Literature DB >> 16270037

Myeloablative vs nonmyeloablative allogeneic transplantation for patients with myelodysplastic syndrome or acute myelogenous leukemia with multilineage dysplasia: a retrospective analysis.

B L Scott1, B M Sandmaier, B Storer, M B Maris, M L Sorror, D G Maloney, T R Chauncey, R Storb, H J Deeg.   

Abstract

Transplant outcome was analyzed in 150 patients with myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) or acute myelogenous leukemia transformed from MDS (tAML) conditioned with nonmyeloablative or myeloablative regimens. A total of 38 patients received nonmyeloablative regimens of 2 Gy total body irradiation alone (n=2) or with fludarabine (n=36), 90mg/m2. A total of 112 patients received a myeloablative regimen of busulfan, 16mg/ kg (targeted to 800-900 ng/ml), and cyclophosphamide 120 mg/ kg. Nonmyeloablative patients were older (median age 62 vs 52 years, P<0.001), more frequently had progressed to tAML (53 vs 31%, P=0.06), had higher risk disease by the International Prognostic Scoring System (53 vs 30%, P=0.004), had higher transplant specific comorbidity indices (68 vs 42%, P=0.01) and more frequently had durable complete responses to induction chemotherapy (58 vs 14%). Three-year overall survival (27%/48% (P=0.56)), progression-free survival (28%/4 44%, (P=0.60)), and nonrelapse mortality (41%/34%, (P=0.94)) did not differ significantly between nonmyeloblative/myeloablative conditioning. Overall (HR=0.9, P=0.84) and progression-free survivals (HR=1, P=0.93) were similar for patients with chemotherapy-induced remissions irrespective of conditioning intensity. Graft vs leukemia effects may be more important than conditioning intensity in preventing progression in patients in chemotherapy-induced remissions at the time of transplantation. Randomized prospective studies are needed to further address the optimal choice of transplant conditioning intensity in myeloid neoplasms.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16270037     DOI: 10.1038/sj.leu.2404010

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Leukemia        ISSN: 0887-6924            Impact factor:   11.528


  68 in total

Review 1.  Who is fit for allogeneic transplantation?

Authors:  H Joachim Deeg; Brenda M Sandmaier
Journal:  Blood       Date:  2010-08-11       Impact factor: 22.113

2.  Allogeneic haematopoietic cell transplantation after nonmyeloablative conditioning in patients with T-cell and natural killer-cell lymphomas.

Authors:  Andrei R Shustov; Theodore A Gooley; Brenda M Sandmaier; Judith Shizuru; Mohamed L Sorror; Firoozeh Sahebi; Peter McSweeney; Dietger Niederwieser; Benedetto Bruno; Rainer Storb; David G Maloney
Journal:  Br J Haematol       Date:  2010-05-09       Impact factor: 6.998

3.  Myeloablative vs reduced-intensity conditioning allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation for chronic myeloid leukemia.

Authors:  Saurabh Chhabra; Kwang Woo Ahn; Zhen-Huan Hu; Sandeep Jain; Amer Assal; Jan Cerny; Edward A Copelan; Andrew Daly; Zachariah DeFilipp; Shahinaz M Gadalla; Robert Peter Gale; Siddhartha Ganguly; Betty K Hamilton; Gerhard Carl Hildebrandt; Jack W Hsu; Yoshihiro Inamoto; Abraham S Kanate; H Jean Khoury; Hillard M Lazarus; Mark R Litzow; Sunita Nathan; Richard F Olsson; Attaphol Pawarode; Olle Ringden; Jacob M Rowe; Ayman Saad; Bipin N Savani; Harry C Schouten; Sachiko Seo; Nirav N Shah; Melhem Solh; Robert K Stuart; Celalettin Ustun; Ann E Woolfrey; Jean A Yared; Edwin P Alyea; Matt E Kalaycio; Uday Popat; Ronald M Sobecks; Wael Saber
Journal:  Blood Adv       Date:  2018-11-13

4.  Reduced-intensity allogeneic hematopoietic transplantation should be considered a standard of care for older patients with acute myeloid leukemia.

Authors:  Richard Champlin
Journal:  Biol Blood Marrow Transplant       Date:  2011-10-17       Impact factor: 5.742

Review 5.  Novel approaches in allogeneic stem cell transplantation.

Authors:  Esperanza B Papadopoulos; Ann A Jakubowski
Journal:  Curr Oncol Rep       Date:  2006-09       Impact factor: 5.075

6.  Transplantation for children with acute myeloid leukemia: a comparison of outcomes with reduced intensity and myeloablative regimens.

Authors:  Menachem Bitan; Wensheng He; Mei-Jie Zhang; Hisham Abdel-Azim; Mouhab Fakhreddine Ayas; Bella Bielorai; Paul A Carpenter; Mitchell S Cairo; Miguel Angel Diaz; John T Horan; Sonata Jodele; Carrie L Kitko; Kirk R Schultz; Morris Kletzel; Kimberly A Kasow; Leslie E Lehmann; Parinda A Mehta; Nirali Shah; Michael A Pulsipher; Tim Prestidge; Adriana Seber; Shalini Shenoy; Ann E Woolfrey; Lolie C Yu; Stella M Davies
Journal:  Blood       Date:  2014-01-16       Impact factor: 22.113

Review 7.  When to transplant MDS, and what to do when transplant fails.

Authors:  Katja Sockel; Uwe Platzbecker
Journal:  Curr Hematol Malig Rep       Date:  2013-12       Impact factor: 3.952

8.  Should elderly patients with higher-risk myelodysplastic syndromes undergo allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation?

Authors:  Amer M Zeidan; Steven D Gore
Journal:  Expert Rev Hematol       Date:  2013-10-04       Impact factor: 2.929

9.  Jumping translocations in myelodysplastic syndromes.

Authors:  Cecilia C S Yeung; H Joachim Deeg; Colin Pritchard; David Wu; Min Fang
Journal:  Cancer Genet       Date:  2016-08-08

10.  Conditioning intensity in secondary AML with prior myelodysplastic syndrome/myeloproliferative disorders: an EBMT ALWP study.

Authors:  Salyka Sengsayadeth; Katie S Gatwood; Ariane Boumendil; Myriam Labopin; Jürgen Finke; Arnold Ganser; Matthias Stelljes; Gerhard Ehninger; Dietrich Beelen; Dietger Niederwieser; Didier Blaise; Peter Dreger; Ghulam Mufti; Patrice Chevallier; Audrey Mailhol; Maria H Gilleece; Norbert Gorin; Jordi Esteve; Fabio Ciceri; Frederic Baron; Christoph Schmid; Sebastian Giebel; Mohamad Mohty; Bipin N Savani; Arnon Nagler
Journal:  Blood Adv       Date:  2018-08-28
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.