Long-term survival of patients with CLL after allogeneic transplantation: A report from the European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation

Even with the availability of targeted drugs, allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (allo-HCT) is the only therapy with curative potential for patients with CLL. Cure can be assessed by comparing long-term survival of patients to the matched general population. Using data from 2589 patients who received allo-HCT between 2000 and 2010, we used landmark analyses and methods from relative survival analysis to calculate excess mortality compared with an age-, sex- and calendar year-matched general population. Estimated event-free survival, overall survival and non-relapse mortality (NRM) 10 years after allo-HCT were 28% (95% confidence interval (CI), 25-31), 35% (95% CI, 32-38) and 40% (95% CI, 37-42), respectively. Patients who passed the 5-year landmark event-free survival (N=394) had a 79% probability (95% CI, 73-85) of surviving the subsequent 5 years without an event. Relapse and NRM contributed equally to treatment failure. Five-year mortality for 45- and 65-year-old reference patients who were event-free at the 5-year landmark was 8% and 47% compared with 3% and 14% in the matched general population, respectively. The prospect of long-term disease-free survival remains an argument to consider allo-HCT for young patients with high-risk CLL, and programs to understand and prevent late causes of failure for long-term survivors are warranted, especially for older patients

Second asymptomatic carotid surgery trial (ACST-2) : a randomised comparison of carotid artery stenting versus carotid endarterectomy

Background: Among asymptomatic patients with severe carotid artery stenosis but no recent stroke or transient cerebral ischaemia, either carotid artery stenting (CAS) or carotid endarterectomy (CEA) can restore patency and reduce long-term stroke risks. However, from recent national registry data, each option causes about 1% procedural risk of disabling stroke or death. Comparison of their long-term protective effects requires large-scale randomised evidence. Methods: ACST-2 is an international multicentre randomised trial of CAS versus CEA among asymptomatic patients with severe stenosis thought to require intervention, interpreted with all other relevant trials. Patients were eligible if they had severe unilateral or bilateral carotid artery stenosis and both doctor and patient agreed that a carotid procedure should be undertaken, but they were substantially uncertain which one to choose. Patients were randomly allocated to CAS or CEA and followed up at 1 month and then annually, for a mean 5 years. Procedural events were those within 30 days of the intervention. Intention-to-treat analyses are provided. Analyses including procedural hazards use tabular methods. Analyses and meta-analyses of non-procedural strokes use Kaplan-Meier and log-rank methods. The trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN21144362. Findings: Between Jan 15, 2008, and Dec 31, 2020, 3625 patients in 130 centres were randomly allocated, 1811 to CAS and 1814 to CEA, with good compliance, good medical therapy and a mean 5 years of follow-up. Overall, 1% had disabling stroke or death procedurally (15 allocated to CAS and 18 to CEA) and 2% had non-disabling procedural stroke (48 allocated to CAS and 29 to CEA). Kaplan-Meier estimates of 5-year non-procedural stroke were 2·5% in each group for fatal or disabling stroke, and 5·3% with CAS versus 4·5% with CEA for any stroke (rate ratio [RR] 1·16, 95% CI 0·86-1·57; p=0·33). Combining RRs for any non-procedural stroke in all CAS versus CEA trials, the RR was similar in symptomatic and asymptomatic patients (overall RR 1·11, 95% CI 0·91-1·32; p=0·21). Interpretation: Serious complications are similarly uncommon after competent CAS and CEA, and the long-term effects of these two carotid artery procedures on fatal or disabling stroke are comparable

Limited clinical relevance of imaging techniques in the follow-up of patients with advanced chronic lymphocytic leukemia: results of a meta-analysis

The clinical value of imaging is well established for the follow-up of many lymphoid malignancies but not for chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). A meta-analysis was performed with the dataset of 3 German CLL Study Group phase 3 trials (CLL4, CLL5, and CLL8) that included 1372 patients receiving first-line therapy for CLL. Response as well as progression during follow-up was reassessed according to the National Cancer Institute Working Group1996 criteria. A total of 481 events were counted as progressive disease during treatment or follow-up. Of these, 372 progressions (77%) were detected by clinical symptoms or blood counts. Computed tomography (CT) scans or ultrasound were relevant in 44 and 29 cases (9% and 6%), respectively. The decision for relapse treatment was determined by CT scan or ultrasound results in only 2 of 176 patients (1%). CT scan results had an impact on the prognosis of patients in complete remission only after the administration of conventional chemotherapy but not after chemoimmunotherapy. In conclusion, physical examination and blood count remain the methods of choice for staging and clinical follow-up of patients with CLL as recommended by the International Workshop on Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia 2008 guidelines. These trials are registered at http://www.isrctn.org as ISRCTN 75653261 and ISRCTN 36294212 and at http://www.clinicaltrials.gov as NCT00281918