Impact of conditioning regimen intensity on the outcomes of peripheral T-cell lymphoma, anaplastic large cell lymphoma and angioimmunoblastic T-cell lymphoma patients undergoing allogeneic transplant.
Adolescent
Adult
Aged
Graft vs Host Disease
Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation
Humans
Immunoblastic Lymphadenopathy
Lymphoma, Large-Cell, Anaplastic
Lymphoma, T-Cell, Peripheral
/ therapy
Middle Aged
Neoplasm Recurrence, Local
Retrospective Studies
Transplantation Conditioning
Transplantation, Homologous
Young Adult
allogeneic transplant
mature T-cell NHL
myeloablative conditioning
reduced-intensity conditioning
Journal
British journal of haematology
ISSN: 1365-2141
Titre abrégé: Br J Haematol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 0372544
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
04 2022
04 2022
Historique:
revised:
28
12
2021
received:
01
11
2021
accepted:
05
01
2022
pubmed:
3
2
2022
medline:
19
4
2022
entrez:
2
2
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
There have been no large studies comparing reduced-intensity/non-myeloablative conditioning (RIC/NMA) to myeloablative conditioning (MAC) regimens in T-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma (T-NHL) patients undergoing allogeneic transplant (allo-HCT). A total of 803 adults with peripheral T-cell lymphoma, anaplastic large cell lymphoma and angioimmunoblastic T-cell lymphoma (age 18-65 years), undergoing allo-HCT between 2008-2019 and reported to the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research with either MAC (n = 258) or RIC/NMA regimens (n = 545) were evaluated. There were no significant differences between the two cohorts in terms of patient sex, race and performance scores. Significantly more patients in the RIC/NMA cohort had peripheral blood grafts, haematopoietic cell transplantation-specific comorbidity index (HCT-CI) of ≥3 and chemosensitive disease compared to the MAC cohort. On multivariate analysis, overall survival (OS) was not significantly different in the RIC/NMA cohort compared to the MAC cohort (hazard ratio (HR) = 1.01, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.79-1.29; p = 0.95). Similarly, non-relapse mortality (NRM) (HR = 0.85, 95% CI = 0.61-1.19; p = 0.34), risk of progression/relapse (HR = 1.29; 95% CI = 0.98-1.70; p = 0.07) and therapy failure (HR = 1.14; 95% CI = 0.92-1.41, p = 0.23) were not significantly different between the two cohorts. Relative to MAC, RIC/NMA was associated with a significantly lower risk of grade 3-4 acute graft-versus-host disease (HR = 0.67; 95% CI = 0.46-0.99, p = 0.04). Among chemorefractory patients, there was no difference in OS, therapy failure, relapse, or NRM between RIC/NMA and MAC regimens. In conclusion, we found no association between conditioning intensity and outcomes after allo-HCT for T-cell NHL.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35106754
doi: 10.1111/bjh.18052
pmc: PMC9018546
mid: NIHMS1770252
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
212-222Subventions
Organisme : NCI NIH HHS
ID : P30 CA008748
Pays : United States
Organisme : NCI NIH HHS
ID : U24 CA076518
Pays : United States
Informations de copyright
© 2022 British Society for Haematology and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Références
Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2019 Sep;25(9):1859-1868
pubmed: 31132455
Ann Hematol. 2018 Jul;97(7):1241-1250
pubmed: 29549411
Ann Oncol. 2016 Dec;27(12):2251-2257
pubmed: 28007754
Blood. 2016 Feb 18;127(7):938-47
pubmed: 26670632
J Clin Oncol. 2012 Feb 20;30(6):631-6
pubmed: 22271479
Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2008 Feb;14(2):236-45
pubmed: 18215784
Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2013 May;19(5):746-53
pubmed: 23380340
Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2015 Dec;21(12):2091-2099
pubmed: 26253007
Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2008 Apr;14(4):480-3
pubmed: 18342792
Transplant Cell Ther. 2021 Jan;27(1):58-66
pubmed: 32956819
J Clin Oncol. 2015 Aug 10;33(23):2492-9
pubmed: 26101246
J Clin Oncol. 2021 Feb 10;39(5):487-498
pubmed: 33434076
Br J Haematol. 2016 Jul;174(2):235-48
pubmed: 26989808
Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2013 Apr;19(4):625-31
pubmed: 23333532
Stat Methods Med Res. 2015 Aug;24(4):462-87
pubmed: 24525487
J Clin Oncol. 2011 Mar 20;29(9):1182-9
pubmed: 21245435
J Clin Oncol. 2008 May 10;26(14):2264-71
pubmed: 18390969
Am J Med. 1980 Aug;69(2):204-17
pubmed: 6996481
J Clin Oncol. 2014 Sep 20;32(27):3059-68
pubmed: 25113753
Transplant Cell Ther. 2021 Jun;27(6):493.e1-493.e8
pubmed: 33857447
Br J Haematol. 2020 Aug;190(4):573-582
pubmed: 32314807
Bone Marrow Transplant. 1995 Jun;15(6):825-8
pubmed: 7581076
J Hematol Oncol. 2019 Jan 10;12(1):6
pubmed: 30630534
J Clin Oncol. 2007 Feb 10;25(5):579-86
pubmed: 17242396
J Clin Oncol. 2016 Sep 10;34(26):3141-9
pubmed: 27269951
Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2009 Dec;15(12):1628-33
pubmed: 19896087
Hematol Oncol Clin North Am. 2007 Oct;21(5):841-54
pubmed: 17908623
J Hematol Oncol. 2020 May 19;13(1):56
pubmed: 32429979
J Clin Oncol. 2013 Sep 1;31(25):3100-9
pubmed: 23897963
Blood. 2021 May 13;137(19):2646-2656
pubmed: 33512419
Blood Adv. 2019 Feb 12;3(3):360-369
pubmed: 30723110
Blood. 2012 Nov 15;120(20):4256-62
pubmed: 23007405
JAMA Oncol. 2020 Jul 1;6(7):1011-1018
pubmed: 32496525
J Clin Oncol. 2004 Jun 1;22(11):2172-6
pubmed: 15169805