Cargando…

Pre‐transplantation cytoreduction does not benefit advanced myelodysplastic syndrome patients after myeloablative transplantation with grafts from family donors

BACKGROUND: The role of pre‐hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) cytoreduction with either induction chemotherapy (IC) or hypomethylating agents (HMAs) in treating advanced myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) remains debatable. We aimed to evaluate pre‐HSCT strategies by comparing the endpoints...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Sun, Yu‐Qian, Xu, Lan‐Ping, Liu, Kai‐Yan, Zhang, Xiao‐Hui, Yan, Chen‐Hua, Jin, Jian, Huang, Xiao‐Jun, Wang, Yu
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8045915/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33566460
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cac2.12140
_version_ 1783678750320230400
author Sun, Yu‐Qian
Xu, Lan‐Ping
Liu, Kai‐Yan
Zhang, Xiao‐Hui
Yan, Chen‐Hua
Jin, Jian
Huang, Xiao‐Jun
Wang, Yu
author_facet Sun, Yu‐Qian
Xu, Lan‐Ping
Liu, Kai‐Yan
Zhang, Xiao‐Hui
Yan, Chen‐Hua
Jin, Jian
Huang, Xiao‐Jun
Wang, Yu
author_sort Sun, Yu‐Qian
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The role of pre‐hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) cytoreduction with either induction chemotherapy (IC) or hypomethylating agents (HMAs) in treating advanced myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) remains debatable. We aimed to evaluate pre‐HSCT strategies by comparing the endpoints related to disease control between advanced MDS patients with pre‐HSCT cytoreduction and those with best supportive care. METHODS: We described 228 consecutive advanced MDS patients who received HSCT from a haploidentical donor (HID, n = 162) or matched related donor (MSD, n = 66) with uniform myeloablative conditioning regimens between January 2015 and December 2018. Of these 228 patients, 131 (57.5%) were treated exclusively with pre‐HSCT best supportive care (BSC), 49 (22.5%) were given HMA, and 48 (21.1%) received both IC and HMA. Propensity score‐matching analysis, multivariate analyses, and subgroup analyses were performed to elucidate the impact of pre‐HSCT strategies on transplant outcomes. RESULTS: The 3‐year relapse‐free survival (RFS) rates were 78.2% and 70.0% for the BSC and cytoreduction cohorts (P = 0.189) and were 78.2%, 66.7%, and 73.2% for the BSC, HMA, and HMA+IC groups, respectively (P = 0.269). A propensity score‐matching analysis confirmed that the 3‐year RFS rates were 81.9%, 87.5%, and 66.9% for BSC, cytoreduction complete remission (CR), and cytoreduction non‐CR groups, respectively (P = 0.051). Multivariate analyses demonstrated that pre‐HSCT cytoreduction, older patient age, monosomal karyotype, and interval between diagnosis and HSCT were poor prognostic factors for RFS. In the subgroup analyses, BSC was associated with longer RFS compared to cytoreduction among the younger patients, those with international prognostic scoring system intermediate‐2/high risk at diagnosis, and those with intermediate/poor cytogenetics. CONCLUSIONS: Different pre‐HSCT therapies did not yield discrepant post‐HSCT outcomes. No benefit in terms of post‐HSCT outcomes were correlated with pre‐HSCT cytoreduction in advanced MDS even for cytoreduction CR patients. Early referral to HSCT is essential for advanced MDS patients.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8045915
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-80459152021-04-16 Pre‐transplantation cytoreduction does not benefit advanced myelodysplastic syndrome patients after myeloablative transplantation with grafts from family donors Sun, Yu‐Qian Xu, Lan‐Ping Liu, Kai‐Yan Zhang, Xiao‐Hui Yan, Chen‐Hua Jin, Jian Huang, Xiao‐Jun Wang, Yu Cancer Commun (Lond) Original Articles BACKGROUND: The role of pre‐hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) cytoreduction with either induction chemotherapy (IC) or hypomethylating agents (HMAs) in treating advanced myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) remains debatable. We aimed to evaluate pre‐HSCT strategies by comparing the endpoints related to disease control between advanced MDS patients with pre‐HSCT cytoreduction and those with best supportive care. METHODS: We described 228 consecutive advanced MDS patients who received HSCT from a haploidentical donor (HID, n = 162) or matched related donor (MSD, n = 66) with uniform myeloablative conditioning regimens between January 2015 and December 2018. Of these 228 patients, 131 (57.5%) were treated exclusively with pre‐HSCT best supportive care (BSC), 49 (22.5%) were given HMA, and 48 (21.1%) received both IC and HMA. Propensity score‐matching analysis, multivariate analyses, and subgroup analyses were performed to elucidate the impact of pre‐HSCT strategies on transplant outcomes. RESULTS: The 3‐year relapse‐free survival (RFS) rates were 78.2% and 70.0% for the BSC and cytoreduction cohorts (P = 0.189) and were 78.2%, 66.7%, and 73.2% for the BSC, HMA, and HMA+IC groups, respectively (P = 0.269). A propensity score‐matching analysis confirmed that the 3‐year RFS rates were 81.9%, 87.5%, and 66.9% for BSC, cytoreduction complete remission (CR), and cytoreduction non‐CR groups, respectively (P = 0.051). Multivariate analyses demonstrated that pre‐HSCT cytoreduction, older patient age, monosomal karyotype, and interval between diagnosis and HSCT were poor prognostic factors for RFS. In the subgroup analyses, BSC was associated with longer RFS compared to cytoreduction among the younger patients, those with international prognostic scoring system intermediate‐2/high risk at diagnosis, and those with intermediate/poor cytogenetics. CONCLUSIONS: Different pre‐HSCT therapies did not yield discrepant post‐HSCT outcomes. No benefit in terms of post‐HSCT outcomes were correlated with pre‐HSCT cytoreduction in advanced MDS even for cytoreduction CR patients. Early referral to HSCT is essential for advanced MDS patients. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021-02-10 /pmc/articles/PMC8045915/ /pubmed/33566460 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cac2.12140 Text en © 2021 The Authors. Cancer Communications published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd. on behalf of Sun Yat‐sen University Cancer Center https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.
spellingShingle Original Articles
Sun, Yu‐Qian
Xu, Lan‐Ping
Liu, Kai‐Yan
Zhang, Xiao‐Hui
Yan, Chen‐Hua
Jin, Jian
Huang, Xiao‐Jun
Wang, Yu
Pre‐transplantation cytoreduction does not benefit advanced myelodysplastic syndrome patients after myeloablative transplantation with grafts from family donors
title Pre‐transplantation cytoreduction does not benefit advanced myelodysplastic syndrome patients after myeloablative transplantation with grafts from family donors
title_full Pre‐transplantation cytoreduction does not benefit advanced myelodysplastic syndrome patients after myeloablative transplantation with grafts from family donors
title_fullStr Pre‐transplantation cytoreduction does not benefit advanced myelodysplastic syndrome patients after myeloablative transplantation with grafts from family donors
title_full_unstemmed Pre‐transplantation cytoreduction does not benefit advanced myelodysplastic syndrome patients after myeloablative transplantation with grafts from family donors
title_short Pre‐transplantation cytoreduction does not benefit advanced myelodysplastic syndrome patients after myeloablative transplantation with grafts from family donors
title_sort pre‐transplantation cytoreduction does not benefit advanced myelodysplastic syndrome patients after myeloablative transplantation with grafts from family donors
topic Original Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8045915/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33566460
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cac2.12140
work_keys_str_mv AT sunyuqian pretransplantationcytoreductiondoesnotbenefitadvancedmyelodysplasticsyndromepatientsaftermyeloablativetransplantationwithgraftsfromfamilydonors
AT xulanping pretransplantationcytoreductiondoesnotbenefitadvancedmyelodysplasticsyndromepatientsaftermyeloablativetransplantationwithgraftsfromfamilydonors
AT liukaiyan pretransplantationcytoreductiondoesnotbenefitadvancedmyelodysplasticsyndromepatientsaftermyeloablativetransplantationwithgraftsfromfamilydonors
AT zhangxiaohui pretransplantationcytoreductiondoesnotbenefitadvancedmyelodysplasticsyndromepatientsaftermyeloablativetransplantationwithgraftsfromfamilydonors
AT yanchenhua pretransplantationcytoreductiondoesnotbenefitadvancedmyelodysplasticsyndromepatientsaftermyeloablativetransplantationwithgraftsfromfamilydonors
AT jinjian pretransplantationcytoreductiondoesnotbenefitadvancedmyelodysplasticsyndromepatientsaftermyeloablativetransplantationwithgraftsfromfamilydonors
AT huangxiaojun pretransplantationcytoreductiondoesnotbenefitadvancedmyelodysplasticsyndromepatientsaftermyeloablativetransplantationwithgraftsfromfamilydonors
AT wangyu pretransplantationcytoreductiondoesnotbenefitadvancedmyelodysplasticsyndromepatientsaftermyeloablativetransplantationwithgraftsfromfamilydonors