Faculty Bibliography

Refractory/early relapsed and 17p deletion/p53 mutation (del(17p)/TP53mut)-positive chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) has been conventionally considered a high-risk disease, potentially eligible for treatment with allogeneic stem cell transplantation (alloSCT). In this multicenter retrospective analysis of 157 patients, we compared the outcomes of patients with high-risk CLL treated with alloSCT, a B-cell receptor pathway inhibitor (BCRi), and both. Seventy-one patients were treated with BCRis, 67 patients underwent reduced-intensity conditioning alloSCT, and 19 received alloSCT with a BCRi before and/or after transplantation. Inverse probability of treatment weighting analyses were performed to compare the alloSCT and no-alloSCT groups; in the 2 groups, 5-year OS, PFS, and cumulative incidence of nonrelapse mortality (NRM) and relapse were 40% versus 60% (P = .096), 34% versus 17% (P = .638), 28% versus 5% (P = .016), and 38% versus 83% (P = .005), respectively. Patients treated with alloSCT plus BCRi had a 3-year OS of 83%. The 3-year OS and NRM by year of alloSCT, including patients treated with BCRi, were 53% and 17% in 2000 to 2007, 55% and 30% in 2008 to 2012, and 72% and 18% in 2013 to 2018. In conclusion, the combination of pathway inhibitors and alloSCT is feasible and may further improve the outcome of high-risk CLL patients.

Contrary to tandem autologous transplant (auto-auto), autologous followed by reduced intensity conditioning allogenic transplantation (auto-allo) offers graft-versus-myeloma (GVM) effect but with higher toxicity. Trials comparing these two strategies relied on availability of HLA-matched sibling donors for arm allocation (biological randomization) and yielded conflicting results. A pooled analysis of multiple trials with extended follow up provides an opportunity to compare these strategies. We obtained individual patient data from participants of four trials comparing auto-auto vs. auto-allo after induction therapy. There were 899 patients in auto-auto and 439 in auto-allo. Median follow up of survivors was 118.5 months. Median overall survival (OS) was 78.0 months in auto-auto and 98.3 months in auto-allo (HR = 0.84, P = 0.02). OS was 36.4% vs. 44.1% at 10 years (P = 0.01) for auto-auto and auto-allo, respectively. Progression-free survival was also improved in auto-allo (HR = 0.84, P = 0.004). Risk of non-relapse mortality was higher in auto-allo (10 year 8.3% vs. 19.7%, P < 0.001), while risk of disease progression was higher in auto-auto (10 year 77.2% vs. 61.6%, P < 0.001). Median post relapse survival was 41.5 months in auto-auto and 62.3 months in auto-allo (HR = 0.71, P < 0.001). This supports the existence of durable GVM effect enhancing myeloma control with subsequent therapies.

Donor selection contributes to improve clinical outcomes of T-cell-replete haploidentical stem cell transplantation (haplo-SCT) with posttransplant cyclophosphamide (PT-Cy). The impact of donor age and other non-HLA donor characteristics remains a matter of debate. We performed a multicenter retrospective analysis on 990 haplo-SCTs with PT-Cy. By multivariable analysis, after adjusting for donor/recipient kinship, increasing donor age and peripheral blood stem cell graft were associated with a higher risk of grade 2 to 4 acute graft-versus-host-disease (aGVHD), whereas 2-year cumulative incidence of moderate-to-severe chronic GVHD was higher for transplants from female donors into male recipients and after myeloablative conditioning. Increasing donor age was associated with a trend for higher nonrelapse mortality (NRM) (hazard ratio [HR], 1.05; P = .057) but with a significant reduced risk of disease relapse (HR, 0.92; P = .001) and improved progression-free survival (PFS) (HR, 0.97; P = .036). Increasing recipient age was a predictor of worse overall survival (OS). Risk of relapse was higher (HR, 1.39; P < .001) in patients aged ≤40 years receiving a transplant from a parent as compared with a sibling. Moreover, OS and PFS were lower when the donor was the mother rather than the father. Pretransplant active disease status was an invariably independent predictor of worse clinical outcomes, while recipient positive cytomegalovirus serostatus and hematopoietic cell transplant comorbidity index >3 were associated with worse OS and PFS. Our results suggest that younger donors may reduce the incidence of aGVHD and NRM, though at higher risk of relapse. A parent donor, particularly the mother, is not recommended in recipients ≤40 years.

To define the role of spleen stiffness (SS) and liver stiffness (LS) in myelofibrosis and other Philadelphia (Ph)-negative myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs), we studied, by ultrasonography (US) and elastography (ES), 70 consecutive patients with myelofibrosis (MF) (no.43), essential thrombocythemia (ET) (no.10), and polycythemia vera (PV) (no.17). Overall, the median SS was not different between patients with MF and PV (p = 0.9); however, both MF and PV groups had significantly higher SS than the ET group (p = 0.011 and p = 0.035, respectively) and healthy controls (p < 0.0001 and p = 0.002, respectively). In patients with MF, SS values above 40 kPa were significantly associated with worse progression-free survival (PFS) (p = 0.012; HR = 3.2). SS also correlated with the extension of bone marrow fibrosis (BMF) (p < 0.0001). SS was higher in advanced fibrotic stages MF-2, MF-3 (W.H.O. criteria) than in pre-fibrotic/early fibrotic stages (MF-0, MF-1) (p < 0.0001) and PFS was significantly different in the two cohorts, with values of 63% and 85%, respectively (p = 0.038; HR = 2.61). LS significantly differed between the patient cohort with MF and healthy controls (p = 0.001), but not between the patient cohorts with ET and PV and healthy controls (p = 0.999 and p = 0.101, respectively). We can conclude that organ stiffness adds valuable information to the clinical work-up of MPNs and could be employed to define patients at a higher risk of progression.

BACKGROUND:Acute graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) remains a major limitation of allogeneic stem-cell transplantation; not all patients have a response to standard glucocorticoid treatment. In a phase 2 trial, ruxolitinib, a selective Janus kinase (JAK1 and JAK2) inhibitor, showed potential efficacy in patients with glucocorticoid-refractory acute GVHD. METHODS:We conducted a multicenter, randomized, open-label, phase 3 trial comparing the efficacy and safety of oral ruxolitinib (10 mg twice daily) with the investigator's choice of therapy from a list of nine commonly used options (control) in patients 12 years of age or older who had glucocorticoid-refractory acute GVHD after allogeneic stem-cell transplantation. The primary end point was overall response (complete response or partial response) at day 28. The key secondary end point was durable overall response at day 56. RESULTS:A total of 309 patients underwent randomization; 154 patients were assigned to the ruxolitinib group and 155 to the control group. Overall response at day 28 was higher in the ruxolitinib group than in the control group (62% [96 patients] vs. 39% [61]; odds ratio, 2.64; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.65 to 4.22; P<0.001). Durable overall response at day 56 was higher in the ruxolitinib group than in the control group (40% [61 patients] vs. 22% [34]; odds ratio, 2.38; 95% CI, 1.43 to 3.94; P<0.001). The estimated cumulative incidence of loss of response at 6 months was 10% in the ruxolitinib group and 39% in the control group. The median failure-free survival was considerably longer with ruxolitinib than with control (5.0 months vs. 1.0 month; hazard ratio for relapse or progression of hematologic disease, non-relapse-related death, or addition of new systemic therapy for acute GVHD, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.35 to 0.60). The median overall survival was 11.1 months in the ruxolitinib group and 6.5 months in the control group (hazard ratio for death, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.60 to 1.15). The most common adverse events up to day 28 were thrombocytopenia (in 50 of 152 patients [33%] in the ruxolitinib group and 27 of 150 [18%] in the control group), anemia (in 46 [30%] and 42 [28%], respectively), and cytomegalovirus infection (in 39 [26%] and 31 [21%]). CONCLUSIONS:Ruxolitinib therapy led to significant improvements in efficacy outcomes, with a higher incidence of thrombocytopenia, the most frequent toxic effect, than that observed with control therapy. (Funded by Novartis; REACH2 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02913261.).

BACKGROUND:Allogeneic stem cell transplantation is a potentially curative therapy for patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) after achieving complete remission (CR). The aim of this study is to evaluate the optimal dose of thiotepa, administered as part of the thiotepa-busulfan-fludarabine (TBF) conditioning regimen for allogeneic stem cell transplantation in adults with AML in CR. PATIENTS AND METHODS/METHODS:In a retrospective multicenter analysis, we identified 240 patients allotransplanted from matched related or unrelated donors or T replete haplo-identical donors. We compared the transplantation outcomes of patients who received 5 mg/kg thiotepa and 2 days of intravenous busulfan at 6.4 mg/kg (T1B2F) versus those who received 10 mg/kg thiotepa with 2 days of intravenous busulfan at 6.4 mg/kg (T2B2F). The median follow-up was 20 months. RESULTS:On univariate analysis, the incidence of acute graft versus host disease (GVHD) grade II to IV was significantly lower in the T1B2F group (19%) versus 32% in the T2B2F group (P = .029). This result was confirmed on multivariate analysis; acute GVHD was higher for patients receiving T2B2F (hazard ratio, 2.22; P = .024). No significant change in non-relapse mortality, progression-free survival, or overall survival was observed between the 2 groups. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:T2B2F is associated with a higher incidence of acute GVHD compared with T1B2F. These results suggest that a lower dose-intensity of thiotepa and busulfan in the TBF regimen may yield better results in patients with AML in CR.

This is a multicenter retrospective comparison of 2 myeloablative conditioning regimens in 454 patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) in remission: busulfan (4 days) and fludarabine (BUFLU) versus thiotepa, busulfan, and fludarabine (TBF). Eligible for this study were patients allografted between January 2008 and December 2018 in 10 transplant centers, with AML in first or second remission: 201 patients received BUFLU, whereas 253 received TBF. The 2 groups (BUFLU and TBF) were comparable for age (P = .13) and adverse AML risk factors (P = .3). The TBF group had more second remissions and more haploidentical grafts. The donor type included HLA-identical siblings, unrelated donors, and family haploidentical donors. The 5-year cumulative incidence of nonrelapse mortality (NRM) was 19% for BUFLU and 22% for TBF (P = .8), and the 5-year cumulative incidence of relapse was 30% and 15%, respectively (P = .0004). The 5-year actuarial survival was 51% for BUFLU and 68% for TBF (P = .002). In a multivariate Cox analysis, after correcting for confounding factors, the use of TBF reduced the risk of relapse compared with BUFLU (P = .03) and the risk of death (P = .03). In a matched pair analysis of 108 BUFLU patients matched with 108 TBF patients, with the exclusion of haploidentical grafts, TBF reduced the risk of relapse (P = .006) and there was a trend for improved survival (P = .07). Superior survival of patients receiving TBF as compared with BUFLU is due to a reduced risk of relapse, with comparable NRM. The survival advantage is independent of donor type and AML risk factors.

A survey within hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) centers of the Gruppo Italiano Trapianto Midollo Osseo (GITMO) was performed in order to describe current antiemetic prophylaxis in patients undergoing HSCT. The multicenter survey was performed by a questionnaire, covering the main areas on chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV): antiemetic prophylaxis guidelines used, antiemetic prophylaxis in different conditioning regimens, and methods of CINV evaluation. The survey was carried out in November 2016, and it was repeated 6 months after the publication of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer (MASCC)/European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) specific guidelines on antiemetic prophylaxis in HSCT. The results show a remarkable heterogeneity of prophylaxis among the various centers and a significant difference between the guidelines and the clinical practice. In the main conditioning regimens, the combination of a serotonin₃ receptor antagonist (5-HT₃-RA) with dexamethasone and neurokin₁ receptor antagonist (NK1-RA), as recommended by MASCC/ESMO guidelines, increased from 0 to 15% (before the publication of the guidelines) to 9-30% (after the publication of the guidelines). This study shows a lack of compliance with specific antiemetic guidelines, resulting mainly in under-prophylaxis. Concerted strategies are required to improve the current CINV prophylaxis, to draft shared common guidelines, and to increase the knowledge and the adherence to the current recommendations for CINV prophylaxis in the specific field of HSCT.