Inferior Outcomes with Cyclosporine and Mycophenolate Mofetil after Myeloablative Allogeneic Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation.
Allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation
Graft-versus-host disease
Methotrexate
Mycophenolate mofetil
Myeloablative
Journal
Biology of blood and marrow transplantation : journal of the American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation
ISSN: 1523-6536
Titre abrégé: Biol Blood Marrow Transplant
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 9600628
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
09 2019
09 2019
Historique:
received:
03
04
2019
revised:
15
05
2019
accepted:
17
05
2019
pubmed:
4
6
2019
medline:
30
7
2020
entrez:
4
6
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Combination therapy with a calcineurin inhibitor (CNI), such as cyclosporine (CSA) or tacrolimus (Tac), and methotrexate (MTX) or mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) is a widely used approach to graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) prevention. Data on the comparative effectiveness of MMF compared with MTX are limited and conflicting, however. We analyzed data from the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research for adult patients undergoing first myeloablative hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) from an HLA-identical matched related donor (MRD; n = 3979) or matched unrelated donor (URD; n = 4163) using CSA+MMF, CSA+MTX, Tac+MMF, or Tac+MTX for GVHD prevention between 2000 and 2013. Within the MRD cohort, 2252 patients received CSA+MTX, 1391 received Tac+MTX, 114 received CSA+MMF, and 222 received Tac+MMF. Recipients of CSA+MMF had a higher incidence of acute GVHD grade II-IV (hazard ratio [HR], 1.65; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.24 to 2.20; P < .001) and grade III-IV (HR, 1.92; 95% CI, 1.31 to 2.83; P < .001) compared with Tac+MTX. The use of CSA+MMF was also associated with inferior overall survival (OS) (HR, 2.31; 95% CI, 1.73 to 3.09; P < .001) due to higher transplantation-related mortality (TRM) (HR, 4.03; 95% CI, 2.61 to 6.23; P < .001) compared with Tac+MTX. Within the URD cohort, 974 patients received CSA+MTX, 2697 received Tac+MTX, 68 received CSA+MMF, and 424 received Tac+MMF. CSA+MMF was again significantly associated with a higher incidence of grade III-IV acute GVHD (HR, 2.31; 95% CI, 1.57 to 3.42; P <0001), worse OS (HR, 2.36; 95% CI, 1.67 to 3.35; P < .001), and higher TRM (HR, 3.09; 95% CI, 2.00 to 4.77; P < .001), compared with Tac+MTX and other regimens. Thus, this large retrospective comparison of MMF versus MTX in combination with CSA or Tac demonstrates significantly worse GVHD and survival outcomes with CSA+MMF compared with Tac+MTX.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31158502
pii: S1083-8791(19)30330-1
doi: 10.1016/j.bbmt.2019.05.019
pmc: PMC7039394
mid: NIHMS1550134
pii:
doi:
Substances chimiques
Cyclosporine
83HN0GTJ6D
Mycophenolic Acid
HU9DX48N0T
Types de publication
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1744-1755Subventions
Organisme : NCI NIH HHS
ID : U24 CA076518
Pays : United States
Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2019. Published by Elsevier Inc.
Références
Blood. 2014 Aug 21;124(8):1372-7
pubmed: 24982504
Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2010 Jul;16(7):937-47
pubmed: 20102746
Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2009 Aug;15(8):919-29
pubmed: 19589481
J Clin Oncol. 1994 Sep;12(9):1923-30
pubmed: 8083714
Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2014 Jul;20(7):979-85
pubmed: 24709007
Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2015 May;21(5):926-33
pubmed: 25655791
J Clin Pharmacol. 2013 Apr;53(4):393-402
pubmed: 23382105
Clin Biochem. 2000 Apr;33(3):203-8
pubmed: 10913519
Haematologica. 2016 Nov;101(11):1417-1425
pubmed: 27662016
Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2008 Jul;14(7):748-58
pubmed: 18541193
Bone Marrow Transplant. 2008 Aug;42 Suppl 1:S1-S2
pubmed: 18724277
Transplantation. 1999 Feb 27;67(4):499-504
pubmed: 10071016
Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2013 Aug;19(8):1159-66
pubmed: 23660171
Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2005 Jul;11(7):495-505
pubmed: 15983549
Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2010 Mar;16(3):421-9
pubmed: 19925875
Blood. 2003 Sep 15;102(6):2021-30
pubmed: 12791654
Am J Med. 1980 Aug;69(2):204-17
pubmed: 6996481
Blood. 1996 Dec 1;88(11):4383-9
pubmed: 8943876
Bone Marrow Transplant. 2004 Oct;34(7):621-5
pubmed: 15300236
Bone Marrow Transplant. 2004 Sep;34(5):425-31
pubmed: 15273705
Bone Marrow Transplant. 2013 Nov;48(12):1578-80
pubmed: 23749105
Bone Marrow Transplant. 1995 Jun;15(6):825-8
pubmed: 7581076
Int J Hematol. 2011 Aug;94(2):193-202
pubmed: 21751082
J Clin Oncol. 2015 Feb 1;33(4):364-9
pubmed: 25534391
Blood. 2001 Jun 1;97(11):3390-400
pubmed: 11369628
Blood. 1998 Oct 1;92(7):2303-14
pubmed: 9746768
Blood. 2000 Sep 15;96(6):2062-8
pubmed: 10979948
Blood. 1989 May 1;73(6):1729-34
pubmed: 2653461
Bone Marrow Transplant. 2006 Jan;37(2):235-6; author reply 236-7
pubmed: 16284607
Am J Hematol. 1991 Dec;38(4):288-92
pubmed: 1746537
Blood. 1998 Apr 1;91(7):2581-7
pubmed: 9516160
Blood Cancer J. 2015 Aug 28;5:e344
pubmed: 26314986
Transplant Proc. 2009 Nov;41(9):3873-6
pubmed: 19917404
Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2005 Nov;78(5):486-500
pubmed: 16321615
Bone Marrow Transplant. 2001 Jul;28(2):181-5
pubmed: 11509936
J Clin Oncol. 2001 Apr 15;19(8):2201-5
pubmed: 11304772
Blood. 2012 Jul 26;120(4):905-13
pubmed: 22709687
Bone Marrow Transplant. 2005 Jun;35(11):1089-93
pubmed: 15821769
N Engl J Med. 1986 Mar 20;314(12):729-35
pubmed: 3513012
Am J Hematol. 2015 Feb;90(2):144-8
pubmed: 25353395