Bejanyan Nelli, Zhang Meijie, Bo-Subait Khalid, Brunstein Claudio, Wang Hailin, Warlick Erica D, Giralt Sergio, Nishihori Taiga, Martino Rodrigo, Passweg Jakob, Dias Ajoy, Copelan Edward, Hale Gregory, Gale Robert Peter, Solh Melhem, Kharfan-Dabaja Mohamed A, Diaz Miguel Angel, Ganguly Siddhartha, Gore Steven, Verdonck Leo F, Hossain Nasheed M, Kekre Natasha, Savani Bipin, Byrne Michael, Kanakry Christopher, Cairo Mitchell S, Ciurea Stefan, Schouten Harry C, Bredeson Christopher, Munker Reinhold, Lazarus Hillard, Cahn Jean-Yves, van Der Poel Marjolein, Rizzieri David, Yared Jean A, Freytes Cesar, Cerny Jan, Aljurf Mahmoud, Palmisiano Neil D, Pawarode Attaphol, Bacher Vera Ulrike, Grunwald Michael R, Nathan Sunita, Wirk Baldeep, Hildebrandt Gerhard C, Seo Sachiko, Olsson Richard F, George Biju, de Lima Marcos, Hourigan Christopher S, Sandmaier Brenda M, Litzow Mark, Kebriaei Partow, Saber Wael, Weisdorf Daniel
Department of Blood and Marrow Transplant and Cellular Immunotherapy, Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, Florida.
Division of Biostatistics, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Wisconsin.
Transplant Cell Ther. 2021 Jan;27(1):68.e1-68.e9. doi: 10.1016/j.bbmt.2020.09.026. Epub 2020 Oct 1.
Compared with reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC), myeloablative conditioning (MAC) is generally associated with lower relapse risk after allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) for acute myelogenous leukemia (AML) and myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS). However, disease-specific risk factors in AML/MDS can further inform when MAC and RIC may yield differential outcomes. We analyzed HCT outcomes stratified by the Disease Risk Index (DRI) in 4387 adults (age 40 to 65 years) to identify the impact of conditioning intensity. In the low/intermediate-risk DRI cohort, RIC was associated with lower nonrelapse mortality (NRM) (hazard ratio [HR], .74; 95% confidence interval [CI], .62 to .88; P < .001) but significantly greater relapse risk (HR, 1.54; 95% CI, 1.35 to 1.76; P < .001) and thus inferior disease-free survival (DFS) (HR, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.07 to 1.33; P = .001). In the high/very high-risk DRI cohort, RIC was associated with marginally lower NRM (HR, .83; 95% CI, .68 to 1.00; P = .051) and significantly higher relapse risk (HR, 1.23; 95% CI, 1.08 to 1.41; P = .002), leading to similar DFS using either RIC or MAC. These data support MAC over RIC as the preferred conditioning intensity for patients with AML/MDS with low/intermediate-risk DRI, but with a similar benefit as RIC in high/very high-risk DRI. Novel MAC regimens with less toxicity could benefit all patients, but more potent antineoplastic approaches are needed for the high/very-high risk DRI group.
与减低强度预处理(RIC)相比,清髓性预处理(MAC)在急性髓系白血病(AML)和骨髓增生异常综合征(MDS)患者接受异基因造血细胞移植(HCT)后,通常与较低的复发风险相关。然而,AML/MDS中的疾病特异性风险因素能够进一步提示何时MAC和RIC可能产生不同的结果。我们分析了4387名年龄在40至65岁之间的成年人按疾病风险指数(DRI)分层的HCT结果,以确定预处理强度的影响。在低/中风险DRI队列中,RIC与较低的非复发死亡率(NRM)相关(风险比[HR],0.74;95%置信区间[CI],0.62至0.88;P < 0.001),但复发风险显著更高(HR,1.54;95%CI,1.35至1.76;P < 0.001),因此无病生存期(DFS)较差(HR,1.19;95%CI,1.07至1.33;P = 0.001)。在高/极高风险DRI队列中,RIC与略低的NRM相关(HR,0.83;95%CI,0.68至1.00;P = 0.051),且复发风险显著更高(HR,1.23;95%CI,1.08至1.41;P = 0.002),导致使用RIC或MAC的DFS相似。这些数据支持对于低/中风险DRI的AML/MDS患者,MAC优于RIC作为首选的预处理强度,但对于高/极高风险DRI患者,MAC与RIC的益处相似。毒性较小的新型MAC方案可能使所有患者受益,但高/极高风险DRI组需要更有效的抗肿瘤方法。