Gaballa Sameh, Palmisiano Neil, Alpdogan Onder, Carabasi Matthew, Filicko-O'Hara Joanne, Kasner Margaret, Kraft Walter K, Leiby Benjamin, Martinez-Outschoorn Ubaldo, O'Hara William, Pro Barbara, Rudolph Shannon, Sharma Manish, Wagner John L, Weiss Mark, Flomenberg Neal, Grosso Dolores
Department of Medical Oncology, Kimmel Cancer Center, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Department of Medical Oncology, Kimmel Cancer Center, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2016 Jan;22(1):141-8. doi: 10.1016/j.bbmt.2015.09.017. Epub 2015 Sep 28.
Haploidentical stem cell transplantation (SCT) offers a transplantation option to patients who lack an HLA-matched donor. We developed a 2-step approach to myeloablative allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation for patients with haploidentical or matched related (MR) donors. In this approach, the lymphoid and myeloid portions of the graft are administered in 2 separate steps to allow fixed T cell dosing. Cyclophosphamide is used for T cell tolerization. Given a uniform conditioning regimen, graft T cell dose, and graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) prophylaxis strategy, we compared immune reconstitution and clinical outcomes in patients undergoing 2-step haploidentical versus 2-step MR SCT. We retrospectively compared data on patients undergoing a 2-step haploidentical (n = 50) or MR (n = 27) peripheral blood SCT for high-risk hematological malignancies and aplastic anemia. Both groups received myeloablative total body irradiation conditioning. Immune reconstitution data included flow cytometric assessment of T cell subsets at day 28 and 90 after SCT. Both groups showed comparable early immune recovery in all assessed T cell subsets except for the median CD3/CD8 cell count, which was higher in the MR group at day 28 compared with that in the haploidentical group. The 3-year probability of overall survival was 70% in the haploidentical group and 71% in the MR group (P = .81), while the 3-year progression-free survival was 68% in the haploidentical group and 70% in the MR group (P = .97). The 3-year cumulative incidence of nonrelapse mortality was 10% in the haploidentical group and 4% in the MR group (P = .34). The 3-year cumulative incidence of relapse was 21% in the haploidentical group and 27% in the MR group (P = .93). The 100-day cumulative incidence of overall grades II to IV acute GVHD was higher in the haploidentical group compared with that in the MR group (40% versus 8%, P < .001), whereas the grades III and IV acute GVHD was not statistically different between both groups (haploidentical, 6%; MR, 4%; P = .49). The cumulative incidence of cytomegalovirus reactivation was also higher in the haploidentical group compared to the MR group (haploidentical, 68%; MR, 19%; P < .001). There were no deaths from GVHD in either group. Using an identical conditioning regimen, graft T cell dose, and GVHD prophylaxis strategy, comparable early immune recovery and clinical outcomes were observed in the 2-step haploidentical and MR SCT recipients.
单倍体相合干细胞移植(SCT)为缺乏HLA匹配供体的患者提供了一种移植选择。我们为具有单倍体相合或匹配相关(MR)供体的患者开发了一种两步法清髓性异基因造血干细胞移植方法。在这种方法中,移植物的淋巴细胞和髓细胞部分分两个独立步骤给予,以实现固定的T细胞剂量。环磷酰胺用于诱导T细胞耐受。鉴于采用统一的预处理方案、移植物T细胞剂量和移植物抗宿主病(GVHD)预防策略,我们比较了接受两步法单倍体相合与两步法MR SCT患者的免疫重建和临床结局。我们回顾性比较了接受两步法单倍体相合(n = 50)或MR(n = 27)外周血SCT治疗高危血液系统恶性肿瘤和再生障碍性贫血患者的数据。两组均接受清髓性全身照射预处理。免疫重建数据包括SCT后第28天和第90天T细胞亚群的流式细胞术评估。除了中位CD3/CD8细胞计数外,两组在所有评估的T细胞亚群中均显示出可比的早期免疫恢复,与单倍体相合组相比,MR组在第28天的中位CD3/CD8细胞计数更高。单倍体相合组的3年总生存率为70%,MR组为71%(P = 0.81),而单倍体相合组的3年无进展生存率为68%,MR组为70%(P = 0.97)。单倍体相合组的3年非复发死亡率累积发生率为10%,MR组为4%(P = 0.34)。单倍体相合组的3年复发累积发生率为21%,MR组为27%(P = 0.93)。单倍体相合组II至IV级急性GVHD的100天累积发生率高于MR组(40%对8%,P < 0.001),而III级和IV级急性GVHD在两组之间无统计学差异(单倍体相合组,6%;MR组,4%;P = 0.49)。单倍体相合组巨细胞病毒再激活的累积发生率也高于MR组(单倍体相合组,68%;MR组,19%;P < 0.001)。两组均无因GVHD死亡的病例。采用相同的预处理方案、移植物T细胞剂量和GVHD预防策略,两步法单倍体相合和MR SCT受者观察到可比的早期免疫恢复和临床结局。