Cargando…

非血缘脐血干细胞移植与同胞造血干细胞移植治疗MDS-EB和AML-MRC的对比观察

OBJECTIVE: To compare the clinical efficacy of umbilical cord blood transplantation (UCBT) and hematopoietic stem cell transplantation from HLA-matched sibling donors (MSD-HSCT) in the treatment of myelodysplastic syndrome-EB (MDS-EB) or acute myeloid leukemia with myelodysplasia-related changes (AM...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Editorial office of Chinese Journal of Hematology 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7343011/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31104440
http://dx.doi.org/10.3760/cma.j.issn.0253-2727.2019.04.006
_version_ 1783555667736395776
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: To compare the clinical efficacy of umbilical cord blood transplantation (UCBT) and hematopoietic stem cell transplantation from HLA-matched sibling donors (MSD-HSCT) in the treatment of myelodysplastic syndrome-EB (MDS-EB) or acute myeloid leukemia with myelodysplasia-related changes (AML-MRC). METHODS: A cohort of 64 patients (including 38 cases of MDS-EB and 26 cases of AML-MRC) who received UCBT/MSD-HSCT from February 2011 to December 2017 were retrospectively analyzed. RESULTS: ①Compared with MSD-HSCT group, UCBT group had a higher proportion of AML-MRC patients [52.8% (19/36) vs 25.0% (7/28), P=0.025], and a lower median age [13 (1.5-52) years vs 32 (10-57) years, P=0.001]. ②The engraftment of neutrophils both in UCBT and MSD-HSCT groups on +42 d was 100%, and the median engraftment time was 17.5 (11–31) d and 11.5 (10–20) d, respectively. The engraftment of platelet at +100 d in UCBT group was 91.4%, the median engraftment time was 40 (15–96) d; The engraftment of platelet at +100 d in MSD-HSCT group was 100%, and the median engraftment time was 15 (11–43) d. ③There were no statistically significant differences in terms of the cumulative incidence of Ⅱ-Ⅳ and Ⅲ/Ⅳ aGVHD of 100 d and transplant related mortality (TRM) of 180 d, relapse rate, overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS) between UCBT and MSD-HSCT groups (P>0.05). ④The 3-year cumulative incidence of chronic GVHD (cGVHD) and severe chronic GVHD in UCBT group were lower than of MSD-HSCT group [28.3% (95%CI 13.4%–45.3%) vs 67.9% (95%CI 46.1%–82.4%), P=0.002; 10.3% (95%CI 2.5%–24.8%) vs 50.0% (95%CI 30.0%–67.1%), respectively, P<0.001]. The cumulative 3-year incidence of GVHD-free and relapse-free survival (GRFS) of UCBT group was significantly higher than of MSD-HSCT group [55.0% (95%CI 36.0%–70.6%) vs 28.6% (95%CI 13.5%–45.6%), P=0.038]. CONCLUSION: UCBT could obtain better quality of life after transplantation than MSD-HSCT in treatment of MDS-EB/AML-MRC.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7343011
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Editorial office of Chinese Journal of Hematology
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-73430112020-07-16 非血缘脐血干细胞移植与同胞造血干细胞移植治疗MDS-EB和AML-MRC的对比观察 Zhonghua Xue Ye Xue Za Zhi 论著 OBJECTIVE: To compare the clinical efficacy of umbilical cord blood transplantation (UCBT) and hematopoietic stem cell transplantation from HLA-matched sibling donors (MSD-HSCT) in the treatment of myelodysplastic syndrome-EB (MDS-EB) or acute myeloid leukemia with myelodysplasia-related changes (AML-MRC). METHODS: A cohort of 64 patients (including 38 cases of MDS-EB and 26 cases of AML-MRC) who received UCBT/MSD-HSCT from February 2011 to December 2017 were retrospectively analyzed. RESULTS: ①Compared with MSD-HSCT group, UCBT group had a higher proportion of AML-MRC patients [52.8% (19/36) vs 25.0% (7/28), P=0.025], and a lower median age [13 (1.5-52) years vs 32 (10-57) years, P=0.001]. ②The engraftment of neutrophils both in UCBT and MSD-HSCT groups on +42 d was 100%, and the median engraftment time was 17.5 (11–31) d and 11.5 (10–20) d, respectively. The engraftment of platelet at +100 d in UCBT group was 91.4%, the median engraftment time was 40 (15–96) d; The engraftment of platelet at +100 d in MSD-HSCT group was 100%, and the median engraftment time was 15 (11–43) d. ③There were no statistically significant differences in terms of the cumulative incidence of Ⅱ-Ⅳ and Ⅲ/Ⅳ aGVHD of 100 d and transplant related mortality (TRM) of 180 d, relapse rate, overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS) between UCBT and MSD-HSCT groups (P>0.05). ④The 3-year cumulative incidence of chronic GVHD (cGVHD) and severe chronic GVHD in UCBT group were lower than of MSD-HSCT group [28.3% (95%CI 13.4%–45.3%) vs 67.9% (95%CI 46.1%–82.4%), P=0.002; 10.3% (95%CI 2.5%–24.8%) vs 50.0% (95%CI 30.0%–67.1%), respectively, P<0.001]. The cumulative 3-year incidence of GVHD-free and relapse-free survival (GRFS) of UCBT group was significantly higher than of MSD-HSCT group [55.0% (95%CI 36.0%–70.6%) vs 28.6% (95%CI 13.5%–45.6%), P=0.038]. CONCLUSION: UCBT could obtain better quality of life after transplantation than MSD-HSCT in treatment of MDS-EB/AML-MRC. Editorial office of Chinese Journal of Hematology 2019-04 /pmc/articles/PMC7343011/ /pubmed/31104440 http://dx.doi.org/10.3760/cma.j.issn.0253-2727.2019.04.006 Text en 2019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
非血缘脐血干细胞移植与同胞造血干细胞移植治疗MDS-EB和AML-MRC的对比观察
title 非血缘脐血干细胞移植与同胞造血干细胞移植治疗MDS-EB和AML-MRC的对比观察
title_full 非血缘脐血干细胞移植与同胞造血干细胞移植治疗MDS-EB和AML-MRC的对比观察
title_fullStr 非血缘脐血干细胞移植与同胞造血干细胞移植治疗MDS-EB和AML-MRC的对比观察
title_full_unstemmed 非血缘脐血干细胞移植与同胞造血干细胞移植治疗MDS-EB和AML-MRC的对比观察
title_short 非血缘脐血干细胞移植与同胞造血干细胞移植治疗MDS-EB和AML-MRC的对比观察
title_sort 非血缘脐血干细胞移植与同胞造血干细胞移植治疗mds-eb和aml-mrc的对比观察
topic 论著
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7343011/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31104440
http://dx.doi.org/10.3760/cma.j.issn.0253-2727.2019.04.006
work_keys_str_mv AT fēixuèyuánqíxuègànxìbāoyízhíyǔtóngbāozàoxuègànxìbāoyízhízhìliáomdsebhéamlmrcdeduìbǐguānchá
AT fēixuèyuánqíxuègànxìbāoyízhíyǔtóngbāozàoxuègànxìbāoyízhízhìliáomdsebhéamlmrcdeduìbǐguānchá
AT fēixuèyuánqíxuègànxìbāoyízhíyǔtóngbāozàoxuègànxìbāoyízhízhìliáomdsebhéamlmrcdeduìbǐguānchá
AT fēixuèyuánqíxuègànxìbāoyízhíyǔtóngbāozàoxuègànxìbāoyízhízhìliáomdsebhéamlmrcdeduìbǐguānchá
AT fēixuèyuánqíxuègànxìbāoyízhíyǔtóngbāozàoxuègànxìbāoyízhízhìliáomdsebhéamlmrcdeduìbǐguānchá
AT fēixuèyuánqíxuègànxìbāoyízhíyǔtóngbāozàoxuègànxìbāoyízhízhìliáomdsebhéamlmrcdeduìbǐguānchá
AT fēixuèyuánqíxuègànxìbāoyízhíyǔtóngbāozàoxuègànxìbāoyízhízhìliáomdsebhéamlmrcdeduìbǐguānchá
AT fēixuèyuánqíxuègànxìbāoyízhíyǔtóngbāozàoxuègànxìbāoyízhízhìliáomdsebhéamlmrcdeduìbǐguānchá
AT fēixuèyuánqíxuègànxìbāoyízhíyǔtóngbāozàoxuègànxìbāoyízhízhìliáomdsebhéamlmrcdeduìbǐguānchá