The aim of this work is to produce recommendations on the management of allogeneic stem cell transplantation (allo-SCT) in primary myelofibrosis (PMF). A comprehensive systematic review of articles ...released from 1999 to 2015 (January) was used as a source of scientific evidence. Recommendations were produced using a Delphi process involving a panel of 23 experts appointed by the European LeukemiaNet and European Blood and Marrow Transplantation Group. Key questions included patient selection, donor selection, pre-transplant management, conditioning regimen, post-transplant management, prevention and management of relapse after transplant. Patients with intermediate-2- or high-risk disease and age <70 years should be considered as candidates for allo-SCT. Patients with intermediate-1-risk disease and age <65 years should be considered as candidates if they present with either refractory, transfusion-dependent anemia, or a percentage of blasts in peripheral blood (PB) >2%, or adverse cytogenetics. Pre-transplant splenectomy should be decided on a case by case basis. Patients with intermediate-2- or high-risk disease lacking an human leukocyte antigen (HLA)-matched sibling or unrelated donor, should be enrolled in a protocol using HLA non-identical donors. PB was considered the most appropriate source of hematopoietic stem cells for HLA-matched sibling and unrelated donor transplants. The optimal intensity of the conditioning regimen still needs to be defined. Strategies such as discontinuation of immune-suppressive drugs, donor lymphocyte infusion or both were deemed appropriate to avoid clinical relapse. In conclusion, we provided consensus-based recommendations aimed to optimize allo-SCT in PMF. Unmet clinical needs were highlighted.
Polycythemia vera (PV) and essential thrombocythemia (ET) are myeloproliferative neoplasms with variable risk of evolution into post-PV and post-ET myelofibrosis, from now on referred to as secondary ...myelofibrosis (SMF). No specific tools have been defined for risk stratification in SMF. To develop a prognostic model for predicting survival, we studied 685 JAK2, CALR, and MPL annotated patients with SMF. Median survival of the whole cohort was 9.3 years (95% CI: 8-not reached-NR-). Through penalized Cox regressions we identified negative predictors of survival and according to beta risk coefficients we assigned 2 points to hemoglobin level <11 g/dl, to circulating blasts ⩾3%, and to CALR-unmutated genotype, 1 point to platelet count <150 × 10
/l and to constitutional symptoms, and 0.15 points to any year of age. Myelofibrosis Secondary to PV and ET-Prognostic Model (MYSEC-PM) allocated SMF patients into four risk categories with different survival (P<0.0001): low (median survival NR; 133 patients), intermediate-1 (9.3 years, 95% CI: 8.1-NR; 245 patients), intermediate-2 (4.4 years, 95% CI: 3.2-7.9; 126 patients), and high risk (2 years, 95% CI: 1.7-3.9; 75 patients). Finally, we found that the MYSEC-PM represents the most appropriate tool for SMF decision-making to be used in clinical and trial settings.
Under the auspices of an International Working Group, seven centers submitted diagnostic and follow-up information on 1545 patients with World Health Organization-defined polycythemia vera (PV). At ...diagnosis, median age was 61 years (51% females); thrombocytosis and venous thrombosis were more frequent in women and arterial thrombosis and abnormal karyotype in men. Considering patients from the center with the most mature follow-up information (n=337 with 44% of patients followed to death), median survival (14.1 years) was significantly worse than that of the age- and sex-matched US population (P<0.001). In multivariable analysis, survival for the entire study cohort (n=1545) was adversely affected by older age, leukocytosis, venous thrombosis and abnormal karyotype; a prognostic model that included the first three parameters delineated risk groups with median survivals of 10.9-27.8 years (hazard ratio (HR), 10.7; 95% confidence interval (CI): 7.7-15.0). Pruritus was identified as a favorable risk factor for survival. Cumulative hazard of leukemic transformation, with death as a competing risk, was 2.3% at 10 years and 5.5% at 15 years; risk factors included older age, abnormal karyotype and leukocytes ≥15 × 10(9)/l. Leukemic transformation was associated with treatment exposure to pipobroman or P32/chlorambucil. We found no association between leukemic transformation and hydroxyurea or busulfan use.
All-trans retinoic acid (ATRA) with chemotherapy is the standard of care for acute promyelocytic leukemia (APL), resulting in cure rates exceeding 80%. Pilot studies of treatment with arsenic ...trioxide with or without ATRA have shown high efficacy and reduced hematologic toxicity.
We conducted a phase 3, multicenter trial comparing ATRA plus chemotherapy with ATRA plus arsenic trioxide in patients with APL classified as low-to-intermediate risk (white-cell count, ≤10×10(9) per liter). Patients were randomly assigned to receive either ATRA plus arsenic trioxide for induction and consolidation therapy or standard ATRA-idarubicin induction therapy followed by three cycles of consolidation therapy with ATRA plus chemotherapy and maintenance therapy with low-dose chemotherapy and ATRA. The study was designed as a noninferiority trial to show that the difference between the rates of event-free survival at 2 years in the two groups was not greater than 5%.
Complete remission was achieved in all 77 patients in the ATRA-arsenic trioxide group who could be evaluated (100%) and in 75 of 79 patients in the ATRA-chemotherapy group (95%) (P=0.12). The median follow-up was 34.4 months. Two-year event-free survival rates were 97% in the ATRA-arsenic trioxide group and 86% in the ATRA-chemotherapy group (95% confidence interval for the difference, 2 to 22 percentage points; P<0.001 for noninferiority and P=0.02 for superiority of ATRA-arsenic trioxide). Overall survival was also better with ATRA-arsenic trioxide (P=0.02). As compared with ATRA-chemotherapy, ATRA-arsenic trioxide was associated with less hematologic toxicity and fewer infections but with more hepatic toxicity.
ATRA plus arsenic trioxide is at least not inferior and may be superior to ATRA plus chemotherapy in the treatment of patients with low-to-intermediate-risk APL. (Funded by Associazione Italiana contro le Leucemie and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00482833.).
Many lymphoma and myeloma patients fail to undergo ASCT owing to poor mobilization. Identification of poor mobilizers (PMs) would provide a tool for early intervention with new mobilization agents. ...The Gruppo italianoTrapianto di Midollo Osseo working group proposed a definition of PMs applicable to clinical trials and clinical practice. The analytic hierarchy process, a method for group decision making, was used in setting prioritized criteria. Lymphoma or myeloma patients were defined as 'proven PM' when: (1) after adequate mobilization (G-CSF 10 μg/kg if used alone or ≥5 μg/kg after chemotherapy) circulating CD34(+) cell peak is <20/μL up to 6 days after mobilization with G-CSF or up to 20 days after chemotherapy and G-CSF or (2) they yielded <2.0 × 10(6) CD34(+) cells per kg in ≤3 apheresis. Patients were defined as predicted PMs if: (1) they failed a previous collection attempt (not otherwise specified); (2) they previously received extensive radiotherapy or full courses of therapy affecting SC mobilization; and (3) they met two of the following criteria: advanced disease (≥2 lines of chemotherapy), refractory disease, extensive BM involvement or cellularity <30% at the time of mobilization; age ≥65 years. This definition of proven and predicted PMs should be validated in clinical trials and common clinical practice.
Assessment of minimal residual disease (MRD) has acquired a prominent position in European treatment protocols for patients with acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL), on the basis of its high ...prognostic value for predicting outcome and the possibilities for implementation of MRD diagnostics in treatment stratification. Therefore, there is an increasing need for standardization of methodologies and harmonization of terminology. For this purpose, a panel of representatives of all major European study groups on childhood and adult ALL and of international experts on PCR- and flow cytometry-based MRD assessment was built in the context of the Second International Symposium on MRD assessment in Kiel, Germany, 18-20 September 2008. The panel summarized the current state of MRD diagnostics in ALL and developed recommendations on the minimal technical requirements that should be fulfilled before implementation of MRD diagnostics into clinical trials. Finally, a common terminology for a standard description of MRD response and monitoring was established defining the terms 'complete MRD response', 'MRD persistence' and 'MRD reappearance'. The proposed MRD terminology may allow a refined and standardized assessment of response to treatment in adult and childhood ALL, and provides a sound basis for the comparison of MRD results between different treatment protocols.
When treatment fails, the clinical outcome of acute leukemia patients is usually very poor, particularly when failure occurs after transplantation. A second allogeneic stem cell transplant could be ...envisaged as an effective and feasible salvage option in younger patients having a late relapse and an available donor. Unmanipulated or minimally manipulated donor T cells may also be effective in a minority of patients but the main limit remains the induction of severe graft-versus-host disease. This clinical complication has brought about a huge research effort that led to the development of leukemia-specific T-cell therapy aiming at the direct recognition of leukemia-specific rather than minor histocompatibility antigens. Despite a great scientific interest, the clinical feasibility of such an approach has proven to be quite problematic. To overcome this limitation, more research has moved toward the choice of targeting commonly expressed hematopoietic specific antigens by the genetic modification of unselected T cells. The best example of this is represented by the anti-CD19 chimeric antigen receptor (CD19.CAR) T cells. As a possible alternative to the genetic manipulation of unselected T cells, specific T-cell subpopulations with in vivo favorable homing and long-term survival properties have been genetically modified by CAR molecules. Finally, the use of naturally cytotoxic effector cells such as natural killer and cytokine-induced killer cells has been proposed in several clinical trials. The clinical development of these latter cells could also be further expanded by additional genetic modifications using the CAR technology.
Allogeneic stem-cell transplantation (HSCT) is the only curative treatment in myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS). Azacitidine (AZA) is increasingly used prior to HSCT, however in Europe it is only ...approved for patients who are not eligible for HSCT.
We conducted a phase II multicenter study to prospectively evaluate the feasibility of HSCT after treatment with AZA in 70 patients with a myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS), 19 with acute myeloid leukemia (AML), and 8 with chronic myelomonocytic leukemia (CMML). After a median of four cycles (range 1–11): 24% of patients achieved complete remission, 14% partial remission, 8% hematologic improvement, 32% had stable and 22% progressive disease. Ten patients discontinued treatment before the planned four cycles, due to an adverse event in nine cases.
A HSC donor was identified in 73 patients, and HSCT was performed in 54 patients (74% of patients with a donor). Main reasons for turning down HSCT were lack of a donor, an adverse event, or progressive disease (9, 12, and 16 patients, respectively). At a median follow-up of 20.5months from enrolment, response to AZA was the only independent prognostic factor for survival. Compared to baseline assessment, AZA treatment did not affect patients’ comorbidities at HSCT: the HCT-CI remained stable in 62% patients, and worsened or improved in 23% and 15% of patients, respectively.
Our study shows that HSCT is feasible in the majority of patients with HR-MDS/AML/CMML-2 after AZA treatment. As matched unrelated donor was the most frequent source of donor cells, the time between diagnosis and HSCT needed for donor search could be ‘bridged’ using azacitidine. These data show that AZA prior to HSCT could be a better option than intensive chemotherapy in higher-risk MDS.
The trial has been registered with the EudraCT number 2010-019673-1.
Hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection reactivation is associated with high morbidity and mortality in patients with haematologic malignancy and/or haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT). ...However, information on this issue is limited. The scope of this position paper is to provide recommendations on HBV screening, monitoring, prophylaxis, treatment and vaccination in the patients described above.
These recommendations were developed from one meeting of experts attended by different Italian scientific societies as well as from a systematic literature review (of articles published through December 31, 2016) on HBV infection in haematologic patients and in patients who underwent haematopoietic stem cell transplantation published in the same issue of the journal. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology was used to assess each recommendation's quality.
These recommendations provide the answers to the following questions: (a) HBV screening and monitoring: Who should be screened before chemotherapy? Which screening tests should be used? Should HBV-DNA detection be used to monitor HBV reactivation before starting antivirals? What is the best timeline to monitor HBV reactivation? (b) Prophylaxis in HBsAg-positive patients: Which antiviral drugs should be used to treat HBsAg-positive patients? How long should antiviral prophylaxis be provided to HBsAg-positive patients? (c) Prophylaxis in patients with resolved HBV infection: Which patients with resolved HBV infection should receive antiviral prophylaxis? Which antiviral drug should be used? How long should antiviral prophylaxis be provided? (d) HBV infection management strategy in autologous (auto-HSCT) and allogeneic HSCT (allo-HSCT): Which HSCT recipients should receive antiviral prophylaxis? Which antiviral drug should be used? How long should antiviral prophylaxis be provided? (e) Choice of antiviral drugs in the treatment of HBV reactivation: Should third-generation anti-HBV drugs be preferred to first- or second-generation antiviral drugs in the treatment of HBV reactivation with or without hepatitis flare in haematologic patients? (f) Immunization against HBV in patients with haematologic malignancies and/or patients who underwent HSCT: Should these patients be vaccinated? Which HBV vaccination schedule should be adopted?
Haematologic patients should be screened for hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) plus anti-hepatitis B core protein (HBc), and HBV DNA before chemotherapy. HBV DNA levels should be monitored monthly in all HBV-positive patients who do not receive prophylaxis. HBsAg-positive haematologic patients and those undergoing HSCT should receive third-generation antiviral therapy as prophylaxis. Anti-HBc-positive lymphoma patients and those receiving HSCT should receive antiviral prophylaxis. All HBV-negative haematologic patients should be vaccinated for HBV. The acquisition of data from well-designed studies is desirable in the near future.
PDF
