◽  
Shuichi Taniguchi ◽  
...  

6533 Background: Although allogeneic stem cell transplantation (allo-SCT) could improve the outcome of adult Philadelphia chromosome-negative acute lymphoblastic leukemia [Ph(-) ALL], the impact of the donor source, particularly the position of cord blood (CB) transplantation, is still uncertain. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 1726 adult Ph(-) ALL patients transplanted at the first time between 1998 and 2009 with myeloablative preparative regimens who were registered in the Japan Society for Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation database. Two hundred and thirty-three received CB transplantation [first complete remission (CR1): 95, subsequent CR: 53, non-CR: 85], 809 received allo-SCT from unrelated donor (URD) (CR1: 434, subsequent CR: 158, non-CR: 217), and 684 received allo-SCT from related donor (RD) (CR1: 388, subsequent CR: 89, non-CR: 207). Results: Overall survival (OS) in patients after CB transplantation in CR1 was comparable with that after allo-SCT from URD or RD [57% in CB, 64% in URD, and 65% in RD at 4 years, respectively, P=0.11]. Donor source was not a significant risk factor for OS in multivariate analysis. Although URD was a favorable factor for relapse and an unfavorable factor for non-relapse mortality (NRM), CB was not a significant factor for them [Relapse: 22% in CB, 17% in URD, and 24% in RD at 3 years, respectively (P=0.02); NRM: 27% in CB, 23% in URD, and 13% in RD at 3 years, respectively (P=0.0001)]. Among CB recipients in CR1, age at allo-SCT (45 years or older) was solely a significant adverse prognostic factor in multivariate analysis. Among patients younger than 45 years who received allo-SCT in CR1, OS after CB transplantation was significantly better than that after allo-SCT from mismatched URD (4-year OS: 68% vs. 49%, P=0.04). Similarly, OS was not different by donor source in subsequent CR or non-CR [Subsequent CR: 48% in CB, 39% in URD and 48% in RD, P=0.33; non-CR: 18% in CB, 21% in URD, and 15% in RD, P=0.20 at 4 years, respectively]. Conclusions: Allo-SCT using CB led to similar outcomes as either RD or URD in any disease status. CB transplantation is a good alternative for adult Ph(-) ALL patients without a suitable RD or URD.


Blood ◽  
2006 ◽  
Vol 108 (11) ◽  
pp. 3152-3152
Author(s):  
Ingo Tamm ◽  
Gero Massenkeil ◽  
Mandy Wagner ◽  
Theis Terwey ◽  
Christoph Lutz ◽  
...  

Abstract Karyotypes like Philadelphia-chromosome (Ph+) and t(4;11) adversely influence clinical outcome in adult patients with acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) after chemotherapy. Here, we analyze the potential impact of karyotype on outcome after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell therapy (HSCT) in ALL. We present a retrospective analysis of 135 adult ALL patients treated unicentrically within the German ALL (GMALL) protocol using allogeneic HSCT. All patients were high-risk patients in CR1 according to GMALL definitions (i.e., WBC > 30.000/μl, pro-B-ALL, t(4;11), t(9;22), early T- or mature T-ALL, no CR after first induction) or were beyond CR1. Median age of all patients was 29 years (range 16 – 55), 99 B-lineage and 36 T-lineage ALLs were transplanted. Normal karyotype was present in 57 patients, Ph+ in 36 patients, complex chromosomal anomalies in six patients, t(4;11) in five patients, other aberrations in 22 patients and no growth/no cytogenetic data were available for 9 patients. Patients were transplanted in complete remission (CR) CR1 (60), CR2 (23), CR3 (7), first relapse (30), second relapse (6), third relapse (1) and eight patients had primary induction failure. 41 patients received bone marrow and 94 patients received peripheral blood stem cell transplants. Patients received standard high-dose (n=125) or reduced intensity conditioning (RIC) (n=10) HSCT from related (n=58) or unrelated (n=77) donors. Overall, after a median follow-up of 11 months (range 1–120), 74 (55%) patients died and 61 (45%) are alive. Median follow-up of the living is 29 months (range 1–120). Deaths were due to treatment-related mortality (TRM; n=33; 24%) or relapse (n=41; 31%). Leukemia-free survival (LFS), overall survival, and TRM were not significantly different between the karyotype subgroups studied. LFS at 6 months, 1 year, 3 years, and five years was 62%, 60%, 50%, and 41% for patients with a normal karyotype; 63%, 47%, 40%, and 28% for patients with Ph+; and 61%, 40%, 27%, and 27% for patients with other aberrations. 4/5 patients with t(4;11) and 4/6 patients with complex chromosomal abnormalities are alive in CR. In conclusion, there is no adverse impact of classical poor risk karyotypes on outcome within this high-risk group of ALL patients after allogeneic stem cell transplantation. In contrast, there was a trend that patients with t(4;11) and complex chromosomal anomalies did better (4/5 alive, 1/5 TRM and 4/6 alive, 1/6 TRM, 1/6 relapse, respectively) than patients with other aberrations (8/22 alive, 8/22 death due to relapse, 6/22 TRM). High-risk ALL patients with poor risk cytogenetics are candidates for allogeneic stem cell transplantation which can be curative. Whether other conditioning regimens or adoptive immunotherapy can reduce relapse rate in this patient group is a matter of ongoing clinical research.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document