Versluis Jurjen, Labopin Myriam, Ruggeri Annalisa, Socie Gerard, Wu Depei, Volin Liisa, Blaise Didier, Milpied Noel, Craddock Charles, Yakoub-Agha Ibrahim, Maertens Johan, Ljungman Per, Huynh Anne, Michallet Mauricette, Deconinck Eric, Chevallier Patrice, Passweg Jakob, Ciceri Fabio, Mohty Mohamad, Cornelissen Jan J, Nagler Arnon
Department of Hematology, Erasmus University Medical Center Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Sorbonne Universités, Saint-Antoine, Paris, France.
Blood Adv. 2017 Feb 28;1(7):477-485. doi: 10.1182/bloodadvances.2016002386.
Allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (alloHSCT) remains the treatment of choice to consolidate remission in patients with poor-risk acute myeloid leukemia (AML). With increasing alternative donors available, the preferred donor or stem cell source is debated. We set out to study outcome in recipients of alloHSCT with poor-risk AML in first complete remission (CR1) by donor type. A total of 6545 adult patients with poor-risk AML in CR1 receiving an alloHSCT using matched related donor (MRD, n = 3511) or alternative donors, including 10/10 (n = 1959) or 9/10 matched unrelated donors (MUDs, n = 549), umbilical cord blood (UCB) grafts (n = 333), or haplo-identical (haplo) donors (n = 193) were compared. Overall survival (OS) at 2 years following MRD alloHSCT was an estimated 59 ± 1%, which did not differ from 10/10 MUD (57 ± 1%) and haplo alloHSCT (57 ± 4%). OS, however, was significantly lower for 9/10 MUD alloHSCT (49 ± 2%) and UCB grafts (44 ± 3%), respectively ( < .001). Nonrelapse mortality (NRM) depended on donor type and was estimated at 26 ± 3% and 29 ± 3% after haplo alloHSCT and UCB grafts at 2 years vs 15 ± 1% following MRD alloHSCT. Multivariable analysis confirmed the impact of donor type with OS following MRD, 10/10 MUD, and haplo alloHSCT not being statistically significantly different. NRM was significantly higher for alternative donors as compared with MRD alloHSCT. Collectively, these results suggest that alloHSCT with MRDs and 10/10 MUDs may still be preferred in patients with poor-risk AML in CR1. If an MRD or 10/10 MUD is not available, then the repertoire of alternative donors includes 9/10 MUD, UCB grafts, and haplo-identical donors. The latter type of donor is increasingly applied and now approximates results with matched donors.
异基因造血干细胞移植(alloHSCT)仍然是巩固高危急性髓系白血病(AML)患者缓解状态的首选治疗方法。随着可用的替代供体越来越多,首选供体或干细胞来源存在争议。我们着手按供体类型研究首次完全缓解(CR1)的高危AML患者接受alloHSCT后的结局。共有6545例CR1期高危AML成年患者接受了alloHSCT,其中使用了匹配的相关供体(MRD,n = 3511)或替代供体,包括10/10(n = 1959)或9/10匹配的无关供体(MUD,n = 549)、脐带血(UCB)移植物(n = 333)或单倍体相合(haplo)供体(n = 193),并进行了比较。MRD alloHSCT后2年的总生存期(OS)估计为59±1%,与10/10 MUD(57±1%)和haplo alloHSCT(57±4%)无差异。然而,9/10 MUD alloHSCT(49±2%)和UCB移植物(44±3%)的OS分别显著较低(P <.001)。非复发死亡率(NRM)取决于供体类型,haplo alloHSCT和UCB移植物后2年估计为26±3%和29±3%,而MRD alloHSCT后为15±1%。多变量分析证实了供体类型的影响,MRD、10/10 MUD和haplo alloHSCT后的OS在统计学上无显著差异。与MRD alloHSCT相比,替代供体的NRM显著更高。总体而言,这些结果表明,CR1期高危AML患者可能仍首选MRD和10/10 MUD的alloHSCT。如果没有MRD或10/10 MUD,则替代供体包括9/10 MUD、UCB移植物和单倍体相合供体。后一种类型的供体应用越来越多,现在其结果已接近匹配供体。