User login
Palliative care improves quality of life after HCT
Inpatient palliative care can help maintain quality of life (QoL) in patients undergoing hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HCT), based on the results of a randomized clinical trial to assess the effect of inpatient palliative care on patient and caregiver-reported outcomes while hospitalized for HCT and for 3 months after transplantation.
During the 2-week period following their transplants, patients who received inpatient palliative care experienced a 14.72-point decrease in QoL, compared with a 21.54-point decrease in QoL for those assigned to standard transplant care alone. The difference was statistically significant (JAMA. 2016;316[20]:2094-2103. doi:10.1001/jama.2016.16786).
In addition to the QoL results, Areej El-Jawahri, MD, of Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston, and coauthors, noted that “exploratory secondary outcomes also showed that patients in the palliative care group benefited, with less increase in their depression symptoms, lower anxiety symptoms, and less increase in symptom burden compared with those receiving standard transplant care.
“Thus, palliative care may help to lessen the decline in QoL experienced by patients during hospitalization for HCT, which has long been perceived as a natural aspect of the transplantation process.”
The study cohort comprised 160 adults with hematologic malignancies undergoing autologous/allogeneic HCT, and 94 caregivers.
A total of 81 patients were assigned to the intervention, and were seen by palliative care clinicians at least twice a week while they were hospitalized. The palliative care intervention focused on managing both physical and psychological symptoms, and those who were assigned to the standard care arm (n = 79) could also request to be seen by the palliative care team.
Quality of life was measured based on mean FACT-BMT score. In the palliative care group, the FACT-BMT score was 110.26 at hospitalization and 95.46 at 2 weeks after transplant (mean change, −14.72). For the standard care group, FACT-BMT score was 106.83 at hospitalization and 85.42 at 2 weeks after transplant (mean change, −21.54) The −6.82 difference between the group groups was statistically significant (95% CI, −13.48 to −0.16; P = .045).
When looking at secondary outcomes, those in the intervention group had lower mean depression scores at 2 weeks based on the HADS-D measure. For the intervention group, the mean baseline score was 3.95 and the mean week 2 score was 6.39. For the control group, the baseline score was 4.94 and the week 2 score was 8.86. The difference between the groups was 1.49 (95% CI, 0.20-2.78; P = .02). Depression scores remained lower in the intervention group at 3 months.
The intervention group also reported a decrease in anxiety symptoms, but the control group reported an increase in anxiety symptoms from baseline to week 2 on the HADS-A measure. The mean difference in score between the two groups was 1.92; (95% CI, 0.83-3.01; P less than .001). However, there was no significant difference between the two groups at 3 months after transplant.
The study was supported by the National Palliative Care Research Foundation and grant K24 CA 181253 from the National Cancer Institute. Dr. El-Jawahri reported no disclosures.
Inpatient palliative care can help maintain quality of life (QoL) in patients undergoing hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HCT), based on the results of a randomized clinical trial to assess the effect of inpatient palliative care on patient and caregiver-reported outcomes while hospitalized for HCT and for 3 months after transplantation.
During the 2-week period following their transplants, patients who received inpatient palliative care experienced a 14.72-point decrease in QoL, compared with a 21.54-point decrease in QoL for those assigned to standard transplant care alone. The difference was statistically significant (JAMA. 2016;316[20]:2094-2103. doi:10.1001/jama.2016.16786).
In addition to the QoL results, Areej El-Jawahri, MD, of Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston, and coauthors, noted that “exploratory secondary outcomes also showed that patients in the palliative care group benefited, with less increase in their depression symptoms, lower anxiety symptoms, and less increase in symptom burden compared with those receiving standard transplant care.
“Thus, palliative care may help to lessen the decline in QoL experienced by patients during hospitalization for HCT, which has long been perceived as a natural aspect of the transplantation process.”
The study cohort comprised 160 adults with hematologic malignancies undergoing autologous/allogeneic HCT, and 94 caregivers.
A total of 81 patients were assigned to the intervention, and were seen by palliative care clinicians at least twice a week while they were hospitalized. The palliative care intervention focused on managing both physical and psychological symptoms, and those who were assigned to the standard care arm (n = 79) could also request to be seen by the palliative care team.
Quality of life was measured based on mean FACT-BMT score. In the palliative care group, the FACT-BMT score was 110.26 at hospitalization and 95.46 at 2 weeks after transplant (mean change, −14.72). For the standard care group, FACT-BMT score was 106.83 at hospitalization and 85.42 at 2 weeks after transplant (mean change, −21.54) The −6.82 difference between the group groups was statistically significant (95% CI, −13.48 to −0.16; P = .045).
When looking at secondary outcomes, those in the intervention group had lower mean depression scores at 2 weeks based on the HADS-D measure. For the intervention group, the mean baseline score was 3.95 and the mean week 2 score was 6.39. For the control group, the baseline score was 4.94 and the week 2 score was 8.86. The difference between the groups was 1.49 (95% CI, 0.20-2.78; P = .02). Depression scores remained lower in the intervention group at 3 months.
The intervention group also reported a decrease in anxiety symptoms, but the control group reported an increase in anxiety symptoms from baseline to week 2 on the HADS-A measure. The mean difference in score between the two groups was 1.92; (95% CI, 0.83-3.01; P less than .001). However, there was no significant difference between the two groups at 3 months after transplant.
The study was supported by the National Palliative Care Research Foundation and grant K24 CA 181253 from the National Cancer Institute. Dr. El-Jawahri reported no disclosures.
Inpatient palliative care can help maintain quality of life (QoL) in patients undergoing hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HCT), based on the results of a randomized clinical trial to assess the effect of inpatient palliative care on patient and caregiver-reported outcomes while hospitalized for HCT and for 3 months after transplantation.
During the 2-week period following their transplants, patients who received inpatient palliative care experienced a 14.72-point decrease in QoL, compared with a 21.54-point decrease in QoL for those assigned to standard transplant care alone. The difference was statistically significant (JAMA. 2016;316[20]:2094-2103. doi:10.1001/jama.2016.16786).
In addition to the QoL results, Areej El-Jawahri, MD, of Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston, and coauthors, noted that “exploratory secondary outcomes also showed that patients in the palliative care group benefited, with less increase in their depression symptoms, lower anxiety symptoms, and less increase in symptom burden compared with those receiving standard transplant care.
“Thus, palliative care may help to lessen the decline in QoL experienced by patients during hospitalization for HCT, which has long been perceived as a natural aspect of the transplantation process.”
The study cohort comprised 160 adults with hematologic malignancies undergoing autologous/allogeneic HCT, and 94 caregivers.
A total of 81 patients were assigned to the intervention, and were seen by palliative care clinicians at least twice a week while they were hospitalized. The palliative care intervention focused on managing both physical and psychological symptoms, and those who were assigned to the standard care arm (n = 79) could also request to be seen by the palliative care team.
Quality of life was measured based on mean FACT-BMT score. In the palliative care group, the FACT-BMT score was 110.26 at hospitalization and 95.46 at 2 weeks after transplant (mean change, −14.72). For the standard care group, FACT-BMT score was 106.83 at hospitalization and 85.42 at 2 weeks after transplant (mean change, −21.54) The −6.82 difference between the group groups was statistically significant (95% CI, −13.48 to −0.16; P = .045).
When looking at secondary outcomes, those in the intervention group had lower mean depression scores at 2 weeks based on the HADS-D measure. For the intervention group, the mean baseline score was 3.95 and the mean week 2 score was 6.39. For the control group, the baseline score was 4.94 and the week 2 score was 8.86. The difference between the groups was 1.49 (95% CI, 0.20-2.78; P = .02). Depression scores remained lower in the intervention group at 3 months.
The intervention group also reported a decrease in anxiety symptoms, but the control group reported an increase in anxiety symptoms from baseline to week 2 on the HADS-A measure. The mean difference in score between the two groups was 1.92; (95% CI, 0.83-3.01; P less than .001). However, there was no significant difference between the two groups at 3 months after transplant.
The study was supported by the National Palliative Care Research Foundation and grant K24 CA 181253 from the National Cancer Institute. Dr. El-Jawahri reported no disclosures.
FROM JAMA
Key clinical point: Inpatient palliative care can help maintain quality of life in patients undergoing hematopoietic stem cell transplantation.
Major finding: During the 2-week period following their transplants, patients who received inpatient palliative care experienced a 14.72-point decrease in QoL, compared with a 21.54-point decrease in QoL for those assigned to standard transplant care alone.
Data source: Randomized clinical trial among 160 adults with hematologic malignancies who underwent HCT, and their caregivers (n = 94).
Disclosures: The study was supported by the National Palliative Care Research Foundation and grant K24 CA 181253 from the National Cancer Institute. Dr. El-Jawahri reported no disclosures.
VIDEO: Despite toxicities, ibrutinib is beneficial for treatment-resistant graft-vs.-host disease
SAN DIEGO – An oral regimen of 420 mg ibrutinib achieved complete response in one-third of allogeneic stem cell recipients with chronic graft-vs.-host disease, David Miklos, MD, reported during a late-breaker session at the annual meeting of the American Society of Hematology.
Fully 79% of patients in this open-label phase II study were considered responders when first assessed, 71% of responses lasted at least 5 months, and patients whose disease involved multiple organs generally showed responses in at least two organs, said Dr. Miklos of Stanford (Calif.) University.
Ibrutinib is a first-in-class Bruton’s tyrosine kinase (BTK) inhibitor. Cardiotoxicities have been a concern with ibrutinib, but were not observed in this cohort of 42 patients whose graft-vs.-host disease had not benefited from frontline therapy, Dr. Miklos said during a video interview. However, 52% of patients in this study developed other serious adverse events that are typical with ibrutinib, including pneumonia, septic shock, and fever, he said.
Chronic graft-vs.-host disease is the most common morbidity after allogeneic transplant. This is an “orphan disease” – there are no approved therapies for patients for whom corticosteroids are ineffective, Dr. Miklos noted. Based on these results, investigators are planning a randomized, placebo-controlled, phase III study, he added.
Ibrutinib is jointly commercialized and developed by Janssen Biotech and by Pharmacyclics LLC, an Abbvie company. Dr. Miklos disclosed a consulting relationship, travel and expenses reimbursements, and research funding from Pharmacyclics.
The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
SAN DIEGO – An oral regimen of 420 mg ibrutinib achieved complete response in one-third of allogeneic stem cell recipients with chronic graft-vs.-host disease, David Miklos, MD, reported during a late-breaker session at the annual meeting of the American Society of Hematology.
Fully 79% of patients in this open-label phase II study were considered responders when first assessed, 71% of responses lasted at least 5 months, and patients whose disease involved multiple organs generally showed responses in at least two organs, said Dr. Miklos of Stanford (Calif.) University.
Ibrutinib is a first-in-class Bruton’s tyrosine kinase (BTK) inhibitor. Cardiotoxicities have been a concern with ibrutinib, but were not observed in this cohort of 42 patients whose graft-vs.-host disease had not benefited from frontline therapy, Dr. Miklos said during a video interview. However, 52% of patients in this study developed other serious adverse events that are typical with ibrutinib, including pneumonia, septic shock, and fever, he said.
Chronic graft-vs.-host disease is the most common morbidity after allogeneic transplant. This is an “orphan disease” – there are no approved therapies for patients for whom corticosteroids are ineffective, Dr. Miklos noted. Based on these results, investigators are planning a randomized, placebo-controlled, phase III study, he added.
Ibrutinib is jointly commercialized and developed by Janssen Biotech and by Pharmacyclics LLC, an Abbvie company. Dr. Miklos disclosed a consulting relationship, travel and expenses reimbursements, and research funding from Pharmacyclics.
The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
SAN DIEGO – An oral regimen of 420 mg ibrutinib achieved complete response in one-third of allogeneic stem cell recipients with chronic graft-vs.-host disease, David Miklos, MD, reported during a late-breaker session at the annual meeting of the American Society of Hematology.
Fully 79% of patients in this open-label phase II study were considered responders when first assessed, 71% of responses lasted at least 5 months, and patients whose disease involved multiple organs generally showed responses in at least two organs, said Dr. Miklos of Stanford (Calif.) University.
Ibrutinib is a first-in-class Bruton’s tyrosine kinase (BTK) inhibitor. Cardiotoxicities have been a concern with ibrutinib, but were not observed in this cohort of 42 patients whose graft-vs.-host disease had not benefited from frontline therapy, Dr. Miklos said during a video interview. However, 52% of patients in this study developed other serious adverse events that are typical with ibrutinib, including pneumonia, septic shock, and fever, he said.
Chronic graft-vs.-host disease is the most common morbidity after allogeneic transplant. This is an “orphan disease” – there are no approved therapies for patients for whom corticosteroids are ineffective, Dr. Miklos noted. Based on these results, investigators are planning a randomized, placebo-controlled, phase III study, he added.
Ibrutinib is jointly commercialized and developed by Janssen Biotech and by Pharmacyclics LLC, an Abbvie company. Dr. Miklos disclosed a consulting relationship, travel and expenses reimbursements, and research funding from Pharmacyclics.
The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
AT ASH 2016
Key clinical point: Ibrutinib (420 mg) led to complete responses in one-third of patients with chronic, treatment-resistant graft-vs-host disease.
Major finding: No cardiotoxicities were observed, but 52% of patients had other serious adverse effects, such as sepsis, pyrexia, and pneumonia.
Data source: An open-label phase II study of 42 patients who developed chronic, treatment-resistant graft-vs.-host disease after undergoing allogeneic stem cell transplantation.
Disclosures: Ibrutinib is jointly commercialized and developed by Janssen Biotech and by Pharmacyclics LLC, an Abbvie company. Dr. Miklos disclosed a consulting relationship, reimbursement for travel and expenses, and research funding from Pharmacyclics.
Bone marrow cells prove limb-saving for some
NEW ORLEANS – Treatment with autologous bone marrow cells can avert amputation in selected patients who have critical limb ischemia and are not candidates for revascularization surgery, based on results from the randomized phase III MOBILE trial.
Critical limb ischemia, the end stage of peripheral arterial disease, accounts for more than 53,000 major limb amputations in the United States annually, noted principal investigator Dr. Michael P. Murphy, director of the Vascular and Cardiac Center for Adult Stem Cell Therapy at Indiana University, Indianapolis.
“About 30% of our patient population with critical limb ischemia have no options for the standard of care, such as surgical bypass, due to absence of a surgical target or chronic total occlusion, which mitigates an endovascular approach,” he said at the American Heart Association scientific sessions. “Thus, these no-option critical limb ischemia patients represent an unmet medical need for a novel agent that may promote limb salvage and prevent amputation and its associated disabilities.”
In the trial, investigators randomized 155 affected limbs (in 152 patients) 3:1 to receive double-blinded treatment with injections of concentrated autologous bone marrow aspirate or placebo.
Amputation-free survival 1 year after treatment, the trial’s primary endpoint, was not significantly better in the aspirate group than in the placebo group, according to the researchers. However, the aspirate reduced the risk of major amputation by 73% in the subgroup with less severe (Rutherford class 4) disease and by 67% in the subgroup of patients who did not have diabetes.
“Personally, I would recommend cell therapy for my Rutherford 4 patients and my nondiabetic Rutherford 5 patients,” Dr. Murphy said. “And one would say even for the Rutherford 5 diabetics, there were no safety concerns and there is hope for improvement rather than amputation – it might be worth the roll of the dice.”
The investigators are preparing a manuscript based on the full data and working with Biomet, the trial sponsor, to apply for Food and Drug Administration approval of the product for the treatment of critical limb ischemia, he said.
Lessons learned
A session attendee asked whether stronger demonstration of benefit in a larger trial is needed to justify the use and cost of such new cellular therapies.
“If we could go back and do it all over again, we would do things differently knowing what we know now,” Dr. Murphy replied, noting that the investigators had to stick to a trial design created more than a decade ago.
“We discovered that the event rate in patients with critical limb ischemia in the control group is actually 30% and not 40% because medical management has changed,” he said. “Secondly, we would do a 1:1 randomization and most likely would increase our sample size to 200, and we probably would have seen a difference overall. That difference overall would have been provided by, of course, increasing the Rutherford 4 and Rutherford 5 nondiabetics, which would overshadow the increased amputation rate in the diabetic group.”
“I think from this [experience], we can launch a much larger study, if there were funding for it, and look at autologous versus allogeneic cells in this domain,” Dr. Murphy concluded.
Identifying patients who benefit
Session panelist Roberto Bolli, MD, chief of the division of cardiovascular medicine at the University of Louisville (Ky.), commended the MOBILE trial for its study design and prespecified subgroup analyses.
“The whole problem we are coping with, not just in this trial, but in other studies, is that patients are different and some patients may respond better than others, or some patients may not respond at all. And really, we still don’t understand why some patients respond or not – it may have to do with their immune system, their regenerative capacity, as well as the type of cells that are being used,” he said.
“Even though it was in its entirety a negative study, it’s very important because it identified a possible target for future trials, which is patients without diabetes in Rutherford class 4, which may benefit from therapy,” Dr. Bolli concluded.
Trial details
Patients were enrolled in MOBILE from 24 U.S. centers. All had critical limb ischemia, were ineligible for revascularization, had an ankle-brachial index of less than 0.60 or a toe-brachial index of less than 0.40, and had Rutherford 4 disease (rest pain) or Rutherford 5 disease (tissue loss).
They received concentrated autologous bone marrow aspirate or placebo by intramuscular injection at 35-40 sites in the affected limb.
Results showed that the groups did not differ significantly with respect to the rates of adverse events or serious adverse events overall, Dr. Murphy reported. The aspirate group had lower rates of respiratory failure and fever; they also had a higher rate of anemia (68.9% vs. 36.1%, P less than .001) as expected, from the aspiration procedure, but with no associated complications.
The 1-year rate of amputation-free survival events, reflecting both major amputations and death, was lower with the aspirate, at 20.2%, than with placebo, at 30.5%, but not significantly so (P = .224). Findings were similar for major amputation in the entire trial population (16.0% vs. 22.2%, P = .392). However, this outcome was less common with the aspirate among patients with Rutherford 4 disease (7.7% vs. 26.3%, P = .041) and nondiabetic patients (10.0% vs. 27.7%, P = .046).
“Looking at these data, it became apparent to us that the Rutherford 5 diabetic was the outlying group,” said Dr. Murphy, who disclosed that he had no relevant conflicts of interest.
Considering all other patients – Rutherford 4 regardless of diabetes status and nondiabetic Rutherford 5 – the aspirate was associated with a dramatically lower rate of amputation compared with the placebo (9.6% vs. 26.7%, P = .021; hazard ratio, 0.33). In this subset, the number needed to treat with bone marrow aspirate to prevent a single amputation was just 6.
The aspirate and placebo groups did not differ with respect to ankle-brachial index, toe-brachial index, or 6-minute walk test distance in the entire trial population. Transcutaneous oxygen pressure (TcP02), an indicator of microvascular perfusion in the subcutaneous tissue of the ischemic limb, increased by 59% in the aspirate group but by only 7% in the placebo group.
NEW ORLEANS – Treatment with autologous bone marrow cells can avert amputation in selected patients who have critical limb ischemia and are not candidates for revascularization surgery, based on results from the randomized phase III MOBILE trial.
Critical limb ischemia, the end stage of peripheral arterial disease, accounts for more than 53,000 major limb amputations in the United States annually, noted principal investigator Dr. Michael P. Murphy, director of the Vascular and Cardiac Center for Adult Stem Cell Therapy at Indiana University, Indianapolis.
“About 30% of our patient population with critical limb ischemia have no options for the standard of care, such as surgical bypass, due to absence of a surgical target or chronic total occlusion, which mitigates an endovascular approach,” he said at the American Heart Association scientific sessions. “Thus, these no-option critical limb ischemia patients represent an unmet medical need for a novel agent that may promote limb salvage and prevent amputation and its associated disabilities.”
In the trial, investigators randomized 155 affected limbs (in 152 patients) 3:1 to receive double-blinded treatment with injections of concentrated autologous bone marrow aspirate or placebo.
Amputation-free survival 1 year after treatment, the trial’s primary endpoint, was not significantly better in the aspirate group than in the placebo group, according to the researchers. However, the aspirate reduced the risk of major amputation by 73% in the subgroup with less severe (Rutherford class 4) disease and by 67% in the subgroup of patients who did not have diabetes.
“Personally, I would recommend cell therapy for my Rutherford 4 patients and my nondiabetic Rutherford 5 patients,” Dr. Murphy said. “And one would say even for the Rutherford 5 diabetics, there were no safety concerns and there is hope for improvement rather than amputation – it might be worth the roll of the dice.”
The investigators are preparing a manuscript based on the full data and working with Biomet, the trial sponsor, to apply for Food and Drug Administration approval of the product for the treatment of critical limb ischemia, he said.
Lessons learned
A session attendee asked whether stronger demonstration of benefit in a larger trial is needed to justify the use and cost of such new cellular therapies.
“If we could go back and do it all over again, we would do things differently knowing what we know now,” Dr. Murphy replied, noting that the investigators had to stick to a trial design created more than a decade ago.
“We discovered that the event rate in patients with critical limb ischemia in the control group is actually 30% and not 40% because medical management has changed,” he said. “Secondly, we would do a 1:1 randomization and most likely would increase our sample size to 200, and we probably would have seen a difference overall. That difference overall would have been provided by, of course, increasing the Rutherford 4 and Rutherford 5 nondiabetics, which would overshadow the increased amputation rate in the diabetic group.”
“I think from this [experience], we can launch a much larger study, if there were funding for it, and look at autologous versus allogeneic cells in this domain,” Dr. Murphy concluded.
Identifying patients who benefit
Session panelist Roberto Bolli, MD, chief of the division of cardiovascular medicine at the University of Louisville (Ky.), commended the MOBILE trial for its study design and prespecified subgroup analyses.
“The whole problem we are coping with, not just in this trial, but in other studies, is that patients are different and some patients may respond better than others, or some patients may not respond at all. And really, we still don’t understand why some patients respond or not – it may have to do with their immune system, their regenerative capacity, as well as the type of cells that are being used,” he said.
“Even though it was in its entirety a negative study, it’s very important because it identified a possible target for future trials, which is patients without diabetes in Rutherford class 4, which may benefit from therapy,” Dr. Bolli concluded.
Trial details
Patients were enrolled in MOBILE from 24 U.S. centers. All had critical limb ischemia, were ineligible for revascularization, had an ankle-brachial index of less than 0.60 or a toe-brachial index of less than 0.40, and had Rutherford 4 disease (rest pain) or Rutherford 5 disease (tissue loss).
They received concentrated autologous bone marrow aspirate or placebo by intramuscular injection at 35-40 sites in the affected limb.
Results showed that the groups did not differ significantly with respect to the rates of adverse events or serious adverse events overall, Dr. Murphy reported. The aspirate group had lower rates of respiratory failure and fever; they also had a higher rate of anemia (68.9% vs. 36.1%, P less than .001) as expected, from the aspiration procedure, but with no associated complications.
The 1-year rate of amputation-free survival events, reflecting both major amputations and death, was lower with the aspirate, at 20.2%, than with placebo, at 30.5%, but not significantly so (P = .224). Findings were similar for major amputation in the entire trial population (16.0% vs. 22.2%, P = .392). However, this outcome was less common with the aspirate among patients with Rutherford 4 disease (7.7% vs. 26.3%, P = .041) and nondiabetic patients (10.0% vs. 27.7%, P = .046).
“Looking at these data, it became apparent to us that the Rutherford 5 diabetic was the outlying group,” said Dr. Murphy, who disclosed that he had no relevant conflicts of interest.
Considering all other patients – Rutherford 4 regardless of diabetes status and nondiabetic Rutherford 5 – the aspirate was associated with a dramatically lower rate of amputation compared with the placebo (9.6% vs. 26.7%, P = .021; hazard ratio, 0.33). In this subset, the number needed to treat with bone marrow aspirate to prevent a single amputation was just 6.
The aspirate and placebo groups did not differ with respect to ankle-brachial index, toe-brachial index, or 6-minute walk test distance in the entire trial population. Transcutaneous oxygen pressure (TcP02), an indicator of microvascular perfusion in the subcutaneous tissue of the ischemic limb, increased by 59% in the aspirate group but by only 7% in the placebo group.
NEW ORLEANS – Treatment with autologous bone marrow cells can avert amputation in selected patients who have critical limb ischemia and are not candidates for revascularization surgery, based on results from the randomized phase III MOBILE trial.
Critical limb ischemia, the end stage of peripheral arterial disease, accounts for more than 53,000 major limb amputations in the United States annually, noted principal investigator Dr. Michael P. Murphy, director of the Vascular and Cardiac Center for Adult Stem Cell Therapy at Indiana University, Indianapolis.
“About 30% of our patient population with critical limb ischemia have no options for the standard of care, such as surgical bypass, due to absence of a surgical target or chronic total occlusion, which mitigates an endovascular approach,” he said at the American Heart Association scientific sessions. “Thus, these no-option critical limb ischemia patients represent an unmet medical need for a novel agent that may promote limb salvage and prevent amputation and its associated disabilities.”
In the trial, investigators randomized 155 affected limbs (in 152 patients) 3:1 to receive double-blinded treatment with injections of concentrated autologous bone marrow aspirate or placebo.
Amputation-free survival 1 year after treatment, the trial’s primary endpoint, was not significantly better in the aspirate group than in the placebo group, according to the researchers. However, the aspirate reduced the risk of major amputation by 73% in the subgroup with less severe (Rutherford class 4) disease and by 67% in the subgroup of patients who did not have diabetes.
“Personally, I would recommend cell therapy for my Rutherford 4 patients and my nondiabetic Rutherford 5 patients,” Dr. Murphy said. “And one would say even for the Rutherford 5 diabetics, there were no safety concerns and there is hope for improvement rather than amputation – it might be worth the roll of the dice.”
The investigators are preparing a manuscript based on the full data and working with Biomet, the trial sponsor, to apply for Food and Drug Administration approval of the product for the treatment of critical limb ischemia, he said.
Lessons learned
A session attendee asked whether stronger demonstration of benefit in a larger trial is needed to justify the use and cost of such new cellular therapies.
“If we could go back and do it all over again, we would do things differently knowing what we know now,” Dr. Murphy replied, noting that the investigators had to stick to a trial design created more than a decade ago.
“We discovered that the event rate in patients with critical limb ischemia in the control group is actually 30% and not 40% because medical management has changed,” he said. “Secondly, we would do a 1:1 randomization and most likely would increase our sample size to 200, and we probably would have seen a difference overall. That difference overall would have been provided by, of course, increasing the Rutherford 4 and Rutherford 5 nondiabetics, which would overshadow the increased amputation rate in the diabetic group.”
“I think from this [experience], we can launch a much larger study, if there were funding for it, and look at autologous versus allogeneic cells in this domain,” Dr. Murphy concluded.
Identifying patients who benefit
Session panelist Roberto Bolli, MD, chief of the division of cardiovascular medicine at the University of Louisville (Ky.), commended the MOBILE trial for its study design and prespecified subgroup analyses.
“The whole problem we are coping with, not just in this trial, but in other studies, is that patients are different and some patients may respond better than others, or some patients may not respond at all. And really, we still don’t understand why some patients respond or not – it may have to do with their immune system, their regenerative capacity, as well as the type of cells that are being used,” he said.
“Even though it was in its entirety a negative study, it’s very important because it identified a possible target for future trials, which is patients without diabetes in Rutherford class 4, which may benefit from therapy,” Dr. Bolli concluded.
Trial details
Patients were enrolled in MOBILE from 24 U.S. centers. All had critical limb ischemia, were ineligible for revascularization, had an ankle-brachial index of less than 0.60 or a toe-brachial index of less than 0.40, and had Rutherford 4 disease (rest pain) or Rutherford 5 disease (tissue loss).
They received concentrated autologous bone marrow aspirate or placebo by intramuscular injection at 35-40 sites in the affected limb.
Results showed that the groups did not differ significantly with respect to the rates of adverse events or serious adverse events overall, Dr. Murphy reported. The aspirate group had lower rates of respiratory failure and fever; they also had a higher rate of anemia (68.9% vs. 36.1%, P less than .001) as expected, from the aspiration procedure, but with no associated complications.
The 1-year rate of amputation-free survival events, reflecting both major amputations and death, was lower with the aspirate, at 20.2%, than with placebo, at 30.5%, but not significantly so (P = .224). Findings were similar for major amputation in the entire trial population (16.0% vs. 22.2%, P = .392). However, this outcome was less common with the aspirate among patients with Rutherford 4 disease (7.7% vs. 26.3%, P = .041) and nondiabetic patients (10.0% vs. 27.7%, P = .046).
“Looking at these data, it became apparent to us that the Rutherford 5 diabetic was the outlying group,” said Dr. Murphy, who disclosed that he had no relevant conflicts of interest.
Considering all other patients – Rutherford 4 regardless of diabetes status and nondiabetic Rutherford 5 – the aspirate was associated with a dramatically lower rate of amputation compared with the placebo (9.6% vs. 26.7%, P = .021; hazard ratio, 0.33). In this subset, the number needed to treat with bone marrow aspirate to prevent a single amputation was just 6.
The aspirate and placebo groups did not differ with respect to ankle-brachial index, toe-brachial index, or 6-minute walk test distance in the entire trial population. Transcutaneous oxygen pressure (TcP02), an indicator of microvascular perfusion in the subcutaneous tissue of the ischemic limb, increased by 59% in the aspirate group but by only 7% in the placebo group.
AT THE AHA SCIENTIFIC SESSIONS
Key clinical point:
Major finding: The 52-week rate of amputation-free survival events was 20.2% with the aspirate and 30.5% with placebo (P = .224).
Data source: A randomized phase III trial among 152 patients with critical limb ischemia who were not candidates for revascularization surgery (MOBILE trial).
Disclosures: Dr. Murphy disclosed that he had no relevant conflicts of interest. The trial was sponsored by Biomet Biologics, LLC.
Myeloablative HSCT bests IV CYC for systemic scleroderma
WASHINGTON – Myeloablative autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation was superior to monthly intravenous cyclophosphamide in patients with severe scleroderma with internal organ involvement in the randomized, multicenter Scleroderma: Cyclophosphamide or Transplantation (SCOT) trial.
At both 54 and 48 months, a comparison of global rank composite scores favored myeloablation followed by CD34+-selected autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) over 12 monthly pulses of 750 mg/m2 cyclophosphamide in the intention-to-treat population of 36 and 39 subjects with diffuse cutaneous systemic sclerosis and high-risk lung and/or renal involvement who were randomized to the groups, respectively (P = .013 at 54 months and P = .008 at 48 months). In subjects who actually underwent HSCT or received at least nine cyclophosphamide doses, the effect was even stronger (P = .004 at 54 months and P = .003 at 48 months), Keith M. Sullivan, MD, reported at the annual meeting of the American College of Rheumatology.
The global rank composite scores were derived based on a hierarchy of outcomes including – in rank order – death, event-free survival, forced vital capacity, scleroderma health assessment questionnaire score, and modified Rodnan skin score (mRSS); each patient was compared, based on the hierarchy, with every other patient in the study.
HSCT was superior overall and within each of the components of the score, Dr. Sullivan said.
The findings were supported by secondary analyses showing that at 54 months, event-free survival was 79% in the HSCT group vs. 50% in the cyclophosphamide group, and overall survival was 91% vs. 77% in the groups, respectively; the differences between the groups were statistically significant, said Dr. Sullivan of Duke University, Durham, N.C.
“In advanced scleroderma, that is a remarkable finding,” he said of the nearly 30-point difference in event-free survival rates between the groups.
Further, disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs were initiated by 54 months in 9% of the HSCT recipients vs. 44% of those in the cyclophosphamide group, he noted.
The rate of serious adverse events was similar in the two groups, although grade 3 or greater adverse events, including treatment-related cytopenias, were more common in the HSCT group, as was herpes zoster. Remarkably, most serious adverse events and adverse events occurred in the first 14 months, Dr. Sullivan noted.
Treatment-related mortality at 54 months was 3% in the HSCT group, and 0% in the cyclophosphamide group, he said.
Study subjects were adults aged 18-69 years with mean baseline modified Rodnan skin score of 30, mean baseline forced vital capacity of 74%, and mean diffusing capacity of the lung for carbon monoxide (DLCO) of 53% of predicted. All but two had lung involvement.
“So [there was] significant skin and pulmonary impairment,” he said.
There are, unquestionably, risks with transplant, but the SCOT findings support myeloablative autologous HSCT as a significant advance in the care of diffuse cutaneous systemic scleroderma with internal organ involvement, as this approach provided superior long-term outcomes, compared with 12 months of IV cyclophosphamide, he said, adding that the global rank composite score developed for this study was a useful measure of scleroderma outcomes.
“Therefore it would be prudent to consider early referral to the transplant center for consultation, which would allow patients, earlier in their disease – before the mRSS hit 30 and the DLCOs hit 50 – to make informed decisions,” he concluded.
The SCOT trial was funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. The authors reported having no disclosures.
WASHINGTON – Myeloablative autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation was superior to monthly intravenous cyclophosphamide in patients with severe scleroderma with internal organ involvement in the randomized, multicenter Scleroderma: Cyclophosphamide or Transplantation (SCOT) trial.
At both 54 and 48 months, a comparison of global rank composite scores favored myeloablation followed by CD34+-selected autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) over 12 monthly pulses of 750 mg/m2 cyclophosphamide in the intention-to-treat population of 36 and 39 subjects with diffuse cutaneous systemic sclerosis and high-risk lung and/or renal involvement who were randomized to the groups, respectively (P = .013 at 54 months and P = .008 at 48 months). In subjects who actually underwent HSCT or received at least nine cyclophosphamide doses, the effect was even stronger (P = .004 at 54 months and P = .003 at 48 months), Keith M. Sullivan, MD, reported at the annual meeting of the American College of Rheumatology.
The global rank composite scores were derived based on a hierarchy of outcomes including – in rank order – death, event-free survival, forced vital capacity, scleroderma health assessment questionnaire score, and modified Rodnan skin score (mRSS); each patient was compared, based on the hierarchy, with every other patient in the study.
HSCT was superior overall and within each of the components of the score, Dr. Sullivan said.
The findings were supported by secondary analyses showing that at 54 months, event-free survival was 79% in the HSCT group vs. 50% in the cyclophosphamide group, and overall survival was 91% vs. 77% in the groups, respectively; the differences between the groups were statistically significant, said Dr. Sullivan of Duke University, Durham, N.C.
“In advanced scleroderma, that is a remarkable finding,” he said of the nearly 30-point difference in event-free survival rates between the groups.
Further, disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs were initiated by 54 months in 9% of the HSCT recipients vs. 44% of those in the cyclophosphamide group, he noted.
The rate of serious adverse events was similar in the two groups, although grade 3 or greater adverse events, including treatment-related cytopenias, were more common in the HSCT group, as was herpes zoster. Remarkably, most serious adverse events and adverse events occurred in the first 14 months, Dr. Sullivan noted.
Treatment-related mortality at 54 months was 3% in the HSCT group, and 0% in the cyclophosphamide group, he said.
Study subjects were adults aged 18-69 years with mean baseline modified Rodnan skin score of 30, mean baseline forced vital capacity of 74%, and mean diffusing capacity of the lung for carbon monoxide (DLCO) of 53% of predicted. All but two had lung involvement.
“So [there was] significant skin and pulmonary impairment,” he said.
There are, unquestionably, risks with transplant, but the SCOT findings support myeloablative autologous HSCT as a significant advance in the care of diffuse cutaneous systemic scleroderma with internal organ involvement, as this approach provided superior long-term outcomes, compared with 12 months of IV cyclophosphamide, he said, adding that the global rank composite score developed for this study was a useful measure of scleroderma outcomes.
“Therefore it would be prudent to consider early referral to the transplant center for consultation, which would allow patients, earlier in their disease – before the mRSS hit 30 and the DLCOs hit 50 – to make informed decisions,” he concluded.
The SCOT trial was funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. The authors reported having no disclosures.
WASHINGTON – Myeloablative autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation was superior to monthly intravenous cyclophosphamide in patients with severe scleroderma with internal organ involvement in the randomized, multicenter Scleroderma: Cyclophosphamide or Transplantation (SCOT) trial.
At both 54 and 48 months, a comparison of global rank composite scores favored myeloablation followed by CD34+-selected autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) over 12 monthly pulses of 750 mg/m2 cyclophosphamide in the intention-to-treat population of 36 and 39 subjects with diffuse cutaneous systemic sclerosis and high-risk lung and/or renal involvement who were randomized to the groups, respectively (P = .013 at 54 months and P = .008 at 48 months). In subjects who actually underwent HSCT or received at least nine cyclophosphamide doses, the effect was even stronger (P = .004 at 54 months and P = .003 at 48 months), Keith M. Sullivan, MD, reported at the annual meeting of the American College of Rheumatology.
The global rank composite scores were derived based on a hierarchy of outcomes including – in rank order – death, event-free survival, forced vital capacity, scleroderma health assessment questionnaire score, and modified Rodnan skin score (mRSS); each patient was compared, based on the hierarchy, with every other patient in the study.
HSCT was superior overall and within each of the components of the score, Dr. Sullivan said.
The findings were supported by secondary analyses showing that at 54 months, event-free survival was 79% in the HSCT group vs. 50% in the cyclophosphamide group, and overall survival was 91% vs. 77% in the groups, respectively; the differences between the groups were statistically significant, said Dr. Sullivan of Duke University, Durham, N.C.
“In advanced scleroderma, that is a remarkable finding,” he said of the nearly 30-point difference in event-free survival rates between the groups.
Further, disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs were initiated by 54 months in 9% of the HSCT recipients vs. 44% of those in the cyclophosphamide group, he noted.
The rate of serious adverse events was similar in the two groups, although grade 3 or greater adverse events, including treatment-related cytopenias, were more common in the HSCT group, as was herpes zoster. Remarkably, most serious adverse events and adverse events occurred in the first 14 months, Dr. Sullivan noted.
Treatment-related mortality at 54 months was 3% in the HSCT group, and 0% in the cyclophosphamide group, he said.
Study subjects were adults aged 18-69 years with mean baseline modified Rodnan skin score of 30, mean baseline forced vital capacity of 74%, and mean diffusing capacity of the lung for carbon monoxide (DLCO) of 53% of predicted. All but two had lung involvement.
“So [there was] significant skin and pulmonary impairment,” he said.
There are, unquestionably, risks with transplant, but the SCOT findings support myeloablative autologous HSCT as a significant advance in the care of diffuse cutaneous systemic scleroderma with internal organ involvement, as this approach provided superior long-term outcomes, compared with 12 months of IV cyclophosphamide, he said, adding that the global rank composite score developed for this study was a useful measure of scleroderma outcomes.
“Therefore it would be prudent to consider early referral to the transplant center for consultation, which would allow patients, earlier in their disease – before the mRSS hit 30 and the DLCOs hit 50 – to make informed decisions,” he concluded.
The SCOT trial was funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. The authors reported having no disclosures.
AT THE ACR ANNUAL MEETING
Key clinical point:
Major finding: Event-free survival was 79% in the HSCT group vs. 50% in the cyclophosphamide group, and overall survival was 91% vs. 77% in the groups, respectively.
Data source: The randomized, multicenter SCOT trial of 75 systemic scleroderma patients.
Disclosures: The SCOT trial was funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. The authors reported having no disclosures.
Worse outcomes for double-hit lymphomas after ASCT
Patients with double-hit lymphomas (DHLs) and double-expressor lymphomas (DELs) have inferior outcomes after undergoing autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT), according to a new study published in the Journal of Clinical Oncology.
The worst outcomes were observed in patients with concurrent DELs and DHLs, and this “supports the concept that the double-hit/double-expressor biology appears to render DLBCL resistant to and less likely to be cured by chemotherapy,” write Alex Herrera, MD, an oncologist at the City of Hope, Duarte, Calif., and his colleagues.
But that said, a significant proportion of patients with relapsed/refractory DEL did experience durable remissions following ASCT, particularly those with isolated DEL without DHL.
This suggests that “the presence of DEL alone should not be considered a contraindication to ASCT,” the authors wrote (J Clin Oncol. 2016 Oct. 24. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2016.68.2740).
DHLs and DELs are subtypes of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), and while they are associated with poor outcomes after standard chemoimmunotherapy, data remain limited as to outcomes of patients with relapsed or refractory disease who undergo ASCT.
The retrospective multicenter study included 117 patients with chemotherapy-sensitive relapsed/refractory DLBCL who underwent ASCT and had archival tumor material available. DEL with MYC/BCL2 coexpression was observed in 52 patients (44%) while 15 patients expressed MYC-R (13%), of whom 12 (10%) had DHL.
The median follow-up time was 45 months for survivors, and the 4-year progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 54% for the entire cohort.
The 4-year PFS and OS in patients with DHL was worse as compared to those without DHL; 28% vs. 57% (P = .013), and 25% vs. 66% (P less than .001), respectively.
Those with DHL had poorer PFS (28%) and OS (25%), compared with patients with DEL but not DHL (PFS, 53% and OS, 61%) as well as patients with neither DEL nor DHL (PFS, 60% and OS, 70%; three-way P value for PFS, P = .013; OS, P = .002).
Patients with concurrent DEL and DHL had the poorest outcome, with a 4-year PFS of 0%.
After researchers adjusted for clinical characteristics, the only factors that remained significantly associated with PFS were DEL (hazard ratio, 1.8; P = .035) and DHL (HR, 2.9; P = .009). Factors that were significantly associated with OS were DHL (HR, 3.4; P = .004) and remission status at ASCT (HR for partial response, 2.4; P = .007).
Overall, patients with DHL were less likely to achieve a complete response following salvage therapy, and those with DEL and patients with DHL had a shorter time to relapse after induction therapy.
“Although some patients with relapsed/refractory DHL had long-term remission after ASCT (isolated DHL without DEL), the low survival rate in this group argues that alternative transplantation strategies, including allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation or peri-ASCT relapse prevention strategies should be studied,” they concluded.
Recognizing that the majority of patients with double-hit or double-expressor lymphoma will relapse after R-CHOP, this study evaluates the efficacy of autologous stem cell transplantation as a salvage modality. This is a carefully conducted, albeit retrospective, analysis of patients with relapsed or refractory double-hit or double-expressor lymphoma undergoing autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (auto-HCT) at two high-volume institutions.
Although it is perhaps not surprising that double-hit and double-expressor phenotypes confer inferior outcomes, it is worth examining these issues in some detail. The first issue is that the authors have defined categories that are not recognized by the World Health Organization, but are routinely seen in clinical practice.
For example, it might be assumed that all patients with double-hit lymphoma will have MYC/BCL2 protein expression and, therefore, also have double-expressor lymphoma, but some patients with double-hit lymphoma do not have protein expression of MYC/BCL2 and these patients may have better outcomes than patients whose tumors display both double-hit and double-expressor characteristics.
A second caveat to interpreting the results is that the study population does not reflect the true denominator of all patients with relapsed diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, because only chemotherapy-sensitive patients undergoing auto-HCT were included.
So, should patients with relapsed double-hit and double-expressor lymphoma be offered auto-HCT? What are the alternatives to auto-HCT? Unfortunately, there are no clear answers to these questions, although the surprisingly excellent outcomes for patients without either of these features (70% long-term survival) suggest that there is a group of patients for whom auto-HCT remains an effective and standard tool. For double-hit and double-expressor lymphoma, a clinical trial based on specific biologic changes in individual patients is the ideal but is far from reality at this point.
Overall, despite being a retrospective series with a high attrition rate based on tissue availability, the central review of pathology, uniform assessment of double-hit and double-expressor features, and mature follow-up of 45 months makes this a thought-provoking and timely paper.
Sonali M. Smith, MD, is from the University of Chicago, and has disclosed a consulting or advisory role with Genentech, Seattle Genetics, TG Therapeutics, Gilead Sciences, Immunogenix, Pharmacyclics, NanoString Technologies, Genmab, Juno Therapeutics, Abbvie, and Portola Pharmaceuticals. These remarks were taken from the editorial accompanying Dr. Herrara’s report (J Clin Oncol. 2016 Oct 17. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2016.70.0625).
Recognizing that the majority of patients with double-hit or double-expressor lymphoma will relapse after R-CHOP, this study evaluates the efficacy of autologous stem cell transplantation as a salvage modality. This is a carefully conducted, albeit retrospective, analysis of patients with relapsed or refractory double-hit or double-expressor lymphoma undergoing autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (auto-HCT) at two high-volume institutions.
Although it is perhaps not surprising that double-hit and double-expressor phenotypes confer inferior outcomes, it is worth examining these issues in some detail. The first issue is that the authors have defined categories that are not recognized by the World Health Organization, but are routinely seen in clinical practice.
For example, it might be assumed that all patients with double-hit lymphoma will have MYC/BCL2 protein expression and, therefore, also have double-expressor lymphoma, but some patients with double-hit lymphoma do not have protein expression of MYC/BCL2 and these patients may have better outcomes than patients whose tumors display both double-hit and double-expressor characteristics.
A second caveat to interpreting the results is that the study population does not reflect the true denominator of all patients with relapsed diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, because only chemotherapy-sensitive patients undergoing auto-HCT were included.
So, should patients with relapsed double-hit and double-expressor lymphoma be offered auto-HCT? What are the alternatives to auto-HCT? Unfortunately, there are no clear answers to these questions, although the surprisingly excellent outcomes for patients without either of these features (70% long-term survival) suggest that there is a group of patients for whom auto-HCT remains an effective and standard tool. For double-hit and double-expressor lymphoma, a clinical trial based on specific biologic changes in individual patients is the ideal but is far from reality at this point.
Overall, despite being a retrospective series with a high attrition rate based on tissue availability, the central review of pathology, uniform assessment of double-hit and double-expressor features, and mature follow-up of 45 months makes this a thought-provoking and timely paper.
Sonali M. Smith, MD, is from the University of Chicago, and has disclosed a consulting or advisory role with Genentech, Seattle Genetics, TG Therapeutics, Gilead Sciences, Immunogenix, Pharmacyclics, NanoString Technologies, Genmab, Juno Therapeutics, Abbvie, and Portola Pharmaceuticals. These remarks were taken from the editorial accompanying Dr. Herrara’s report (J Clin Oncol. 2016 Oct 17. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2016.70.0625).
Recognizing that the majority of patients with double-hit or double-expressor lymphoma will relapse after R-CHOP, this study evaluates the efficacy of autologous stem cell transplantation as a salvage modality. This is a carefully conducted, albeit retrospective, analysis of patients with relapsed or refractory double-hit or double-expressor lymphoma undergoing autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (auto-HCT) at two high-volume institutions.
Although it is perhaps not surprising that double-hit and double-expressor phenotypes confer inferior outcomes, it is worth examining these issues in some detail. The first issue is that the authors have defined categories that are not recognized by the World Health Organization, but are routinely seen in clinical practice.
For example, it might be assumed that all patients with double-hit lymphoma will have MYC/BCL2 protein expression and, therefore, also have double-expressor lymphoma, but some patients with double-hit lymphoma do not have protein expression of MYC/BCL2 and these patients may have better outcomes than patients whose tumors display both double-hit and double-expressor characteristics.
A second caveat to interpreting the results is that the study population does not reflect the true denominator of all patients with relapsed diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, because only chemotherapy-sensitive patients undergoing auto-HCT were included.
So, should patients with relapsed double-hit and double-expressor lymphoma be offered auto-HCT? What are the alternatives to auto-HCT? Unfortunately, there are no clear answers to these questions, although the surprisingly excellent outcomes for patients without either of these features (70% long-term survival) suggest that there is a group of patients for whom auto-HCT remains an effective and standard tool. For double-hit and double-expressor lymphoma, a clinical trial based on specific biologic changes in individual patients is the ideal but is far from reality at this point.
Overall, despite being a retrospective series with a high attrition rate based on tissue availability, the central review of pathology, uniform assessment of double-hit and double-expressor features, and mature follow-up of 45 months makes this a thought-provoking and timely paper.
Sonali M. Smith, MD, is from the University of Chicago, and has disclosed a consulting or advisory role with Genentech, Seattle Genetics, TG Therapeutics, Gilead Sciences, Immunogenix, Pharmacyclics, NanoString Technologies, Genmab, Juno Therapeutics, Abbvie, and Portola Pharmaceuticals. These remarks were taken from the editorial accompanying Dr. Herrara’s report (J Clin Oncol. 2016 Oct 17. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2016.70.0625).
Patients with double-hit lymphomas (DHLs) and double-expressor lymphomas (DELs) have inferior outcomes after undergoing autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT), according to a new study published in the Journal of Clinical Oncology.
The worst outcomes were observed in patients with concurrent DELs and DHLs, and this “supports the concept that the double-hit/double-expressor biology appears to render DLBCL resistant to and less likely to be cured by chemotherapy,” write Alex Herrera, MD, an oncologist at the City of Hope, Duarte, Calif., and his colleagues.
But that said, a significant proportion of patients with relapsed/refractory DEL did experience durable remissions following ASCT, particularly those with isolated DEL without DHL.
This suggests that “the presence of DEL alone should not be considered a contraindication to ASCT,” the authors wrote (J Clin Oncol. 2016 Oct. 24. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2016.68.2740).
DHLs and DELs are subtypes of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), and while they are associated with poor outcomes after standard chemoimmunotherapy, data remain limited as to outcomes of patients with relapsed or refractory disease who undergo ASCT.
The retrospective multicenter study included 117 patients with chemotherapy-sensitive relapsed/refractory DLBCL who underwent ASCT and had archival tumor material available. DEL with MYC/BCL2 coexpression was observed in 52 patients (44%) while 15 patients expressed MYC-R (13%), of whom 12 (10%) had DHL.
The median follow-up time was 45 months for survivors, and the 4-year progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 54% for the entire cohort.
The 4-year PFS and OS in patients with DHL was worse as compared to those without DHL; 28% vs. 57% (P = .013), and 25% vs. 66% (P less than .001), respectively.
Those with DHL had poorer PFS (28%) and OS (25%), compared with patients with DEL but not DHL (PFS, 53% and OS, 61%) as well as patients with neither DEL nor DHL (PFS, 60% and OS, 70%; three-way P value for PFS, P = .013; OS, P = .002).
Patients with concurrent DEL and DHL had the poorest outcome, with a 4-year PFS of 0%.
After researchers adjusted for clinical characteristics, the only factors that remained significantly associated with PFS were DEL (hazard ratio, 1.8; P = .035) and DHL (HR, 2.9; P = .009). Factors that were significantly associated with OS were DHL (HR, 3.4; P = .004) and remission status at ASCT (HR for partial response, 2.4; P = .007).
Overall, patients with DHL were less likely to achieve a complete response following salvage therapy, and those with DEL and patients with DHL had a shorter time to relapse after induction therapy.
“Although some patients with relapsed/refractory DHL had long-term remission after ASCT (isolated DHL without DEL), the low survival rate in this group argues that alternative transplantation strategies, including allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation or peri-ASCT relapse prevention strategies should be studied,” they concluded.
Patients with double-hit lymphomas (DHLs) and double-expressor lymphomas (DELs) have inferior outcomes after undergoing autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT), according to a new study published in the Journal of Clinical Oncology.
The worst outcomes were observed in patients with concurrent DELs and DHLs, and this “supports the concept that the double-hit/double-expressor biology appears to render DLBCL resistant to and less likely to be cured by chemotherapy,” write Alex Herrera, MD, an oncologist at the City of Hope, Duarte, Calif., and his colleagues.
But that said, a significant proportion of patients with relapsed/refractory DEL did experience durable remissions following ASCT, particularly those with isolated DEL without DHL.
This suggests that “the presence of DEL alone should not be considered a contraindication to ASCT,” the authors wrote (J Clin Oncol. 2016 Oct. 24. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2016.68.2740).
DHLs and DELs are subtypes of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), and while they are associated with poor outcomes after standard chemoimmunotherapy, data remain limited as to outcomes of patients with relapsed or refractory disease who undergo ASCT.
The retrospective multicenter study included 117 patients with chemotherapy-sensitive relapsed/refractory DLBCL who underwent ASCT and had archival tumor material available. DEL with MYC/BCL2 coexpression was observed in 52 patients (44%) while 15 patients expressed MYC-R (13%), of whom 12 (10%) had DHL.
The median follow-up time was 45 months for survivors, and the 4-year progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 54% for the entire cohort.
The 4-year PFS and OS in patients with DHL was worse as compared to those without DHL; 28% vs. 57% (P = .013), and 25% vs. 66% (P less than .001), respectively.
Those with DHL had poorer PFS (28%) and OS (25%), compared with patients with DEL but not DHL (PFS, 53% and OS, 61%) as well as patients with neither DEL nor DHL (PFS, 60% and OS, 70%; three-way P value for PFS, P = .013; OS, P = .002).
Patients with concurrent DEL and DHL had the poorest outcome, with a 4-year PFS of 0%.
After researchers adjusted for clinical characteristics, the only factors that remained significantly associated with PFS were DEL (hazard ratio, 1.8; P = .035) and DHL (HR, 2.9; P = .009). Factors that were significantly associated with OS were DHL (HR, 3.4; P = .004) and remission status at ASCT (HR for partial response, 2.4; P = .007).
Overall, patients with DHL were less likely to achieve a complete response following salvage therapy, and those with DEL and patients with DHL had a shorter time to relapse after induction therapy.
“Although some patients with relapsed/refractory DHL had long-term remission after ASCT (isolated DHL without DEL), the low survival rate in this group argues that alternative transplantation strategies, including allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation or peri-ASCT relapse prevention strategies should be studied,” they concluded.
FROM THE JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY
Key clinical point:
Major finding: The 4-year progression-free survival in patients with DEL vs. non-DEL was 48% versus 59% (P = .049), and the 4-year OS was 56% vs. 67% (P = .10).
Data source: Retrospective, multicenter study that included 117 patients with relapsed/refractory aggressive B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma who underwent ASCT.
Disclosures: The study was funded by a Conquer Cancer Foundation/ASCO Young Investigator Award and National Cancer Institute Grants; the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute Award Fund for Collaborative Research Initiatives in Hematologic Oncology; the Harold and Virginia Lash/David Lash Fund for Lymphoma Research; and NCI Grant No. P30CA033572 for work performed in the COH Pathology Core. Dr. Herrera reports receiving research funding from Seattle Genetics, Pharmacyclics, Genentech, Immune Design, and Sequenta, and received travel, accommodations, and expenses from Bristol-Myers Squibb. Several coauthors also report relationships with industry.
Allogeneic stem cells show promise for treating nonischemic dilated cardiomyopathy
NEW ORLEANS – Allogeneic stem cells appear to be a safe treatment option for nonischemic dilated cardiomyopathy and show somewhat greater efficacy than autologous stem cells, according to the results of the randomized POSEIDON-DCM trial.
“Nonischemic dilated cardiomyopathy is an incurable condition with significant genetic and immunologic underpinnings,” noted lead investigator Joshua M. Hare, MD, director of the Interdisciplinary Stem Cell Institute and professor of medicine at the University of Miami. “Mesenchymal stem cells are immunomodulatory and immunoprivileged cells with proregenerative effects that have been shown to be safe and to promote reverse remodeling in ischemic cardiomyopathy.”
The phase I/II trial undertook a head-to-head comparison of allogeneic and autologous bone marrow–derived mesenchymal stem cells in 37 patients with nonischemic dilated cardiomyopathy.
Results presented at the American Heart Association scientific sessions and simultaneously published (J Am Coll Cardiol. 2016. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2016.11.009) showed that none of the patients in either group experienced a 30-day treatment-emergent serious adverse event, the trial’s primary endpoint.
The allogeneic group had a greater shift to a lesser inflammatory immune profile, and, at 12 months, a lower rate of major adverse cardiac events and more improvement in walk test distance. Additionally, half of patients in the allogeneic group no longer met the ejection fraction cutoff typically used to define dilated cardiomyopathy, compared with only about one-fifth of those in the autologous group.
“Immunomodulation may contribute to the efficacy of allogeneic human mesenchymal stem cells in nonischemic dilated cardiomyopathy, as we have shown suppression of immune activation to a greater degree with the allo versus auto cells,” Dr. Hare said.
“We argue that these data support the use of allogeneic mesenchymal stem cell therapy in future pivotal placebo-controlled clinical trials for this patient population, an important patient population with significant unmet need.”
Trial details
The patients enrolled in POSEIDON-DCM had left ventricular dysfunction due to nonischemic dilated cardiomyopathy and were randomized evenly to allogeneic or autologous stem cell therapy. Stem cells were delivered by transendocardial injection into 10 left ventricular sites using a catheter.
In the first 30 days after treatment, there were no treatment-emergent serious adverse events, defined as death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, stroke, hospitalization for worsening heart failure, cardiac perforation, pericardial tamponade, or sustained ventricular arrhythmias. “The 30-day safety and tolerability was excellent in both groups receiving either allogeneic or autologous therapy,” Dr. Hare said.
At 12 months, the allogeneic group had lower rates than the autologous group of major adverse cardiac events (20.3% vs. 57.1%, P = .0186) and all-cause rehospitalizations (28.2% vs. 70.0%, P = .0447).
In terms of efficacy, ejection fraction at 12 months had improved by a significant 8.0 Units in the allogeneic group and a nonsignificant 5.4 Units in the autologous group (P not significant for difference between groups). Roughly half of patients in the allogeneic group had achieved an ejection fraction of greater than 40%, compared with only two patients in the autologous group. “This is meaningful because the clinical definition of dilated cardiomyopathy typically uses an ejection fraction cutoff of 40%,” he noted.
The 6-minute walk test distance increased by a significant 37.0 m for the allogeneic group and by a nonsignificant 7.3 m for the autologous group (P = .0168 for difference between groups). Scores on the Minnesota Living With Heart Failure Questionnaire fell significantly in the former group and nonsignificantly in the latter group (P not significant for difference between groups).
Patients in the allogeneic group were more likely to have an improvement from baseline in New York Heart Association class (66.7% vs. 27.3%, P = .0527).
“An issue of concern in this field has been the formation of ectopic tissue with mesenchymal stem cells, so patients received whole-body CT scanning over 12 months,” Dr. Hare reported. “There was no ectopic tissue formation or tumor formation in any patient.”
In terms of biologic endpoints, two measures of endothelial function known to be suppressed in the setting of circulatory failure – endothelial progenitor cell colony-forming units and flow-mediated vasodilation – had increased significantly at 3 months in the allogeneic group only. Tumor necrosis factor–alpha levels fell by roughly 70% with allogeneic therapy versus 50% with autologous therapy (P = .05).
Both groups had a lessening of the immunosuppression that is common in heart failure, but benefit in several markers, such as the percentage of switched memory B cells, was greater with the allogeneic therapy. Additionally, there was a trend toward greater reduction of early T-cell activation in the allogeneic group.
“Of importance in the field of allogeneic cell therapy is [whether] the allogeneic cells mount a panel-reactive antigen [PRA],” commented Dr. Hare, who disclosed that he has an ownership interest in and is a consultant or advisory board member for Vestion.
Results showed that one patient in the allogeneic group developed a high-risk PRA, compared with none in the autologous group. Another four patients in the former group developed a moderate-risk PRA, compared with one in the latter group (P less than or equal to .05).
NEW ORLEANS – Allogeneic stem cells appear to be a safe treatment option for nonischemic dilated cardiomyopathy and show somewhat greater efficacy than autologous stem cells, according to the results of the randomized POSEIDON-DCM trial.
“Nonischemic dilated cardiomyopathy is an incurable condition with significant genetic and immunologic underpinnings,” noted lead investigator Joshua M. Hare, MD, director of the Interdisciplinary Stem Cell Institute and professor of medicine at the University of Miami. “Mesenchymal stem cells are immunomodulatory and immunoprivileged cells with proregenerative effects that have been shown to be safe and to promote reverse remodeling in ischemic cardiomyopathy.”
The phase I/II trial undertook a head-to-head comparison of allogeneic and autologous bone marrow–derived mesenchymal stem cells in 37 patients with nonischemic dilated cardiomyopathy.
Results presented at the American Heart Association scientific sessions and simultaneously published (J Am Coll Cardiol. 2016. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2016.11.009) showed that none of the patients in either group experienced a 30-day treatment-emergent serious adverse event, the trial’s primary endpoint.
The allogeneic group had a greater shift to a lesser inflammatory immune profile, and, at 12 months, a lower rate of major adverse cardiac events and more improvement in walk test distance. Additionally, half of patients in the allogeneic group no longer met the ejection fraction cutoff typically used to define dilated cardiomyopathy, compared with only about one-fifth of those in the autologous group.
“Immunomodulation may contribute to the efficacy of allogeneic human mesenchymal stem cells in nonischemic dilated cardiomyopathy, as we have shown suppression of immune activation to a greater degree with the allo versus auto cells,” Dr. Hare said.
“We argue that these data support the use of allogeneic mesenchymal stem cell therapy in future pivotal placebo-controlled clinical trials for this patient population, an important patient population with significant unmet need.”
Trial details
The patients enrolled in POSEIDON-DCM had left ventricular dysfunction due to nonischemic dilated cardiomyopathy and were randomized evenly to allogeneic or autologous stem cell therapy. Stem cells were delivered by transendocardial injection into 10 left ventricular sites using a catheter.
In the first 30 days after treatment, there were no treatment-emergent serious adverse events, defined as death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, stroke, hospitalization for worsening heart failure, cardiac perforation, pericardial tamponade, or sustained ventricular arrhythmias. “The 30-day safety and tolerability was excellent in both groups receiving either allogeneic or autologous therapy,” Dr. Hare said.
At 12 months, the allogeneic group had lower rates than the autologous group of major adverse cardiac events (20.3% vs. 57.1%, P = .0186) and all-cause rehospitalizations (28.2% vs. 70.0%, P = .0447).
In terms of efficacy, ejection fraction at 12 months had improved by a significant 8.0 Units in the allogeneic group and a nonsignificant 5.4 Units in the autologous group (P not significant for difference between groups). Roughly half of patients in the allogeneic group had achieved an ejection fraction of greater than 40%, compared with only two patients in the autologous group. “This is meaningful because the clinical definition of dilated cardiomyopathy typically uses an ejection fraction cutoff of 40%,” he noted.
The 6-minute walk test distance increased by a significant 37.0 m for the allogeneic group and by a nonsignificant 7.3 m for the autologous group (P = .0168 for difference between groups). Scores on the Minnesota Living With Heart Failure Questionnaire fell significantly in the former group and nonsignificantly in the latter group (P not significant for difference between groups).
Patients in the allogeneic group were more likely to have an improvement from baseline in New York Heart Association class (66.7% vs. 27.3%, P = .0527).
“An issue of concern in this field has been the formation of ectopic tissue with mesenchymal stem cells, so patients received whole-body CT scanning over 12 months,” Dr. Hare reported. “There was no ectopic tissue formation or tumor formation in any patient.”
In terms of biologic endpoints, two measures of endothelial function known to be suppressed in the setting of circulatory failure – endothelial progenitor cell colony-forming units and flow-mediated vasodilation – had increased significantly at 3 months in the allogeneic group only. Tumor necrosis factor–alpha levels fell by roughly 70% with allogeneic therapy versus 50% with autologous therapy (P = .05).
Both groups had a lessening of the immunosuppression that is common in heart failure, but benefit in several markers, such as the percentage of switched memory B cells, was greater with the allogeneic therapy. Additionally, there was a trend toward greater reduction of early T-cell activation in the allogeneic group.
“Of importance in the field of allogeneic cell therapy is [whether] the allogeneic cells mount a panel-reactive antigen [PRA],” commented Dr. Hare, who disclosed that he has an ownership interest in and is a consultant or advisory board member for Vestion.
Results showed that one patient in the allogeneic group developed a high-risk PRA, compared with none in the autologous group. Another four patients in the former group developed a moderate-risk PRA, compared with one in the latter group (P less than or equal to .05).
NEW ORLEANS – Allogeneic stem cells appear to be a safe treatment option for nonischemic dilated cardiomyopathy and show somewhat greater efficacy than autologous stem cells, according to the results of the randomized POSEIDON-DCM trial.
“Nonischemic dilated cardiomyopathy is an incurable condition with significant genetic and immunologic underpinnings,” noted lead investigator Joshua M. Hare, MD, director of the Interdisciplinary Stem Cell Institute and professor of medicine at the University of Miami. “Mesenchymal stem cells are immunomodulatory and immunoprivileged cells with proregenerative effects that have been shown to be safe and to promote reverse remodeling in ischemic cardiomyopathy.”
The phase I/II trial undertook a head-to-head comparison of allogeneic and autologous bone marrow–derived mesenchymal stem cells in 37 patients with nonischemic dilated cardiomyopathy.
Results presented at the American Heart Association scientific sessions and simultaneously published (J Am Coll Cardiol. 2016. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2016.11.009) showed that none of the patients in either group experienced a 30-day treatment-emergent serious adverse event, the trial’s primary endpoint.
The allogeneic group had a greater shift to a lesser inflammatory immune profile, and, at 12 months, a lower rate of major adverse cardiac events and more improvement in walk test distance. Additionally, half of patients in the allogeneic group no longer met the ejection fraction cutoff typically used to define dilated cardiomyopathy, compared with only about one-fifth of those in the autologous group.
“Immunomodulation may contribute to the efficacy of allogeneic human mesenchymal stem cells in nonischemic dilated cardiomyopathy, as we have shown suppression of immune activation to a greater degree with the allo versus auto cells,” Dr. Hare said.
“We argue that these data support the use of allogeneic mesenchymal stem cell therapy in future pivotal placebo-controlled clinical trials for this patient population, an important patient population with significant unmet need.”
Trial details
The patients enrolled in POSEIDON-DCM had left ventricular dysfunction due to nonischemic dilated cardiomyopathy and were randomized evenly to allogeneic or autologous stem cell therapy. Stem cells were delivered by transendocardial injection into 10 left ventricular sites using a catheter.
In the first 30 days after treatment, there were no treatment-emergent serious adverse events, defined as death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, stroke, hospitalization for worsening heart failure, cardiac perforation, pericardial tamponade, or sustained ventricular arrhythmias. “The 30-day safety and tolerability was excellent in both groups receiving either allogeneic or autologous therapy,” Dr. Hare said.
At 12 months, the allogeneic group had lower rates than the autologous group of major adverse cardiac events (20.3% vs. 57.1%, P = .0186) and all-cause rehospitalizations (28.2% vs. 70.0%, P = .0447).
In terms of efficacy, ejection fraction at 12 months had improved by a significant 8.0 Units in the allogeneic group and a nonsignificant 5.4 Units in the autologous group (P not significant for difference between groups). Roughly half of patients in the allogeneic group had achieved an ejection fraction of greater than 40%, compared with only two patients in the autologous group. “This is meaningful because the clinical definition of dilated cardiomyopathy typically uses an ejection fraction cutoff of 40%,” he noted.
The 6-minute walk test distance increased by a significant 37.0 m for the allogeneic group and by a nonsignificant 7.3 m for the autologous group (P = .0168 for difference between groups). Scores on the Minnesota Living With Heart Failure Questionnaire fell significantly in the former group and nonsignificantly in the latter group (P not significant for difference between groups).
Patients in the allogeneic group were more likely to have an improvement from baseline in New York Heart Association class (66.7% vs. 27.3%, P = .0527).
“An issue of concern in this field has been the formation of ectopic tissue with mesenchymal stem cells, so patients received whole-body CT scanning over 12 months,” Dr. Hare reported. “There was no ectopic tissue formation or tumor formation in any patient.”
In terms of biologic endpoints, two measures of endothelial function known to be suppressed in the setting of circulatory failure – endothelial progenitor cell colony-forming units and flow-mediated vasodilation – had increased significantly at 3 months in the allogeneic group only. Tumor necrosis factor–alpha levels fell by roughly 70% with allogeneic therapy versus 50% with autologous therapy (P = .05).
Both groups had a lessening of the immunosuppression that is common in heart failure, but benefit in several markers, such as the percentage of switched memory B cells, was greater with the allogeneic therapy. Additionally, there was a trend toward greater reduction of early T-cell activation in the allogeneic group.
“Of importance in the field of allogeneic cell therapy is [whether] the allogeneic cells mount a panel-reactive antigen [PRA],” commented Dr. Hare, who disclosed that he has an ownership interest in and is a consultant or advisory board member for Vestion.
Results showed that one patient in the allogeneic group developed a high-risk PRA, compared with none in the autologous group. Another four patients in the former group developed a moderate-risk PRA, compared with one in the latter group (P less than or equal to .05).
AT THE AHA SCIENTIFIC SESSIONS
Key clinical point:
Major finding: At 12 months, the allogeneic group had lower rates than the autologous group of major adverse cardiac events (20.3% vs. 57.1%, P = .0186) and all-cause rehospitalizations (28.2% vs. 70.0%, P = .0447).
Data source: A randomized phase I/II trial among 37 patients with nonischemic dilated cardiomyopathy (POSEIDON-DCM trial).
Disclosures: Dr. Hare disclosed that he has an ownership interest in and is a consultant or advisory board member for Vestion.
Lenalidomide maintenance prolongs overall survival after ASCT
CHICAGO – Lenalidomide maintenance therapy significantly prolonged overall survival after autologous stem cell transplant in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma patients, including patients who had a complete response to ASCT, based on a meta-analysis presented at the annual meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.
While several studies have indicated that lenalidomide maintenance reduces the risk of disease progression or death compared to a control group, none of the individual studies were powered to detect a significant improvement in overall survival, said Dr. Philip L. McCarthy, director of the Blood and Marrow Transplant Center at Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, N.Y., who is a co-author of the meta-analysis and reported the results on behalf of Dr. Michel Attal of University Hospital, Toulouse, France.
The researchers found that three randomized controlled trials using lenalidomide post-ASCT (IFM 2005-02, CALGB 100104 [Alliance], GIMEMA RV-209) met the criteria of having patient-level data, a control arm, and primary efficacy data for newly-diagnosed patients with multiple myeloma.
After induction and single (82%) or tandem (18%) ASCT, 55% of patients in the meta-analysis had complete or very good partial responses.
From 2005 to 2009, 605 patients received lenalidomide either 10 mg/day on days 1-21 of a 28-day cycle (GIMEMA) or on days 1-28 of a 28-day cycle (IFM and CALGB); 604 patients were in a control group. With a median follow-up of 6.6 years, 491 patients (41%) had died.
Median overall survival was not reached in the lenolidamide group and was 86 months in the control group (HR = 0.74; 95% CI, 0.62-0.89; log-rank P = .001). Survival was longer in the lenolidamine group as compared to the control group at 5 years (71% vs 66%), 6 years (65% vs 58%), and 7 years (62% vs 50%), reported Dr. McCarthy.
Dr. McCarthy receives research funding from Celgene, the maker of Revlimid (lenalidomide); and is a consultant or advisor to and receives honoraria from Binding Site; Bristol-Myers Squibb; Celgene; Janssen; Karyopharm Therapeutics; and Sanofi. Dr. Attal had no disclosures.
On Twitter @maryjodales
CHICAGO – Lenalidomide maintenance therapy significantly prolonged overall survival after autologous stem cell transplant in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma patients, including patients who had a complete response to ASCT, based on a meta-analysis presented at the annual meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.
While several studies have indicated that lenalidomide maintenance reduces the risk of disease progression or death compared to a control group, none of the individual studies were powered to detect a significant improvement in overall survival, said Dr. Philip L. McCarthy, director of the Blood and Marrow Transplant Center at Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, N.Y., who is a co-author of the meta-analysis and reported the results on behalf of Dr. Michel Attal of University Hospital, Toulouse, France.
The researchers found that three randomized controlled trials using lenalidomide post-ASCT (IFM 2005-02, CALGB 100104 [Alliance], GIMEMA RV-209) met the criteria of having patient-level data, a control arm, and primary efficacy data for newly-diagnosed patients with multiple myeloma.
After induction and single (82%) or tandem (18%) ASCT, 55% of patients in the meta-analysis had complete or very good partial responses.
From 2005 to 2009, 605 patients received lenalidomide either 10 mg/day on days 1-21 of a 28-day cycle (GIMEMA) or on days 1-28 of a 28-day cycle (IFM and CALGB); 604 patients were in a control group. With a median follow-up of 6.6 years, 491 patients (41%) had died.
Median overall survival was not reached in the lenolidamide group and was 86 months in the control group (HR = 0.74; 95% CI, 0.62-0.89; log-rank P = .001). Survival was longer in the lenolidamine group as compared to the control group at 5 years (71% vs 66%), 6 years (65% vs 58%), and 7 years (62% vs 50%), reported Dr. McCarthy.
Dr. McCarthy receives research funding from Celgene, the maker of Revlimid (lenalidomide); and is a consultant or advisor to and receives honoraria from Binding Site; Bristol-Myers Squibb; Celgene; Janssen; Karyopharm Therapeutics; and Sanofi. Dr. Attal had no disclosures.
On Twitter @maryjodales
CHICAGO – Lenalidomide maintenance therapy significantly prolonged overall survival after autologous stem cell transplant in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma patients, including patients who had a complete response to ASCT, based on a meta-analysis presented at the annual meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.
While several studies have indicated that lenalidomide maintenance reduces the risk of disease progression or death compared to a control group, none of the individual studies were powered to detect a significant improvement in overall survival, said Dr. Philip L. McCarthy, director of the Blood and Marrow Transplant Center at Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, N.Y., who is a co-author of the meta-analysis and reported the results on behalf of Dr. Michel Attal of University Hospital, Toulouse, France.
The researchers found that three randomized controlled trials using lenalidomide post-ASCT (IFM 2005-02, CALGB 100104 [Alliance], GIMEMA RV-209) met the criteria of having patient-level data, a control arm, and primary efficacy data for newly-diagnosed patients with multiple myeloma.
After induction and single (82%) or tandem (18%) ASCT, 55% of patients in the meta-analysis had complete or very good partial responses.
From 2005 to 2009, 605 patients received lenalidomide either 10 mg/day on days 1-21 of a 28-day cycle (GIMEMA) or on days 1-28 of a 28-day cycle (IFM and CALGB); 604 patients were in a control group. With a median follow-up of 6.6 years, 491 patients (41%) had died.
Median overall survival was not reached in the lenolidamide group and was 86 months in the control group (HR = 0.74; 95% CI, 0.62-0.89; log-rank P = .001). Survival was longer in the lenolidamine group as compared to the control group at 5 years (71% vs 66%), 6 years (65% vs 58%), and 7 years (62% vs 50%), reported Dr. McCarthy.
Dr. McCarthy receives research funding from Celgene, the maker of Revlimid (lenalidomide); and is a consultant or advisor to and receives honoraria from Binding Site; Bristol-Myers Squibb; Celgene; Janssen; Karyopharm Therapeutics; and Sanofi. Dr. Attal had no disclosures.
On Twitter @maryjodales
AT ASCO 2016
Key clinical point: Lenalidomide maintenance therapy significantly prolonged overall survival after autologous stem cell transplant in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma patients.
Major finding: Median overall survival was not reached in the lenolidamide group and was 86 months in the control group (HR = 0.74; 95% CI, 0.62-0.89; log-rank P = .001).
Data source: Meta-analysis of 1,209 patients in three randomized controlled trials using lenalidomide post-ASCT (IFM 2005-02, CALGB 100104 [Alliance], GIMEMA RV-209).
Disclosures: Dr. McCarthy receives research funding from Celgene, the maker of Revlimid (lenalidomide); and is a consultant or advisor to and receives honoraria from Binding Site; Bristol-Myers Squibb; Celgene; Janssen; Karyopharm Therapeutics; and Sanofi. Dr. Attal had no disclosures.
Donor EBV status affects recipient graft-vs-host disease risk
In allogeneic hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation, the donor’s status regarding Epstein-Barr virus affects the recipient’s risk of developing graft-vs-host disease – a “completely new and striking” finding, according to a report published online April 18 in the Journal of Clinical Oncology.
Approximately 80% of the general population has been infected with EBV and carries persistent virus in memory B cells. When viral material is transmitted to stem-cell recipients, it is known to cause posttransplantation lymphoproliferative disorder. Until now, however, no data were available to examine EBV serology’s effect on other posttransplantation outcomes, said Dr. Jan Styczynski of the department of pediatric hematology and oncology at Nicolaus Copernicus University, Bydgoszcz, Poland, and his associates.
They analyzed information in the European Society of Blood and Marrow Transplantation database for 11,364 patients with acute lymphoblastic leukemia or acute myeloblastic leukemia who underwent stem-cell transplantation between 1997 and 2012 and who were followed for approximately 5 years. Most of the donors (82%) were seropositive for EBV. Acute graft-vs-host disease (GVHD) developed in 32% and chronic GVHD developed in 40% of these stem cell–transplant recipients.
The incidence of chronic GVHD was significantly higher when the donor was EBV-seropositive (41%) than when the donor was EBV-seronegative (31%). Similarly, the incidence of acute GVHD was significantly higher when the donor was EBV-seropositive (32% vs 30%), but the magnitude of the difference between the two groups was smaller. The risk for GVHD increased even though patients receiving transplants from EBV-seropositive donors underwent more intensive GVHD prophylaxis than did those who had seronegative donors, the investigators said (J Clin Oncol. 2016 Apr 18. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2015.64.2405).
In contrast, the transplant recipients’ EBV status did not affect their risk of developing GVHD.
“Despite the effect of donor EBV serostatus on GVHD, we did not observe a corresponding GVHD-related death rate, and as a result, there was no effect on overall survival, relapse-free survival, relapse incidence, and nonrelapse mortality. However, it should be kept in mind that many other pre- and posttransplantation factors play a role in contributing to final transplantation outcomes,” Dr. Styczynski and his associates noted.
The current recommendation to monitor transplantation recipients for EBV and to give them “preemptive” rituximab to stave off the development of posttransplantation lymphoproliferative disorder might prove useful in also preventing GVHD, they added.
The findings of Dr. Styczynski and his associates raise the possibility that we may be able to prevent or treat GVHD in transplant recipients by controlling EBV infection.
Selecting only EBV-negative donors would be one way to accomplish this, but that would be impractical given the high seroprevalence of EBV in the general population. Depleting memory B cells, the reservoir of EBV infection, using monoclonal antibodies may prove helpful, and these agents might provide additional therapeutic effects. And novel antivirals such as retroviral integrase inhibitors may be more specific at targeting EBV than acyclovir and related agents, which have limited activity against latently infected B cells. These novel drugs, however, are not without risks and adverse effects.
A promising alternative might be to boost immunity to EBV using vaccination or adoptive transfer of ex vivo expanded EBV-specific cytotoxic T cells.
Dr. Katayoun Rezvani and Dr. Richard E. Champlin are with the University of Texas MD Andersen Cancer Center, Houston. Their financial disclosures are available at www.jco.org. They made these remarks in an editorial accompanying Dr. Styczynski’s report (J Clin Oncol. 2016 Apr 18. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2016.66.6099).
The findings of Dr. Styczynski and his associates raise the possibility that we may be able to prevent or treat GVHD in transplant recipients by controlling EBV infection.
Selecting only EBV-negative donors would be one way to accomplish this, but that would be impractical given the high seroprevalence of EBV in the general population. Depleting memory B cells, the reservoir of EBV infection, using monoclonal antibodies may prove helpful, and these agents might provide additional therapeutic effects. And novel antivirals such as retroviral integrase inhibitors may be more specific at targeting EBV than acyclovir and related agents, which have limited activity against latently infected B cells. These novel drugs, however, are not without risks and adverse effects.
A promising alternative might be to boost immunity to EBV using vaccination or adoptive transfer of ex vivo expanded EBV-specific cytotoxic T cells.
Dr. Katayoun Rezvani and Dr. Richard E. Champlin are with the University of Texas MD Andersen Cancer Center, Houston. Their financial disclosures are available at www.jco.org. They made these remarks in an editorial accompanying Dr. Styczynski’s report (J Clin Oncol. 2016 Apr 18. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2016.66.6099).
The findings of Dr. Styczynski and his associates raise the possibility that we may be able to prevent or treat GVHD in transplant recipients by controlling EBV infection.
Selecting only EBV-negative donors would be one way to accomplish this, but that would be impractical given the high seroprevalence of EBV in the general population. Depleting memory B cells, the reservoir of EBV infection, using monoclonal antibodies may prove helpful, and these agents might provide additional therapeutic effects. And novel antivirals such as retroviral integrase inhibitors may be more specific at targeting EBV than acyclovir and related agents, which have limited activity against latently infected B cells. These novel drugs, however, are not without risks and adverse effects.
A promising alternative might be to boost immunity to EBV using vaccination or adoptive transfer of ex vivo expanded EBV-specific cytotoxic T cells.
Dr. Katayoun Rezvani and Dr. Richard E. Champlin are with the University of Texas MD Andersen Cancer Center, Houston. Their financial disclosures are available at www.jco.org. They made these remarks in an editorial accompanying Dr. Styczynski’s report (J Clin Oncol. 2016 Apr 18. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2016.66.6099).
In allogeneic hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation, the donor’s status regarding Epstein-Barr virus affects the recipient’s risk of developing graft-vs-host disease – a “completely new and striking” finding, according to a report published online April 18 in the Journal of Clinical Oncology.
Approximately 80% of the general population has been infected with EBV and carries persistent virus in memory B cells. When viral material is transmitted to stem-cell recipients, it is known to cause posttransplantation lymphoproliferative disorder. Until now, however, no data were available to examine EBV serology’s effect on other posttransplantation outcomes, said Dr. Jan Styczynski of the department of pediatric hematology and oncology at Nicolaus Copernicus University, Bydgoszcz, Poland, and his associates.
They analyzed information in the European Society of Blood and Marrow Transplantation database for 11,364 patients with acute lymphoblastic leukemia or acute myeloblastic leukemia who underwent stem-cell transplantation between 1997 and 2012 and who were followed for approximately 5 years. Most of the donors (82%) were seropositive for EBV. Acute graft-vs-host disease (GVHD) developed in 32% and chronic GVHD developed in 40% of these stem cell–transplant recipients.
The incidence of chronic GVHD was significantly higher when the donor was EBV-seropositive (41%) than when the donor was EBV-seronegative (31%). Similarly, the incidence of acute GVHD was significantly higher when the donor was EBV-seropositive (32% vs 30%), but the magnitude of the difference between the two groups was smaller. The risk for GVHD increased even though patients receiving transplants from EBV-seropositive donors underwent more intensive GVHD prophylaxis than did those who had seronegative donors, the investigators said (J Clin Oncol. 2016 Apr 18. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2015.64.2405).
In contrast, the transplant recipients’ EBV status did not affect their risk of developing GVHD.
“Despite the effect of donor EBV serostatus on GVHD, we did not observe a corresponding GVHD-related death rate, and as a result, there was no effect on overall survival, relapse-free survival, relapse incidence, and nonrelapse mortality. However, it should be kept in mind that many other pre- and posttransplantation factors play a role in contributing to final transplantation outcomes,” Dr. Styczynski and his associates noted.
The current recommendation to monitor transplantation recipients for EBV and to give them “preemptive” rituximab to stave off the development of posttransplantation lymphoproliferative disorder might prove useful in also preventing GVHD, they added.
In allogeneic hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation, the donor’s status regarding Epstein-Barr virus affects the recipient’s risk of developing graft-vs-host disease – a “completely new and striking” finding, according to a report published online April 18 in the Journal of Clinical Oncology.
Approximately 80% of the general population has been infected with EBV and carries persistent virus in memory B cells. When viral material is transmitted to stem-cell recipients, it is known to cause posttransplantation lymphoproliferative disorder. Until now, however, no data were available to examine EBV serology’s effect on other posttransplantation outcomes, said Dr. Jan Styczynski of the department of pediatric hematology and oncology at Nicolaus Copernicus University, Bydgoszcz, Poland, and his associates.
They analyzed information in the European Society of Blood and Marrow Transplantation database for 11,364 patients with acute lymphoblastic leukemia or acute myeloblastic leukemia who underwent stem-cell transplantation between 1997 and 2012 and who were followed for approximately 5 years. Most of the donors (82%) were seropositive for EBV. Acute graft-vs-host disease (GVHD) developed in 32% and chronic GVHD developed in 40% of these stem cell–transplant recipients.
The incidence of chronic GVHD was significantly higher when the donor was EBV-seropositive (41%) than when the donor was EBV-seronegative (31%). Similarly, the incidence of acute GVHD was significantly higher when the donor was EBV-seropositive (32% vs 30%), but the magnitude of the difference between the two groups was smaller. The risk for GVHD increased even though patients receiving transplants from EBV-seropositive donors underwent more intensive GVHD prophylaxis than did those who had seronegative donors, the investigators said (J Clin Oncol. 2016 Apr 18. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2015.64.2405).
In contrast, the transplant recipients’ EBV status did not affect their risk of developing GVHD.
“Despite the effect of donor EBV serostatus on GVHD, we did not observe a corresponding GVHD-related death rate, and as a result, there was no effect on overall survival, relapse-free survival, relapse incidence, and nonrelapse mortality. However, it should be kept in mind that many other pre- and posttransplantation factors play a role in contributing to final transplantation outcomes,” Dr. Styczynski and his associates noted.
The current recommendation to monitor transplantation recipients for EBV and to give them “preemptive” rituximab to stave off the development of posttransplantation lymphoproliferative disorder might prove useful in also preventing GVHD, they added.
FROM THE JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY
Key clinical point: In allogeneic hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation, the donor’s EBV status affects the recipient’s risk of developing GVHD.
Major finding: Chronic GVHD was significantly more likely to develop when the donor was EBV-seropositive (41%) than EBV-seronegative (31%).
Data source: A retrospective analysis of data regarding 11,364 European patients with acute leukemia who underwent stem-cell transplantation and were followed for 5 years.
Disclosures: No study sponsor was identified. Dr. Styczynski reported having no relevant financial disclosures; his associates reported ties to numerous industry sources.
In myelodysplastic syndrome, improved tool for predicting death after HCT
A new risk-stratification tool goes one better than the standard tools used to predict survival in those undergoing allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (allo HCT) for myelodysplastic syndrome, based on a study published online April 4 in the Journal of Clinical Oncology.
The concordance index for the new risk-stratification tool was modestly better at 0.575, compared with 0.538 for the standard International Prognostic Scoring System (IPSS) and 0.554 for the revised IPSS (IPSS-R), according to Dr. Brian C. Shaffer of Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, and his colleagues who participate in the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research (CIBMTR) network.
“The proposed system generally agrees with the IPSS-R in the very high–risk subcategory; however, a significant portion of patients in high- and very high–risk IPSS-R groups were represented in the low- and intermediate-risk proposed scoring subcategories. The 3-year survival in patients classified as high risk with the IPSS-R was 75%; it was 57% in those classified as low or intermediate risk with the proposed system,” the researchers wrote.
Further, the “scoring system uses readily available clinical data and can be calculated quickly, facilitating patient consultation with respect to allo HCT, and may also be used to identify high-risk populations where interventions such as post–allo HCT maintenance therapies may be of benefit,” they wrote (J Clin Oncol. 2016 April 4. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2015.65.0515).
The data were obtained from the CIBMTR, a combined research program of the Medical College of Wisconsin and the National Marrow Donor Program. The CIBMTR comprises a voluntary network of more than 450 transplantation centers worldwide that contribute data on consecutive allo and autologous HCTs to a centralized statistical center.
The researchers applied the prognostic tool to 2,133 patients with MDS undergoing HLA-matched (n = 1,728) or -mismatched (n = 405) allo HCT. Factors prognostic of mortality were identified in a training subset (n = 1,151) of the HLA-matched cohort. A weighted score using these factors was then assigned to the validation cohort of 577 remaining patients undergoing HLA-matched allo HCT as well as to patients undergoing HLA-mismatched allo HCT. The training data set was used to develop a prognostic scoring system, and the validation data set was used to assess the prognostic ability of the scoring system, the researchers noted.
In the scoring system, 1 point was assigned for the following factors: Blood blasts greater than 3%, platelet levels of 50 × 109/L or less at transplantation, Karnofsky performance status less than 90%, comprehensive cytogenetic risk score of poor or very poor, and age 30-49 years. Two points were assigned for monosomal karyotype and age 50 years or older.
Based on the scoring system, 3-year overall survival after transplantation was 71% in patients with scores of 1 point, 49% with scores of 2-3, 41% with scores of 4-5, and 25% with scores of 6 or more. Increasing score was predictive of increased relapse and treatment-related mortality in the HLA-matched set and of relapse in the HLA-mismatched cohort.
To develop the scoring system, the researchers used a model that weighed patient age; sex; and Karnofsky performance status; disease stage at transplantation; comprehensive cytogenetic risk status; bone marrow and peripheral blood blast percentages; hemoglobin, neutrophil, and platelet counts at diagnosis and pretransplantation; lactate dehydrogenase at transplantation; pretransplantation therapy (hypomethylating agents, chemotherapy, neither, or both); time from diagnosis to transplantation; year of transplantation; conditioning regimen and regimen intensity (myeloablative v reduced intensity); donor–recipient sex match or mismatch; graft-versus-host disease prophylaxis; graft type (bone marrow vs. peripheral blood); presence of secondary myelodysplastic syndrome; and unrelated donor vs. related donor.
There were no significant differences in overall survival at 1, 3, and 5 years or in the 3-year incidences of relapse and treatment-related mortality in the training subset and the validation cohort.
Data on somatic mutations have become relevant in myelodysplastic syndrome prognostication and were missing from this analysis, the researchers wrote. “The next generation of prognostic tools will need to account for this information.”
Dr. Shaffer had no relevant financial disclosures.
On Twitter @maryjodales
A new risk-stratification tool goes one better than the standard tools used to predict survival in those undergoing allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (allo HCT) for myelodysplastic syndrome, based on a study published online April 4 in the Journal of Clinical Oncology.
The concordance index for the new risk-stratification tool was modestly better at 0.575, compared with 0.538 for the standard International Prognostic Scoring System (IPSS) and 0.554 for the revised IPSS (IPSS-R), according to Dr. Brian C. Shaffer of Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, and his colleagues who participate in the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research (CIBMTR) network.
“The proposed system generally agrees with the IPSS-R in the very high–risk subcategory; however, a significant portion of patients in high- and very high–risk IPSS-R groups were represented in the low- and intermediate-risk proposed scoring subcategories. The 3-year survival in patients classified as high risk with the IPSS-R was 75%; it was 57% in those classified as low or intermediate risk with the proposed system,” the researchers wrote.
Further, the “scoring system uses readily available clinical data and can be calculated quickly, facilitating patient consultation with respect to allo HCT, and may also be used to identify high-risk populations where interventions such as post–allo HCT maintenance therapies may be of benefit,” they wrote (J Clin Oncol. 2016 April 4. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2015.65.0515).
The data were obtained from the CIBMTR, a combined research program of the Medical College of Wisconsin and the National Marrow Donor Program. The CIBMTR comprises a voluntary network of more than 450 transplantation centers worldwide that contribute data on consecutive allo and autologous HCTs to a centralized statistical center.
The researchers applied the prognostic tool to 2,133 patients with MDS undergoing HLA-matched (n = 1,728) or -mismatched (n = 405) allo HCT. Factors prognostic of mortality were identified in a training subset (n = 1,151) of the HLA-matched cohort. A weighted score using these factors was then assigned to the validation cohort of 577 remaining patients undergoing HLA-matched allo HCT as well as to patients undergoing HLA-mismatched allo HCT. The training data set was used to develop a prognostic scoring system, and the validation data set was used to assess the prognostic ability of the scoring system, the researchers noted.
In the scoring system, 1 point was assigned for the following factors: Blood blasts greater than 3%, platelet levels of 50 × 109/L or less at transplantation, Karnofsky performance status less than 90%, comprehensive cytogenetic risk score of poor or very poor, and age 30-49 years. Two points were assigned for monosomal karyotype and age 50 years or older.
Based on the scoring system, 3-year overall survival after transplantation was 71% in patients with scores of 1 point, 49% with scores of 2-3, 41% with scores of 4-5, and 25% with scores of 6 or more. Increasing score was predictive of increased relapse and treatment-related mortality in the HLA-matched set and of relapse in the HLA-mismatched cohort.
To develop the scoring system, the researchers used a model that weighed patient age; sex; and Karnofsky performance status; disease stage at transplantation; comprehensive cytogenetic risk status; bone marrow and peripheral blood blast percentages; hemoglobin, neutrophil, and platelet counts at diagnosis and pretransplantation; lactate dehydrogenase at transplantation; pretransplantation therapy (hypomethylating agents, chemotherapy, neither, or both); time from diagnosis to transplantation; year of transplantation; conditioning regimen and regimen intensity (myeloablative v reduced intensity); donor–recipient sex match or mismatch; graft-versus-host disease prophylaxis; graft type (bone marrow vs. peripheral blood); presence of secondary myelodysplastic syndrome; and unrelated donor vs. related donor.
There were no significant differences in overall survival at 1, 3, and 5 years or in the 3-year incidences of relapse and treatment-related mortality in the training subset and the validation cohort.
Data on somatic mutations have become relevant in myelodysplastic syndrome prognostication and were missing from this analysis, the researchers wrote. “The next generation of prognostic tools will need to account for this information.”
Dr. Shaffer had no relevant financial disclosures.
On Twitter @maryjodales
A new risk-stratification tool goes one better than the standard tools used to predict survival in those undergoing allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (allo HCT) for myelodysplastic syndrome, based on a study published online April 4 in the Journal of Clinical Oncology.
The concordance index for the new risk-stratification tool was modestly better at 0.575, compared with 0.538 for the standard International Prognostic Scoring System (IPSS) and 0.554 for the revised IPSS (IPSS-R), according to Dr. Brian C. Shaffer of Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, and his colleagues who participate in the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research (CIBMTR) network.
“The proposed system generally agrees with the IPSS-R in the very high–risk subcategory; however, a significant portion of patients in high- and very high–risk IPSS-R groups were represented in the low- and intermediate-risk proposed scoring subcategories. The 3-year survival in patients classified as high risk with the IPSS-R was 75%; it was 57% in those classified as low or intermediate risk with the proposed system,” the researchers wrote.
Further, the “scoring system uses readily available clinical data and can be calculated quickly, facilitating patient consultation with respect to allo HCT, and may also be used to identify high-risk populations where interventions such as post–allo HCT maintenance therapies may be of benefit,” they wrote (J Clin Oncol. 2016 April 4. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2015.65.0515).
The data were obtained from the CIBMTR, a combined research program of the Medical College of Wisconsin and the National Marrow Donor Program. The CIBMTR comprises a voluntary network of more than 450 transplantation centers worldwide that contribute data on consecutive allo and autologous HCTs to a centralized statistical center.
The researchers applied the prognostic tool to 2,133 patients with MDS undergoing HLA-matched (n = 1,728) or -mismatched (n = 405) allo HCT. Factors prognostic of mortality were identified in a training subset (n = 1,151) of the HLA-matched cohort. A weighted score using these factors was then assigned to the validation cohort of 577 remaining patients undergoing HLA-matched allo HCT as well as to patients undergoing HLA-mismatched allo HCT. The training data set was used to develop a prognostic scoring system, and the validation data set was used to assess the prognostic ability of the scoring system, the researchers noted.
In the scoring system, 1 point was assigned for the following factors: Blood blasts greater than 3%, platelet levels of 50 × 109/L or less at transplantation, Karnofsky performance status less than 90%, comprehensive cytogenetic risk score of poor or very poor, and age 30-49 years. Two points were assigned for monosomal karyotype and age 50 years or older.
Based on the scoring system, 3-year overall survival after transplantation was 71% in patients with scores of 1 point, 49% with scores of 2-3, 41% with scores of 4-5, and 25% with scores of 6 or more. Increasing score was predictive of increased relapse and treatment-related mortality in the HLA-matched set and of relapse in the HLA-mismatched cohort.
To develop the scoring system, the researchers used a model that weighed patient age; sex; and Karnofsky performance status; disease stage at transplantation; comprehensive cytogenetic risk status; bone marrow and peripheral blood blast percentages; hemoglobin, neutrophil, and platelet counts at diagnosis and pretransplantation; lactate dehydrogenase at transplantation; pretransplantation therapy (hypomethylating agents, chemotherapy, neither, or both); time from diagnosis to transplantation; year of transplantation; conditioning regimen and regimen intensity (myeloablative v reduced intensity); donor–recipient sex match or mismatch; graft-versus-host disease prophylaxis; graft type (bone marrow vs. peripheral blood); presence of secondary myelodysplastic syndrome; and unrelated donor vs. related donor.
There were no significant differences in overall survival at 1, 3, and 5 years or in the 3-year incidences of relapse and treatment-related mortality in the training subset and the validation cohort.
Data on somatic mutations have become relevant in myelodysplastic syndrome prognostication and were missing from this analysis, the researchers wrote. “The next generation of prognostic tools will need to account for this information.”
Dr. Shaffer had no relevant financial disclosures.
On Twitter @maryjodales
FROM JCO
Key clinical point: A portion of patients with myelodysplastic syndrome in high- and very high–risk groups of the revised International Prognostic Scoring System (IPSS-R) were represented in the low- and intermediate-risk groups of the proposed scoring subcategories.
Major finding: The 3-year survival in patients classified as high risk with the IPSS-R was 75%; it was 57% in those classified as low or intermediate risk with the proposed system.
Data source: The Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research (CIBMTR), a combined research program of the Medical College of Wisconsin and the National Marrow Donor Program. The CIBMTR comprises a voluntary network of more than 450 transplantation centers worldwide that contribute data on consecutive allo and autologous HCTs to a centralized statistical center.
Disclosures: Dr. Shaffer had no relevant financial disclosures.
Cyclophosphamide nets low rate of chronic GVHD after mobilized blood cell transplantation
High-dose cyclophosphamide is safe and effective when given as prophylaxis for chronic graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) to patients who have undergone transplantation of mobilized blood cells, finds a phase 2 trial reported in Blood.
Investigators led by Dr. Marco Mielcarek, medical director of the Adult Blood and Marrow Transplant Program and an oncologist at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center in Seattle, Washington, enrolled in the trial 43 patients with high-risk hematologic malignancies.
The patients underwent myeloablative conditioning followed by transplantation with growth factor–mobilized blood cells from related or unrelated donors, and were given high-dose cyclophosphamide on two early posttransplantation days.
Main results showed that the cumulative 1-year incidence of chronic GVHD was 16%, less than half of the roughly 35% seen historically with conventional immunosuppression.
Moreover, cyclophosphamide did not appear to compromise engraftment or control of the underlying malignancy. Only a single patient, one with an HLA-mismatched donor, had failure of primary engraftment; after amendment of the protocol to require HLA matching, there were no additional cases. Just 17% of patients experienced a recurrence of their malignancy by 2 years.
Taken together, the findings suggest that high-dose cyclophosphamide—as combined with two myeloablative conditioning options (to accommodate different malignancies) and with posttransplantation cyclosporine (to reduce the risk of acute GVHD)—may eliminate most of the drawbacks to using mobilized blood cells for transplantation, according to the investigators.
“If these findings are confirmed in future studies, HLA-matched mobilized blood cell transplantation may gain even greater acceptance and further replace marrow as a source of stem cells for most indications,” they maintain.
The patients studied had a median age of 43 years, and slightly more than half were in remission without minimal residual disease.
Blood cells were mobilized with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF). Overall, 28% of patients received grafts from related donors, while 72% received grafts from unrelated donors.
For pretransplant conditioning, patients received fludarabine and targeted busulfan, or total body irradiation with use of a minimum dose of 12 Gy.
The patients were given cyclophosphamide at 50 mg/kg per day on days 3 and 4 after transplantation. This was followed by cyclosporine starting on day 5.
The cumulative 1-year incidence of chronic GVHD as defined by National Institutes of Health criteria (i.e., that requiring systemic immunosuppressive therapy)—the trial’s primary endpoint—was 16%, which fell just short of the goal of 15% the investigators were aiming for (Blood. 2016;127:1502-8). Analyses failed to identify any predictors of this outcome.
Although the estimated cumulative incidence of grade 2 acute GVHD was high, at 77%, none of the patients developed grade 3 or 4 acute GVHD, according to the investigators, who disclosed that they had no competing financial interests.
The single patient who experienced failure of primary engraftment had familial myelodysplastic syndrome and had received a graft from an HLA A-antigen–mismatched unrelated donor.
The 2-year cumulative incidence of nonrelapse mortality was 14%, and the 2-year cumulative incidence of recurrent malignancy was 17%. Projected overall survival was 70%.
Among the 42 patients having at least a year of follow-up, 50% were alive and free of relapse without any systemic immunosuppression at 1 year after transplantation.
High-dose cyclophosphamide is safe and effective when given as prophylaxis for chronic graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) to patients who have undergone transplantation of mobilized blood cells, finds a phase 2 trial reported in Blood.
Investigators led by Dr. Marco Mielcarek, medical director of the Adult Blood and Marrow Transplant Program and an oncologist at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center in Seattle, Washington, enrolled in the trial 43 patients with high-risk hematologic malignancies.
The patients underwent myeloablative conditioning followed by transplantation with growth factor–mobilized blood cells from related or unrelated donors, and were given high-dose cyclophosphamide on two early posttransplantation days.
Main results showed that the cumulative 1-year incidence of chronic GVHD was 16%, less than half of the roughly 35% seen historically with conventional immunosuppression.
Moreover, cyclophosphamide did not appear to compromise engraftment or control of the underlying malignancy. Only a single patient, one with an HLA-mismatched donor, had failure of primary engraftment; after amendment of the protocol to require HLA matching, there were no additional cases. Just 17% of patients experienced a recurrence of their malignancy by 2 years.
Taken together, the findings suggest that high-dose cyclophosphamide—as combined with two myeloablative conditioning options (to accommodate different malignancies) and with posttransplantation cyclosporine (to reduce the risk of acute GVHD)—may eliminate most of the drawbacks to using mobilized blood cells for transplantation, according to the investigators.
“If these findings are confirmed in future studies, HLA-matched mobilized blood cell transplantation may gain even greater acceptance and further replace marrow as a source of stem cells for most indications,” they maintain.
The patients studied had a median age of 43 years, and slightly more than half were in remission without minimal residual disease.
Blood cells were mobilized with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF). Overall, 28% of patients received grafts from related donors, while 72% received grafts from unrelated donors.
For pretransplant conditioning, patients received fludarabine and targeted busulfan, or total body irradiation with use of a minimum dose of 12 Gy.
The patients were given cyclophosphamide at 50 mg/kg per day on days 3 and 4 after transplantation. This was followed by cyclosporine starting on day 5.
The cumulative 1-year incidence of chronic GVHD as defined by National Institutes of Health criteria (i.e., that requiring systemic immunosuppressive therapy)—the trial’s primary endpoint—was 16%, which fell just short of the goal of 15% the investigators were aiming for (Blood. 2016;127:1502-8). Analyses failed to identify any predictors of this outcome.
Although the estimated cumulative incidence of grade 2 acute GVHD was high, at 77%, none of the patients developed grade 3 or 4 acute GVHD, according to the investigators, who disclosed that they had no competing financial interests.
The single patient who experienced failure of primary engraftment had familial myelodysplastic syndrome and had received a graft from an HLA A-antigen–mismatched unrelated donor.
The 2-year cumulative incidence of nonrelapse mortality was 14%, and the 2-year cumulative incidence of recurrent malignancy was 17%. Projected overall survival was 70%.
Among the 42 patients having at least a year of follow-up, 50% were alive and free of relapse without any systemic immunosuppression at 1 year after transplantation.
High-dose cyclophosphamide is safe and effective when given as prophylaxis for chronic graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) to patients who have undergone transplantation of mobilized blood cells, finds a phase 2 trial reported in Blood.
Investigators led by Dr. Marco Mielcarek, medical director of the Adult Blood and Marrow Transplant Program and an oncologist at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center in Seattle, Washington, enrolled in the trial 43 patients with high-risk hematologic malignancies.
The patients underwent myeloablative conditioning followed by transplantation with growth factor–mobilized blood cells from related or unrelated donors, and were given high-dose cyclophosphamide on two early posttransplantation days.
Main results showed that the cumulative 1-year incidence of chronic GVHD was 16%, less than half of the roughly 35% seen historically with conventional immunosuppression.
Moreover, cyclophosphamide did not appear to compromise engraftment or control of the underlying malignancy. Only a single patient, one with an HLA-mismatched donor, had failure of primary engraftment; after amendment of the protocol to require HLA matching, there were no additional cases. Just 17% of patients experienced a recurrence of their malignancy by 2 years.
Taken together, the findings suggest that high-dose cyclophosphamide—as combined with two myeloablative conditioning options (to accommodate different malignancies) and with posttransplantation cyclosporine (to reduce the risk of acute GVHD)—may eliminate most of the drawbacks to using mobilized blood cells for transplantation, according to the investigators.
“If these findings are confirmed in future studies, HLA-matched mobilized blood cell transplantation may gain even greater acceptance and further replace marrow as a source of stem cells for most indications,” they maintain.
The patients studied had a median age of 43 years, and slightly more than half were in remission without minimal residual disease.
Blood cells were mobilized with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF). Overall, 28% of patients received grafts from related donors, while 72% received grafts from unrelated donors.
For pretransplant conditioning, patients received fludarabine and targeted busulfan, or total body irradiation with use of a minimum dose of 12 Gy.
The patients were given cyclophosphamide at 50 mg/kg per day on days 3 and 4 after transplantation. This was followed by cyclosporine starting on day 5.
The cumulative 1-year incidence of chronic GVHD as defined by National Institutes of Health criteria (i.e., that requiring systemic immunosuppressive therapy)—the trial’s primary endpoint—was 16%, which fell just short of the goal of 15% the investigators were aiming for (Blood. 2016;127:1502-8). Analyses failed to identify any predictors of this outcome.
Although the estimated cumulative incidence of grade 2 acute GVHD was high, at 77%, none of the patients developed grade 3 or 4 acute GVHD, according to the investigators, who disclosed that they had no competing financial interests.
The single patient who experienced failure of primary engraftment had familial myelodysplastic syndrome and had received a graft from an HLA A-antigen–mismatched unrelated donor.
The 2-year cumulative incidence of nonrelapse mortality was 14%, and the 2-year cumulative incidence of recurrent malignancy was 17%. Projected overall survival was 70%.
Among the 42 patients having at least a year of follow-up, 50% were alive and free of relapse without any systemic immunosuppression at 1 year after transplantation.
FROM BLOOD
Key clinical point: High-dose posttransplant cyclophosphamide is safe and effective for reducing the risk of chronic GVHD after mobilized blood cell transplantation.
Major finding: The cumulative 1-year incidence of chronic GVHD requiring immunosuppressive therapy was 16%.
Data source: A single-arm trial among 43 patients with high-risk hematologic malignancies undergoing growth factor–mobilized blood cell transplantation.
Disclosures: The authors disclosed that they have no competing financial interests.