Sirolimus Is an Acceptable Alternative to Tacrolimus for Graft-versus-Host Disease Prophylaxis after Haploidentical Peripheral Blood Stem Cell Transplantation with Post-Transplantation Cyclophosphamide.

Graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) prophylaxis with post-transplantation cyclophosphamide (PTCy), tacrolimus (Tac), and mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) for allogeneic haploidentical donor (haplo) hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) results in comparable outcomes to matched unrelated donor HCT. A phase II study from the Moffitt Cancer Center substituting sirolimus (Siro) for Tac in this prophylactic regimen reported comparable rates of grade II-IV acute GVHD (aGVHD). Many centers have substituted Siro for Tac in this setting based on a preferable side effect profile, although comparative data are limited. In this study, we retrospectively compared outcomes in haplo-HCT with PTCy/Siro/MMF versus haplo-HCT with PTCy/Tac/MMF. The study cohort included all consecutive patients receiving haploidentical donor T cell-replete peripheral blood stem cell (PBSC) HCT for hematologic malignancies at Moffitt Cancer Center or the City of Hope National Medical Center between 2014 and 2019. A total of 423 patients were included, of whom 84 (20%) received PTCy/Siro/MMF and 339 (80%) received PTCy/Tac/MMF. The median age for the entire cohort was 54 years (range, 18 to 78 years), and the median follow-up was 30 months. The Siro group had a higher proportion of patients age ≥60 years (58% versus 34%; P < .01), and the groups also differed in diagnosis type, conditioning regimen, and cytomegalovirus serostatus. There were no significant differences in the rates of grade II-IV aGVHD (45% versus 47%; P = .6) at day +100 or chronic GVHD (cGVHD) (47% versus 54%; P = .79) at 2 years post-HCT. In multivariate analysis, neutrophil engraftment at day +30 was significantly better in the Tac group (odds ratio, .30; 95% confidence interval, .1 to .83; P = .02), with a median time to engraftment of 17 days versus 18 days in the Siro group, but platelet engraftment was similar in the 2 groups. Otherwise, in multivariate analysis, GVHD prophylaxis type had no significant influence on aGVHD or cGVHD, nonrelapse mortality, relapse, GVHD-free relapse-free survival, disease-free survival, or overall survival after PBSC haplo-HCT. These findings suggest that Siro is a comparable alternative to Tac in combination with PTCy/MMF for GVHD prophylaxis, with overall similar clinical outcomes despite delayed engraftment after peripheral blood stem cell haplo-HCT. Although Tac remains the standard of care, Siro may be substituted based on the side effect profile of these medications, with consideration of patient medical comorbidities at HCT.