Abstract

Simple SummaryHaploidentical hematopoietic stem cell transplantation haplo-HSCT is now increasingly recognized as a valid treatment for patients with hematologic malignancies. The two most noteworthy strategies are posttransplantation cyclophosphamide (PTCy) with or without anti-thymoglobulin and granulocyte colony stimulating factor-primed bone marrow plus peripheral blood stem cells (GIAC). Direct comparisons of these approaches are rare, which makes physicians hard to choose the optimal treatment strategy for patients. We used a nationwide blood and marrow transplantation registry to compare these approaches. We found that patients in the modified GIAC (mGIAC) group had the most favorable platelet and neutrophil engraftment kinetics but had a higher extensive chronic graft-versus-host disease rate. The patients receiving mGIAC had the lowest nonrelapse mortality and highest overall survival rates. Physicians can choose the optimal treatment for patients based on the distinct clinical features and outcomes of these strategies. This study may pave the way for further prospective trials.Background: The two most noteworthy strategies for haploidentical stem cell transplantation (haplo-HSCT) are posttransplantation cyclophosphamide (PTCy) with or without thymoglobulin (ATG) and granulocyte colony stimulating factor-primed bone marrow plus peripheral blood stem cells (GIAC). We aimed to compare these approaches in patients with hematological malignancies. Methods: We enrolled 178 patients undergoing haplo-HSCT, including modified GIAC (mGIAC), PTCy without ATG, and PTCy with ATG. Results: The patients in the mGIAC group had the most favorable platelet and neutrophil engraftment kinetics. Although the grade III–IV acute graft-versus-host-disease (GvHD) rates were similar, those receiving mGIAC had a significantly higher extensive chronic GvHD rate. The patients receiving mGIAC had a similar cumulative incidence of relapse (CIR) to that in the patients receiving PTCy with ATG, but this was lower than that in the patients receiving PTCy without ATG. The patients receiving mGIAC had the lowest nonrelapse mortality (NRM) and the highest overall survival (OS) rates. The differences in CIR, NRM, and OS remained significant when focusing on patients with low/intermediate-risk diseases before haplo-HSCT. Intriguingly, among patients with high/very-high-risk diseases before haplo-HSCT, no differences were observed in the CIR, NRM, OS, or GvHD/relapse-free survival. Conclusion: the mGIAC approach may yield a better outcome in Taiwanese patients with hematologic malignancies, especially for those with low/intermediate-risk diseases.

Highlights

  • Allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation is a potential curative treatment for hematologic malignancies

  • Patients receiving modified GIAC (mGIAC) were significantly younger than those receiving posttransplantation cyclophosphamide (PTCy) with or without anti-thymocyte globulin (ATG) (p = 0.031)

  • All allografts in the PTCy strategy were from peripheral blood (PB) stem cells

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HSCT) is a potential curative treatment for hematologic malignancies. One main protocol is the administration of high-dose cyclophosphamide following graft infusion, termed the posttransplantation cyclophosphamide (PTCy) approach, which allows the immunomodulation of alloreactivities but spares donor hematopoietic stem cells [4]. This approach has become widely adopted in recent years and has evolved from using unmanipulated bone marrow (BM) to peripheral blood (PB) stem cell grafts [5,6] either combined with anti-thymocyte globulin (ATG) [7,8] or not [9,10]. The other T-cell-replete haplo-HSCT protocol consists of four components based on T-cell immunity modulation: ‘G’-CSF mobilization, ‘I’ntensified posttransplantation immunosuppression, ‘A’TG to prevent GvHD and aid engraftment, and the ‘C’ombination of bone marrow and peripheral blood stem cell grafts, which is known as the GIAC approach [11,12]. We aimed to compare these approaches in patients with hematological malignancies

Objectives
Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

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.