Allogreffes de deux unités de sang placentaire (faisabilité, efficacité et nouvelles perspectives : étude rétrospective du registre de la Société Française de Greffe de Moelle et de Thérapie Cellulaire (SFGM-TC))

LYON1-BU Santé (693882101) / SudocSudocFranceF

Potential anti-leukemic activity of iron chelation after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation in patients with acute myeloid leukemia

International audienc

Cidofovir in the Treatment of BK Virus-Associated Hemorrhagic Cystitis after Allogeneic Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation

International audienceAfter allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT), BK virus-associated hemorrhagic cystitis (BKV-HC) is a common complication. Although supportive measures have been the standard of care for many years, several studies suggested the efficacy of cidofovir. The aim of this study was to assess the safety profile and efficacy of cidofovir. A retrospective study was conducted on all patients treated with cidofovir in our HSCT unit between March 2011 and May 2013. Data for efficacy (partial [PR] or complete response [CR]), prescription (dose, frequency, number of doses, and administration route), and toxicity were collected from published reports and medical files. Renal toxicity was evaluated using creatinine clearance calculated with the Cockcroft and Gault formula. A parallel literature search using PubMed (last search, May 2015) was performed. From March 2011 to June 2013, 27 of 181 patients undergoing allogeneic HSCT in our department received cidofovir for BKV-HC: 24 (88.9%) intravenously, 1 intravesically, and 2 via both routes. Mean dose was 5 mg/kg per administration, for a median of 4 injections (range, 1 to 11), from twice a week to once every 2 weeks. CR was achieved in 22 patients (81.5%), PR in 2, and no response in 2 patients. Eight patients presented renal failure (29.6%): 6 moderate (creatinine clearance \\textless 60 mL/min) and 2 severe (creatinine clearance \\textless 30 mLmin). Mean decrease in creatinine clearance after cidofovir was 27% (35 mL/min; range, 2 to 159). In 3 cases renal insufficiency and hematologic toxicity led to discontinuation of treatment or switch to intravesical instillation. For 3 patients cidofovir dose was reduced because of nephrotoxicity. Thirteen studies have reported on the use of cidofovir for BKV-HC (204 patients) since 2005. Intravenous cidofovir was used for 91.3% of patients, with doses ranging from .5 to 5 mg/kg. The main toxicity reported was renal failure (9% to 50% in 9 studies). Between 60% and 100% of CRs were observed independently of cidofovir dose or administration route. Cidofovir is an effective therapy for BKV-HC but requires very precise renal function management to avoid toxicity. Cidofovir treatment modalities (high dose, intravesical instillation, or low dose

Clinical outcome of therapy‐related acute myeloid leukemia patients. Real‐life experience in a University Hospital and a Cancer Center in France

Abstract Background t‐AML occurs after a primary malignancy treatment and retains a poor prognosis. Aims To determine the impact of primary malignancies, therapeutic strategies, and prognostic factors on clinical outcomes of t‐AML. Results A total of 112 adult patients were included in this study. Fifty‐Five patients received intensive chemotherapy (IC), 33 non‐IC, and 24 best supportive care. At t‐AML diagnosis, 42% and 44% of patients presented an unfavorable karyotype and unfavorable 2010 ELN risk profile, respectively. Among treated patients (n = 88), 43 (49%) achieved complete remission: four out of 33 (12%) and 39 out of 55 (71%) in non‐IC and IC groups, respectively. With a median follow‐up of 5.5 months, the median overall survival (OS) and disease‐free survival (DFS) for the whole population were 9 months and 6.3 months, respectively, and for the 88 treated patients 13.5 months and 8.2 months, respectively. Univariate analysis on OS and DFS showed a significant impact of high white blood cells (WBC) and blast counts at diagnosis, unfavorable karyotype and ELN classification. Multivariate analysis showed a negative impact of WBC count at diagnosis and a positive impact of chemotherapy on OS and DFS in the whole population. It also showed a negative impact of previous auto‐HCT and high WBC count on OS and DFS and of IC on OS in treated patients which disappeared when we considered only confounding variables (age, previous cancers, marrow blasts, and 2010 ELN classification). In a pair‐matched analysis comparing IC treated t‐AML with de novo AML, there was no difference of OS and DFS between the two populations. Conclusion We showed, in this study that t‐AML patients with unfavorable features represented almost half of the population. Best outcomes obtained in patients receiving IC must be balanced by known confounding variables and should be improved by using new innovative agents and therapeutic strategies

Treosulfan compared with reduced-intensity busulfan improves allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation outcomes of older acute myeloid leukemia and myelodysplastic syndrome patients: Final analysis of a prospective randomized trial

The phase III study was designed to compare event-free survival (EFS) after treosulfan-based conditioning with a widely applied reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) busulfan regimen in older or comorbid patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) or myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) undergoing allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT). A previously reported confirmatory interim analysis of the randomized clinical study including 476 patients demonstrated statistically significant noninferiority for treosulfan with clinically meaningful improvement in EFS. Here, the final study results and pre-specified subgroup analyses of all 570 randomized patients with completed longer-term follow-up are presented. Patients presenting HCT-specific comorbidity index >2 or aged ≥50 years were randomly assigned (1:1) to intravenous (IV) fludarabine with either treosulfan (30 g/m2 IV) or busulfan (6.4 mg/kg IV) after stratification by disease risk group, donor type, and participating institution. The primary endpoint was EFS with disease recurrence, graft failure, or death from any cause as events. EFS of patients (median age 60 years) was superior after treosulfan compared to RIC busulfan: 36-months-EFS rate 59.5% (95% CI, 52.2-66.1) vs. 49.7% (95% CI, 43.3-55.7) with a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.64 (95% CI, 0.49-0.84), p = 0.0006. Likewise, overall survival (OS) with treosulfan was superior compared to busulfan: 36-month-OS rate 66.8% vs. 56.3%; HR 0.64 (95% CI, 0.48-0.87), p = 0.0037. Post hoc analyses revealed that these differences were consistent with the confirmatory interim analysis, and thereby the treosulfan regimen appears particularly suitable for older AML and MDS patients

Treosulfan or busulfan plus fludarabine as conditioning treatment before allogeneic haemopoietic stem cell transplantation for older patients with acute myeloid leukaemia or myelodysplastic syndrome (MC-FludT.14/L): a randomised, non-inferiority, phase 3 trial

Background Further improvement of preparative regimens before allogeneic haemopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) is an unmet medical need for the growing number of older or comorbid patients with acute myeloid leukaemia or myelodysplastic syndrome. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of conditioning with treosulfan plus fludarabine compared with reduced-intensity busulfan plus fludarabine in this population. Methods We did an open-label, randomised, non-inferiority, phase 3 trial in 31 transplantation centres in France, Germany, Hungary, Italy, and Poland. Eligible patients were 18-70 years, had acute myeloid leukaemia in first or consecutive complete haematological remission (blast counts = 50 years), an HSCT-specific comorbidity index of more than 2, or both. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either intravenous 10 g/m(2) treosulfan daily applied as a 2-h infusion for 3 days (days -4 to -2) or 0.8 mg/kg busulfan applied as a 2-h infusion at 6-h intervals on days -4 and -3. Both groups received 30 mg/m(2) intravenous fludarabine daily for 5 days (days -6 to -2). The primary outcome was event-free survival 2 years after HSCT. The non-inferiority margin was a hazard ratio (HR) of 1.3. Efficacy was assessed in all patients who received treatment and completed transplantation, and safety in all patients who received treatment. The study is registered with EudraCT (2008-002356-18) and ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT00822393). Findings Between June 13, 2013, and May 3, 2016,476 patients were enrolled (240 in the busulfan group received treatment and transplantation, and in the treosulfan group 221 received treatment and 220 transplanation). At the second preplanned interim analysis (Nov 9, 2016), the primary endpoint was met and trial was stopped. Here we present the final confirmatory analysis (data cutoff May 31, 2017). Median follow-up was 15.4 months (IQR 8.8-23-6) for patients treated with treosulfan and 17.4 months (6.3-23.4) for those treated with busulfan. 2-year event-free survival was 64.0% (95% CI 56.0-70.9) in the treosulfan group and 50.4% (42.8-57.5) in the busulfan group (HR 0.65 [95% CI 0.47-0.90]; p<0 =0001 for non-inferiority, p=0.0051 for superiority). The most frequently reported grade 3 or higher adverse events were abnormal blood chemistry results (33 [15%] of 221 patients in the treosulfan group vs 35 115%1 of 240 patients in the busulfan group) and gastrointestinal disorders (24 [11%] patients vs 39[16%] patients). Serious adverse events were reported for 18 (8%) patients in the treosulfan group and 17 (7%) patients in the busulfan group. Causes of deaths were generally transplantation-related. Interpretation Treosulfan was non-inferior to busulfan when used in combination with fludarabine as a conditioning regimen for allogeneic HSCT for older or comorbid patients with acute myeloid leukaemia or myelodysplastic syndrome. The improved outcomes in patients treated with the treosulfan-fludarabine regimen suggest its potential to become a standard preparative regimen in this population. Copyright (C) 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved