| Literature DB >> 26456259 |
Stefania Bregante1, Alida Dominietto1, Anna Ghiso1, Anna Maria Raiola1, Francesca Gualandi1, Riccardo Varaldo1, Carmen Di Grazia1, Teresa Lamparelli1, Silvia Luchetti1, Simona Geroldi1, Lucia Casarino1, Sarah Pozzi1, Elisabetta Tedone1, Maria Teresa Van Lint1, Federica Galaverna1, Giovanni Barosi2, Andrea Bacigalupo3.
Abstract
This is a retrospective analysis of 95 patients with myelofibrosis who were allografted between 2001 and 2014. The aims of the study were to assess whether the outcome of alternative donor grafts has improved with time and how this compares with the outcome of identical sibling grafts. Patients were studied in 2 time intervals: 2000 to 2010 (n = 58) and 2011 to 2014 (n = 37). The Dynamic International Prognostic Scoring System score was comparable in the 2 time periods, but differences in the most recent group included older age (58 versus 53 years, P = .004), more family haploidentical donors (54% versus 5%, P < .0001), and the introduction of the thiotepa-fludarabine-busulfan conditioning regimen (70% of patients versus 2%, P < .0001). Acute and chronic graft-versus-host disease were comparable in the 2 time periods. The 3-year transplantation-related mortality (TRM) in the 2011 to 2014 period versus the 2000 to 2010 period is 16% versus 32% (P = .10), the relapse rate 16% versus 40% (P = .06), and actuarial survival 70% versus 39% (P = .08). Improved survival was most pronounced in alternative donor grafts (69% versus 21%, P = .02), compared with matched sibling grafts (72% versus 45%, P = .40). In conclusion, the outcome of allografts in patients with myelofibrosis has improved in recent years because of a reduction of both TRM and relapse. Improvement is most significant in alternative donor transplantations, with modifications in donor type and conditioning regimen.Entities:
Keywords: Haploidentical donors; Myelofibrosis; Unrelated donors
Mesh:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26456259 DOI: 10.1016/j.bbmt.2015.09.028
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biol Blood Marrow Transplant ISSN: 1083-8791 Impact factor: 5.742