Cargando…
自体与同胞全相合造血干细胞移植治疗PH(+)急性淋巴细胞白血病的疗效比较
OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy of autologous HSCT(auto-HSCT)with matched sibling donor(MSD)HSCT in Ph(+) ALL and provide a basis for the choice of transplantation method. METHODS: We retrospectively investigated the outcomes of 78 adult patients with Ph(+) ALL who underwent auto-HSCT(n=31)and MS...
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
---|---|
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Editorial office of Chinese Journal of Hematology
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7342073/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32536133 http://dx.doi.org/10.3760/cma.j.issn.0253-2727.2020.05.003 |
_version_ | 1783555359963611136 |
---|---|
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy of autologous HSCT(auto-HSCT)with matched sibling donor(MSD)HSCT in Ph(+) ALL and provide a basis for the choice of transplantation method. METHODS: We retrospectively investigated the outcomes of 78 adult patients with Ph(+) ALL who underwent auto-HSCT(n=31)and MSD-HSCT(n=47)in Institute of Hematology and Blood Diseases Hospital, CAMS & PUMC, from January 2008 to December 2017. The overall survival(OS)rate, leukemia-free survival(LFS)rate, cumulative incidence of relapse(CIR)rate, nonrelapse mortality(NRM)rate, and the impact of achievement of complete molecular response(CMR)within 3 months and sustaining CMR up to transplantation(s3CMR)on transplantation method were explored. RESULTS: The median time of neutrophil and platelet reconstitution in auto-HSCT and MSD-HSCT groups were 12(10–29)days vs 14(11–24)days(P=0.006)and 17.5(10–62)days vs 7(10–33)days(P=0.794), respectively. In the MSD-HSCT group, the incidence of Ⅱ–Ⅳ and Ⅲ–Ⅳ acute graft-versus-host disease(GVHD)was 27.7%(13/47)and 8.5%(4/47), respectively. The incidence of limited and extensive chronic GVHD was 17.0%(8/47)and 12.8%(6/47), respectively. The estimated CIR, NRM, LFS, and OS at 3 years were not significantly different between auto-HSCT and MSD-HSCT groups(P>0.05). For 44 patients who achieved s3CMR, 3-year OS[(84.0±8.6)% vs(78.0±8.7)%, P=0.612], LFS[(70.3±10.3)% vs(68.2±10.1)%, P=0.970], CIR[(24.9±10.0)% vs(14.4±8.0)%, P=0.286], and NRM[(4.7±4.7)% vs(17.4±8.1)%, P=0.209]of the auto-HSCT and MSD-HSCT groups were not significantly different. However, for 34 patients who did not reach s3CMR, 3-year cumulative relapse rate of patients in the auto-HSCT group was significantly higher than MSD-HSCT group[(80.0±14.7)% vs(39.6±10.9)%, P=0.057]. CONCLUSION: auto-HSCT with maintenance therapy after HSCT appears to be an attractive treatment option for patients with Ph(+) ALL especially for those with s3CMR maintained up to transplantation. For non-s3CMR patients, allogeneic transplantation may be more effective from lower relapse. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7342073 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | Editorial office of Chinese Journal of Hematology |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-73420732020-07-16 自体与同胞全相合造血干细胞移植治疗PH(+)急性淋巴细胞白血病的疗效比较 Zhonghua Xue Ye Xue Za Zhi 论著 OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy of autologous HSCT(auto-HSCT)with matched sibling donor(MSD)HSCT in Ph(+) ALL and provide a basis for the choice of transplantation method. METHODS: We retrospectively investigated the outcomes of 78 adult patients with Ph(+) ALL who underwent auto-HSCT(n=31)and MSD-HSCT(n=47)in Institute of Hematology and Blood Diseases Hospital, CAMS & PUMC, from January 2008 to December 2017. The overall survival(OS)rate, leukemia-free survival(LFS)rate, cumulative incidence of relapse(CIR)rate, nonrelapse mortality(NRM)rate, and the impact of achievement of complete molecular response(CMR)within 3 months and sustaining CMR up to transplantation(s3CMR)on transplantation method were explored. RESULTS: The median time of neutrophil and platelet reconstitution in auto-HSCT and MSD-HSCT groups were 12(10–29)days vs 14(11–24)days(P=0.006)and 17.5(10–62)days vs 7(10–33)days(P=0.794), respectively. In the MSD-HSCT group, the incidence of Ⅱ–Ⅳ and Ⅲ–Ⅳ acute graft-versus-host disease(GVHD)was 27.7%(13/47)and 8.5%(4/47), respectively. The incidence of limited and extensive chronic GVHD was 17.0%(8/47)and 12.8%(6/47), respectively. The estimated CIR, NRM, LFS, and OS at 3 years were not significantly different between auto-HSCT and MSD-HSCT groups(P>0.05). For 44 patients who achieved s3CMR, 3-year OS[(84.0±8.6)% vs(78.0±8.7)%, P=0.612], LFS[(70.3±10.3)% vs(68.2±10.1)%, P=0.970], CIR[(24.9±10.0)% vs(14.4±8.0)%, P=0.286], and NRM[(4.7±4.7)% vs(17.4±8.1)%, P=0.209]of the auto-HSCT and MSD-HSCT groups were not significantly different. However, for 34 patients who did not reach s3CMR, 3-year cumulative relapse rate of patients in the auto-HSCT group was significantly higher than MSD-HSCT group[(80.0±14.7)% vs(39.6±10.9)%, P=0.057]. CONCLUSION: auto-HSCT with maintenance therapy after HSCT appears to be an attractive treatment option for patients with Ph(+) ALL especially for those with s3CMR maintained up to transplantation. For non-s3CMR patients, allogeneic transplantation may be more effective from lower relapse. Editorial office of Chinese Journal of Hematology 2020-05 /pmc/articles/PMC7342073/ /pubmed/32536133 http://dx.doi.org/10.3760/cma.j.issn.0253-2727.2020.05.003 Text en 2020年版权归中华医学会所有 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/ This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License (CC-BY-NC). The Copyright own by Publisher. Without authorization, shall not reprint, except this publication article, shall not use this publication format design. Unless otherwise stated, all articles published in this journal do not represent the views of the Chinese Medical Association or the editorial board of this journal. |
spellingShingle | 论著 自体与同胞全相合造血干细胞移植治疗PH(+)急性淋巴细胞白血病的疗效比较 |
title | 自体与同胞全相合造血干细胞移植治疗PH(+)急性淋巴细胞白血病的疗效比较 |
title_full | 自体与同胞全相合造血干细胞移植治疗PH(+)急性淋巴细胞白血病的疗效比较 |
title_fullStr | 自体与同胞全相合造血干细胞移植治疗PH(+)急性淋巴细胞白血病的疗效比较 |
title_full_unstemmed | 自体与同胞全相合造血干细胞移植治疗PH(+)急性淋巴细胞白血病的疗效比较 |
title_short | 自体与同胞全相合造血干细胞移植治疗PH(+)急性淋巴细胞白血病的疗效比较 |
title_sort | 自体与同胞全相合造血干细胞移植治疗ph(+)急性淋巴细胞白血病的疗效比较 |
topic | 论著 |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7342073/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32536133 http://dx.doi.org/10.3760/cma.j.issn.0253-2727.2020.05.003 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT zìtǐyǔtóngbāoquánxiānghézàoxuègànxìbāoyízhízhìliáophjíxìnglínbāxìbāobáixuèbìngdeliáoxiàobǐjiào AT zìtǐyǔtóngbāoquánxiānghézàoxuègànxìbāoyízhízhìliáophjíxìnglínbāxìbāobáixuèbìngdeliáoxiàobǐjiào AT zìtǐyǔtóngbāoquánxiānghézàoxuègànxìbāoyízhízhìliáophjíxìnglínbāxìbāobáixuèbìngdeliáoxiàobǐjiào AT zìtǐyǔtóngbāoquánxiānghézàoxuègànxìbāoyízhízhìliáophjíxìnglínbāxìbāobáixuèbìngdeliáoxiàobǐjiào AT zìtǐyǔtóngbāoquánxiānghézàoxuègànxìbāoyízhízhìliáophjíxìnglínbāxìbāobáixuèbìngdeliáoxiàobǐjiào AT zìtǐyǔtóngbāoquánxiānghézàoxuègànxìbāoyízhízhìliáophjíxìnglínbāxìbāobáixuèbìngdeliáoxiàobǐjiào AT zìtǐyǔtóngbāoquánxiānghézàoxuègànxìbāoyízhízhìliáophjíxìnglínbāxìbāobáixuèbìngdeliáoxiàobǐjiào AT zìtǐyǔtóngbāoquánxiānghézàoxuègànxìbāoyízhízhìliáophjíxìnglínbāxìbāobáixuèbìngdeliáoxiàobǐjiào AT zìtǐyǔtóngbāoquánxiānghézàoxuègànxìbāoyízhízhìliáophjíxìnglínbāxìbāobáixuèbìngdeliáoxiàobǐjiào AT zìtǐyǔtóngbāoquánxiānghézàoxuègànxìbāoyízhízhìliáophjíxìnglínbāxìbāobáixuèbìngdeliáoxiàobǐjiào AT zìtǐyǔtóngbāoquánxiānghézàoxuègànxìbāoyízhízhìliáophjíxìnglínbāxìbāobáixuèbìngdeliáoxiàobǐjiào AT zìtǐyǔtóngbāoquánxiānghézàoxuègànxìbāoyízhízhìliáophjíxìnglínbāxìbāobáixuèbìngdeliáoxiàobǐjiào AT zìtǐyǔtóngbāoquánxiānghézàoxuègànxìbāoyízhízhìliáophjíxìnglínbāxìbāobáixuèbìngdeliáoxiàobǐjiào |