Association between the choice of the conditioning regimen and outcomes of allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation for myelofibrosis

Allogeneic hematopoietic; Cell transplantation; MyelofibrosisTrasplante alogénico; Células hematopoyéticas; MielofibrosisTrasplantament al·logènic; Cèl·lules hematopoètiques; MielofibrosiAllogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (allo-HCT) remains the only curative treatment for myelofibrosis. However, the optimal conditioning regimen either with reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) or myeloablative conditioning (MAC) is not well known. Using the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research database, we identified adults aged ≥18 years with myelofibrosis undergoing allo-HCT between 2008-2019 and analyzed the outcomes separately in the RIC and MAC cohorts based on the conditioning regimens used. Among 872 eligible patients, 493 underwent allo-HCT using RIC (fludarabine/ busulfan n=166, fludarabine/melphalan n=327) and 379 using MAC (fludarabine/busulfan n=247, busulfan/cyclophosphamide n=132). In multivariable analysis with RIC, fludarabine/melphalan was associated with inferior overall survival (hazard ratio [HR]=1.80; 95% confidenec interval [CI]: 1.15-2.81; P=0.009), higher early non-relapse mortality (HR=1.81; 95% CI: 1.12-2.91; P=0.01) and higher acute graft-versus-host disease (GvHD) (grade 2-4 HR=1.45; 95% CI: 1.03-2.03; P=0.03; grade 3-4 HR=2.21; 95%CI: 1.28-3.83; P=0.004) compared to fludarabine/busulfan. In the MAC setting, busulfan/cyclophosphamide was associated with a higher acute GvHD (grade 2-4 HR=2.33; 95% CI: 1.67-3.25; P<0.001; grade 3-4 HR=2.31; 95% CI: 1.52-3.52; P<0.001) and inferior GvHD-free relapse-free survival (GRFS) (HR=1.94; 95% CI: 1.49-2.53; P<0.001) as compared to fludarabine/busulfan. Hence, our study suggests that fludarabine/busulfan is associated with better outcomes in RIC (better overall survival, lower early non-relapse mortality, lower acute GvHD) and MAC (lower acute GvHD and better GRFS) in myelofibrosis.The CIBMTR is supported primarily by Public Health Service U24CA076518 from the National Cancer Institute (NCI), the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute (NHLBI) and the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID); HHSH250201700006C from the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA); and N00014-20-1-2705 and N00014-20-1-2832 from the Ofce of Naval Research; support is also provided by Be the Match Foundation, the Medical College of Wisconsin, the National Marrow Donor Program, and from the following commercial entities: AbbVie; Accenture; Actinium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; Adaptive Biotechnologies Corporation; Adienne SA; Allovir, Inc.; Amgen, Inc.; Astellas Pharma US; bluebird bio, inc.; Bristol Myers Squibb Co.; CareDx; CSL Behring; CytoSen Therapeutics, Inc.; Daiichi Sankyo Co., Ltd.; Eurofins Viracor, DBA Eurofins Transplant Diagnostics; Fate Therapeutics; Gamida-Cell, Ltd.; Gilead; GlaxoSmithKline; HistoGenetics; Incyte Corporation; Iovance; Janssen Research & Development, LLC; Janssen/Johnson & Johnson; Jasper Therapeutics; Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; Kadmon; Karius; Karyopharm Therapeutics; Kiadis Pharma; Kite Pharma Inc; Kite, a Gilead Company; Kyowa Kirin International plc; Kyowa Kirin; Legend Biotech; Magenta Therapeutics; Medac GmbH; Medexus; Merck & Co.; Millennium, the Takeda Oncology Co.; Miltenyi Biotec, Inc.; MorphoSys; Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation; Omeros Corporation; OncoImmune, Inc.; Oncopeptides, Inc.; OptumHealth; Orca Biosystems, Inc.; Ossium Health, Inc; Pfizer, Inc.; Pharmacyclics, LLC; Priothera; Sanofi Genzyme; Seagen, Inc.; Stemcyte; Takeda Pharmaceuticals; Talaris Therapeutics; Terumo Blood and Cell Technologies; TG Therapeutics; Tscan; Vertex; Vor Biopharma; Xenikos BV

Association between the choice of the conditioning regimen and outcomes of allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation for myelofibrosis

Allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (allo-HCT) remains the only curative treatment for myelofibrosis. However, the optimal conditioning regimen either with reduced intensity conditioning (RIC) or myeloablative conditioning (MAC) is not well known. Using the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research database, we identified adults aged ≥18 years with myelofibrosis undergoing allo-HCT between 2008-2019 and analyzed the outcomes separately in the RIC and MAC cohorts based on the conditioning regimens used. Among 872 eligible patients, 493 underwent allo-HCT using RIC (Fludarabine/busulfan=166, Fludarabine/melphalan=327) and 379 using MAC (Fludarabine/busulfan=247, Busulfan/cyclophosphamide=132). In multivariable analysis with RIC, Fludarabine/melphalan was associated with inferior overall survival (HR 1.80, 95% CI 1.15-2.81, p=0.009), higher early non-relapse mortality (HR 1.81, 95% CI 1.12-2.91, p=0.01) and higher acute graft versus host disease (GVHD) (grade II-IV- HR 1.45, 95% CI 1.03-2.03, p=0.03; grade III-IV HR 2.21, 95%CI 1.28-3.83, p=0.004) compared to Fludarabine/busulfan. In the MAC setting, Busulfan/cyclophosphamide was associated with a higher acute GVHD (grade II-IV HR 2.33, 95% CI 1.67-3.25, p\u3c0.001; grade III-IV HR 2.31, 95% CI 1.52-3.52, p\u3c0.001) and inferior GVHD-free relapse-free survival (GRFS) (HR 1.94, 95% CI 1.49-2.53, p\u3c0.001) as compared to Fludarabine/busulfan. Hence, our study suggests that Fludarabine/busulfan is associated with better outcomes in RIC (better overall survival, lower early non-relapse mortality, lower acute GVHD) and MAC (lower acute GVHD and better GRFS) in myelofibrosis

Haploidentical vs. sibling, unrelated, or cord blood hematopoietic cell transplantation for acute lymphoblastic leukemia

The role of haploidentical hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) using posttransplant cyclophosphamide (PTCy) for acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) is being defined. We performed a retrospective, multivariable analysis comparing outcomes of HCT approaches by donor for adults with ALL in remission. The primary objective was to compare overall survival (OS) among haploidentical HCTs using PTCy and HLA-matched sibling donor (MSD), 8/8 HLAmatched unrelated donor (MUD), 7 /8 HLA-MUD, or umbilical cord blood (UCB) HCT. Comparing haploidentical HCT to MSD HCT, we found that OS, leukemia-free survival (LFS), nonrelapse mortality (NRM), relapse, and acute graft-versus-host disease (aGVHD) were not different but chronic GVHD (cGVHD) was higher in MSD HCT. Compared with MUD HCT, OS, LFS, and relapse were not different, but MUD HCT had increased NRM (hazard ratio [HR], 1.42; P = .02), grade 3 to 4 aGVHD (HR, 1.59; P = .005), and cGVHD. Compared with 7/8 UD HCT, LFS and relapse were not different, but 7/8 UD HCT had worse OS (HR, 1.38; P = .01) and increased NRM (HR, 2.13; P <_ .001), grade 3 to 4 aGVHD (HR, 1.86; P = .003), and cGVHD (HR, 1.72; P <_ .001). Compared with UCB HCT, late OS, late LFS, relapse, and cGVHD were not different but UCB HCT had worse early OS (<_18 months; HR, 1.93; P < .001), worse early LFS (HR, 1.40; P = .007) and increased incidences of NRM (HR, 2.08; P < .001) and grade 3 to 4 aGVHD (HR, 1.97; P < .001). Haploidentical HCT using PTCy showed no difference in survival but less GVHD compared with traditional MSD and MUD HCT and is the preferred alternative donor HCT option for adults with ALL in complete remission

Impact of Second Primary Malignancy Post–Autologous Transplantation on Outcomes of Multiple Myeloma: A CIBMTR Analysis

The overall survival (OS) has improved significantly in multiple myeloma (MM) over the last decade with the use of proteasome inhibitor and immunomodulatory drug-based combinations, followed by high-dose melphalan and autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (auto-HSCT) and subsequent maintenance therapies in eligible newly diagnosed patients. However, clinical trials using auto-HSCT followed by lenalidomide maintenance have shown an increased risk of second primary malignancies (SPM), including second hematological malignancies (SHM). We evaluated the impact of SPM and SHM on progression-free survival (PFS) and OS in patients with MM after auto-HSCT using CIBMTR registry data. Adult patients with MM who underwent first auto-HSCT in the United States with melphalan conditioning regimen from 2011 to 2018 and received maintenance therapy were included (n = 3948). At a median follow-up of 37 months, 175 (4%) patients developed SPM, including 112 (64%) solid, 36 (20%) myeloid, 24 (14%) SHM, not otherwise specified, and 3 (2%) lymphoid malignancies. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that SPM and SHM were associated with an inferior PFS (hazard ratio [HR] 2.62, P \u3c .001 and HR 5.01, P \u3c .001, respectively) and OS (HR 3.85, P \u3c .001 and HR 8.13, P \u3c .001, respectively). In patients who developed SPM and SHM, MM remained the most frequent primary cause of death (42% vs 30% and 53% vs 18%, respectively). We conclude the development of SPM and SHM leads to a poor survival in patients with MM and is an important survivorship challenge. Given the median survival for MM continues to improve, continued vigilance is needed to assess the risks of SPM and SHM with maintenance therapy post-auto-HSCT

The Mutational Landscape in Chronic Myelomonocytic Leukemia and Its Impact on Allogeneic Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation Outcomes: A Center for Blood and Marrow Transplantation Research (CIBMTR) Analysis

Somatic mutations are recognized as an important prognostic factor in chronic myelomonocytic leukemia (CMML). However, limited data are available regarding their impact on outcomes after allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT). In this registry analysis conducted in collaboration with the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplantation Registry database/sample repository, we identified 313 adult patients with CMML (median age: 64 years, range, 28- 77) who underwent allogeneic HCT during 2001-2017 and had an available biospecimen in the form of a peripheral blood sample obtained prior to the start of conditioning. In multivariate analysis, a CMML-specific prognostic scoring system (CPSS) score of intermediate-2 (HR=1.46, P=0.049) or high (HR=3.22, P=0.0004) correlated significantly with overall survival. When the molecularly informed CPSS-Mol prognostic model was applied, a high CPSS-Mol score (HR=2 P=0.0079) correlated significantly with overall survival. The most common somatic mutations were in ASXL1 (62%), TET2 (35%), KRAS/NRAS (33% combined), and SRSF2 (31%). DNMT3A and TP53 mutations were associated with decreased overall survival (HR=1.70 [95% CI: 1.11-2.60], P=0.0147 and HR=2.72 [95% CI: 1.37-5.39], P=0.0042, respectively) while DNMT3A, JAK2, and TP53 mutations were associated with decreased disease-free survival (HR=1.66 [95% CI: 1.11-2.49], P=0.0138, HR=1.79 [95% CI: 1.06-3.03], P=0.0293, and HR=2.94 [95% CI: 1.50-5.79], P=0.0018, respectively). The only mutation associated with increased relapse was TP53 (HR=2.94, P=0.0201). Nonetheless, the impact of TP53 mutations specifically should be interpreted cautiously given their rarity in CMML. We calculated the goodness of fit measured by Harrell\u27s C-index for both the CPSS and CPSS-Mol, which were very similar. In summary, via registry data we have determined the mutational landscape in patients with CMML who underwent allogeneic HCT, and demonstrated an association between CPSS-Mol and transplant outcomes although without major improvement in the risk prediction beyond that provided by the CPSS

Differential and persistent risk of excess mortality from Hurricane Maria in Puerto Rico: a time-series analysis.

© 2018 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license Background: Hurricane Maria struck Puerto Rico on Sept 20, 2017, devastating the island. Controversy surrounded the official death toll, fuelled by estimates of excess mortality from academics and investigative journalists. We analysed all-cause excess mortality following the storm. Methods: We did a time-series analysis in Puerto Rico from September, 2017, to February, 2018. Mortality data were from the Puerto Rico Vital Statistics System. We developed two counterfactual scenarios to establish the population at risk. In the first scenario, the island\u27s population was assumed to track the most recent census estimates. In the second scenario, we accounted for the large-scale population displacement. Expected mortality was projected for each scenario through over-dispersed log-linear regression from July, 2010, to August, 2017, taking into account changing distributions of age, sex, and municipal socioeconomic development, as well as both long-term and seasonal trends in mortality. Excess mortality was calculated as the difference between observed and expected deaths. Findings: Between September, 2017, and February, 2018, we estimated that 1191 excess deaths (95% CI 836–1544) occurred under the census scenario. Under the preferred displacement scenario, we estimated that 2975 excess deaths (95% CI 2658–3290) occurred during the same observation period. The ratio of observed to expected mortality was highest for individuals living in municipalities with the lowest socioeconomic development (1·43, 95% CI 1·39–1·46), and for men aged 65 years or older (1·33, 95% CI 1·30–1·37). Excess risk persisted in these groups throughout the observation period. Interpretation: Analysis of all-cause mortality with vital registration data allows for unbiased estimation of the impact of disasters associated with natural hazards and is useful for public health surveillance. It does not depend on certified cause of death, the basis for the official death toll in Puerto Rico. Although all sectors of Puerto Rican society were affected, recovery varied by municipal socioeconomic development and age groups. This finding calls for equitable disaster preparedness and response to protect vulnerable populations in disasters. Funding: Forensic Science Bureau, Department of Public Safety, and Milken Institute School of Public Health of The George Washington University (Washington, DC, USA)

Differential and persistent risk of excess mortality from Hurricane Maria in Puerto Rico: a time-series analysis

Summary: Background: Hurricane Maria struck Puerto Rico on Sept 20, 2017, devastating the island. Controversy surrounded the official death toll, fuelled by estimates of excess mortality from academics and investigative journalists. We analysed all-cause excess mortality following the storm. Methods: We did a time-series analysis in Puerto Rico from September, 2017, to February, 2018. Mortality data were from the Puerto Rico Vital Statistics System. We developed two counterfactual scenarios to establish the population at risk. In the first scenario, the island's population was assumed to track the most recent census estimates. In the second scenario, we accounted for the large-scale population displacement. Expected mortality was projected for each scenario through over-dispersed log-linear regression from July, 2010, to August, 2017, taking into account changing distributions of age, sex, and municipal socioeconomic development, as well as both long-term and seasonal trends in mortality. Excess mortality was calculated as the difference between observed and expected deaths. Findings: Between September, 2017, and February, 2018, we estimated that 1191 excess deaths (95% CI 836–1544) occurred under the census scenario. Under the preferred displacement scenario, we estimated that 2975 excess deaths (95% CI 2658–3290) occurred during the same observation period. The ratio of observed to expected mortality was highest for individuals living in municipalities with the lowest socioeconomic development (1·43, 95% CI 1·39–1·46), and for men aged 65 years or older (1·33, 95% CI 1·30–1·37). Excess risk persisted in these groups throughout the observation period. Interpretation: Analysis of all-cause mortality with vital registration data allows for unbiased estimation of the impact of disasters associated with natural hazards and is useful for public health surveillance. It does not depend on certified cause of death, the basis for the official death toll in Puerto Rico. Although all sectors of Puerto Rican society were affected, recovery varied by municipal socioeconomic development and age groups. This finding calls for equitable disaster preparedness and response to protect vulnerable populations in disasters. Funding: Forensic Science Bureau, Department of Public Safety, and Milken Institute School of Public Health of The George Washington University (Washington, DC, USA)

Impact of Induction Therapy with VRD versus VCD on Outcomes in Patients with Multiple Myeloma in Partial Response or Better Undergoing Upfront Autologous Stem Cell Transplantation

Bortezomib-based triplet regimens—specifically bortezomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (VRD) and bortezomib, cyclophosphamide, and dexamethasone (VCD)—are the 2 most common induction regimens used in transplantation-eligible patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM), with conflicting data on comparative efficacy and outcomes in this population. We compared long-term outcomes of patients with NDMM receiving VRD induction and those receiving VCD induction prior to autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT). Patients registered with the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Registry were included if they had undergone ASCT for MM within 6 months of diagnosis between January 2013 and December 2018, received VRD or VCD induction, and achieved a pretransplantation partial or better response. Of 1135 patients, 914 received VRD and 221 received VCD. The patients receiving VCD were more likely to have renal impairment and International Staging System (ISS) stage III disease and less likely to receive full-dose melphalan (200 mg/m2) conditioning (69% versus 80%; P < .001). Very good partial response rates pretransplantation, post-transplantation, and at best response were not significantly different in the 2 groups. Maintenance use was more common after VRD induction (88% versus 76%; P < .001), with lenalidomide the most common agent (80% versus 63%). Patients in the VRD group had a higher rate of renal recovery (74% versus 43%; P < .001), possibly due to a rapid reduction of light chains in the VRD group or improvement in renal function with VCD, which allowed a switch over to VRD, as patients who switched were classified in the VRD group. Patients receiving VRD had better survival on univariate analysis, with a median progression-free survival (PFS) from transplantation of 44.6 months versus 34.1 months (P = .004) and median 5-year overall survival (OS) of 79% versus 60% (P < .001). Multivariate analysis showed no significant survival difference, with a hazard ratio for VCD versus VRD induction of 1.22 (95% CI, 0.96 to 1.55; P = .10) for PFS and 1.33 (95% CI, 0.93 to 1.92, P = .12) for OS. Maintenance use was independently associated with superior PFS and OS, along with ISS stage, cytogenetics, and pretransplantation response (PFS only). In patients with MM undergoing upfront ASCT after VRD or VCD induction, no independent survival difference was seen based on the induction therapy received after adjusting for other prognostic factors. The use of maintenance treatment was uniformly associated with superior outcomes. © 2021 American Society for Transplantation and Cellular Therapy. Published by Elsevier Inc

Maintenance therapy after second autologous hematopoietic cell transplantation for multiple myeloma. A CIBMTR analysis

The role of maintenance therapy after high-dose chemotherapy and first autologous transplantation in multiple myeloma (MM) is well established. We explored the effect of maintenance therapy on outcomes after salvage second autologous hematopoietic cell transplant (AHCT2) using the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research registry. Outcomes of interest included non-relapse mortality (NRM), relapse/progression (REL), progression-free and overall survival (PFS, OS). Of 522 patients who underwent AHCT2 between 2010 and 2018, 342 received maintenance therapy and 180 did not. Maintenance regimens included lenalidomide (42%), pomalidomide (13%), and bortezomib (13%). Median follow up was 58 months in the maintenance group and 61.5 months in the no-maintenance group. Univariate analysis showed superior outcomes at 5 years in maintenance compared to the no-maintenance group: NRM 2 (0.7-3.9)% vs 9.9 (5.9-14.9)%, (p < 0.01), REL 70.2 (64.4-75.8)% vs 80.3 (73.6-86.3)% (p < 0.01), PFS 27.8 (22.4-33.5)% vs. 9.8 (5.5-15.2)% (p < 0.01), and OS 54 (47.5-60.5)% vs 30.9 (23.2-39.2)% (p < 0.01), respectively. Use of maintenance therapy retained its association with improved outcomes in multivariate analysis. There was no difference in second cancers in the two groups (p = 0.39). We conclude that maintenance after AHCT2 is associated with improved 5-year outcomes