Abstract
The impact of the intensity of conditioning before allogeneic haemopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) has been studied in a randomised phase 3 trial comparing reduced-intensity conditioning with myeloablative conditioning in patients with acute myeloid leukaemia in first complete remission. Because of the short follow-up of the original trial, whether reduced-intensity conditioning increases the risk of late relapse compared with myeloablative conditioning remained unclear. To address this question, we present retrospective 10-year follow-up data of this trial and focus on late relapse. The original randomised phase 3 trial included patients aged 18-60 years, with intermediate-risk or high-risk acute myeloid leukaemia, an adequate organ function, and an available HLA-matched sibling donor or an unrelated donor with at least nine out of ten HLA alleles matched. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to 120 mg/m2 fludarabine combined with four 2 Gy doses of total-body irradiation (reduced-intensity conditioning) or six 2 Gy doses of total-body irradiation and 120 mg/kg cyclophosphamide (myeloablative conditioning). The primary and secondary efficacy endpoints of this trial have been published previously. In this retrospective, long-term follow-up analysis, data were collected from medical reports from individual participating study centres, and from physician and patient interviews. Endpoints included in this analysis were cumulative relapse incidence, overall survival, disease-free survival, and non-relapse mortality in the original study population and in patients alive and relapse-free at 12 months after HCT (landmark analysis). 10-year time to event rates were calculated in the intention-to-treat population and were compared with the Gray test. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00150878. In the original trial, 195 patients were randomly assigned to receive reduced-intensity conditioning (n=99) or myeloablative conditioning (n=96). For this retrospective analysis, data were collected with a nearly complete follow-up (completeness index 99%). Median follow-up time for surviving patients was 9·9 years (IQR 8·5-11·4), during which the cumulative incidence of relapse in the complete study population was identical in both groups (30% [95% CI 20-39] in the reduced-intensity conditioning group vs 30% [21-40] in the myeloablative conditioning group; Gray test p=0·99). Relapse occurred at a median of 5·0 months (IQR 3·0-8·8) in the reduced-intensity conditioning group versus 9·5 months (4·5-20·5) in the myeloablative conditioning group. 10-year disease-free survival was 55% (95% CI 45-66) in the reduced-intensity conditioning group and 43% (34-55) in the myeloablative conditioning group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·76 [0·51-1·14]; p=0·19). 10-year non-relapse mortality was 16% (95% CI 8-24) in the reduced-intensity conditioning group and 26% (17-36) in the myeloablative conditioning group (subdistribution HR 0·60 [95% CI 0·32-1·11]; Gray test p=0·10). The incidence of long-term toxicities associated with total-body irradiation was comparable; secondary malignancies occurred in six (6%) of 94 patients in the reduced-intensity conditioning group and five (6%) of 90 in the myeloablative conditioning group (p=1·00). There is no evidence that reduced-intensity conditioning increases the risk of late relapse compared with myeloablative conditioning. Given that the reduced-intensity conditioning group in the original trial was associated with lower early morbidity and toxicity, reduced-intensity conditioning with moderately reduced total-body irradiation doses could be the preferred conditioning strategy for patients with acute myeloid leukaemia who are younger than 60 years and transplanted in first complete remission. None.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.