Literature DB >> 27521323

Immunosuppressive Therapy: Exploring an Underutilized Treatment Option for Myelodysplastic Syndrome.

Mintallah Haider1, Najla Al Ali2, Eric Padron2, Pearlie Epling-Burnette2, Jeffrey Lancet2, Alan List2, Rami Komrokji2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Immunosuppressive therapy (IST) in low risk myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) is known to achieve hematologic improvement but remains an underutilized treatment option. We report our experience using antithymocyte globulin (ATG) and cyclosporine A (CSA) to explore clinical predictive response factors. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients treated with IST identified in the Moffitt Cancer Center MDS database were analyzed using baseline data, IST details, and response rates.
RESULTS: Sixty-six patients treated with IST were identified. The median age was 61 years; the majority were at low risk and had a good karyotype. The median time to start IST was 1 year. All patients received ATG, 60% rabbit (r-ATG), 32% equine ATG (e-ATG), and 60% received CSA. Overall hematologic improvement was 42% with a trend favoring e-ATG over r-ATG (52% vs. 39%; P = .09). Erythroid improvement was evaluated in 30 patients, and 60% responded; neutrophil improvement was evaluated in 15, and 39% responded; platelet improvement was evaluated in 18, and 57% responded. Six of 18 pancytopenic patients experienced trilineage response. Mean time from ATG to next therapy was 12 months. None of the patients with very high risk or high risk revised International Prognostic Scoring System (IPSS-R) responded. Poor karyotype had a lower response rate, 25%, compared to 41% for intermediate and 44% for good karyotype. No difference in predicting response was found based on the National Institutes of Health Response Model; 38% with low and 45% with high probability responded. A trend favored treatment within 2 years from diagnosis, with 46% responding compared to 33% treated after 2 years. First-line ATG or after lenalidomide responded better than after azacitidine or third-line therapy. CSA provided an advantage: the disease of 51% responded compared to 27% with ATG alone (P = .05). Ten patients experienced transformation to acute myeloid leukemia, 7% with disease that responded to therapy and 24% with disease that did not respond to therapy (P = .08). Overall survival was 67.2 months without difference between those with and without response. Adverse events were reported in 55 patients. Infusion reactions occurred in 85% but was similar between ATG types. Infection rate was 25% and higher with e-ATG. Serum sickness was reported in 18% and significantly higher with r-ATG.
CONCLUSION: IST has a hematologic improvement response rate in the range of other therapies approved for lower risk MDS. High risk IPSS-R, poor karyotype, and treatment after 2 years from diagnosis have unfavorable response trend. ATG with CSA has higher response than ATG alone. First-line ATG or after lenalidomide had better response trend compared to third-line therapy or azacitidine therapy.
Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  ATG; Cyclosporine; IPSS-R; Low risk MDS; NIH response model

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27521323     DOI: 10.1016/j.clml.2016.02.017

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Lymphoma Myeloma Leuk        ISSN: 2152-2669


  7 in total

1.  The use of immunosuppressive therapy in MDS: clinical outcomes and their predictors in a large international patient cohort.

Authors:  Maximilian Stahl; Michelle DeVeaux; Theo de Witte; Judith Neukirchen; Mikkael A Sekeres; Andrew M Brunner; Gail J Roboz; David P Steensma; Vijaya R Bhatt; Uwe Platzbecker; Thomas Cluzeau; Pedro H Prata; Raphaël Itzykson; Pierre Fenaux; Amir T Fathi; Alexandra Smith; Ulrich Germing; Ellen K Ritchie; Vivek Verma; Aziz Nazha; Jaroslaw P Maciejewski; Nikolai A Podoltsev; Thomas Prebet; Valeria Santini; Steven D Gore; Rami S Komrokji; Amer M Zeidan
Journal:  Blood Adv       Date:  2018-07-24

Review 2.  Disordered Immune Regulation and its Therapeutic Targeting in Myelodysplastic Syndromes.

Authors:  Kathryn S Ivy; P Brent Ferrell
Journal:  Curr Hematol Malig Rep       Date:  2018-08       Impact factor: 3.952

3.  Use of immunosuppressive therapy for management of myelodysplastic syndromes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Maximilian Stahl; Jan Philipp Bewersdorf; Smith Giri; Rong Wang; Amer M Zeidan
Journal:  Haematologica       Date:  2019-04-19       Impact factor: 9.941

Review 4.  Hypoplastic Myelodysplastic Syndromes: Just an Overlap Syndrome?

Authors:  Bruno Fattizzo; Fabio Serpenti; Wilma Barcellini; Chiara Caprioli
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2021-01-03       Impact factor: 6.639

Review 5.  The yin-yang of immunity: Immune dysregulation in myelodysplastic syndrome with different risk stratification.

Authors:  Xiaohuan Peng; Xiaofeng Zhu; Tianning Di; Futian Tang; Xiaojia Guo; Yang Liu; Jun Bai; Yanhong Li; Lijuan Li; Liansheng Zhang
Journal:  Front Immunol       Date:  2022-09-23       Impact factor: 8.786

Review 6.  Management of the Older Patient with Myelodysplastic Syndrome.

Authors:  Rory M Shallis; Amer M Zeidan
Journal:  Drugs Aging       Date:  2021-08-03       Impact factor: 3.923

Review 7.  Infections in Myelodysplastic Syndrome in Relation to Stage and Therapy.

Authors:  Giuseppe Leone; Livio Pagano
Journal:  Mediterr J Hematol Infect Dis       Date:  2018-07-01       Impact factor: 3.122

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.