The rare myelomas, immunoglobulin (Ig)D, IgM, and non-secretory, have been associated with poorer outcomes following treatment than the common myelomas (IgG, IgA, and light-chain only). We show... Show moreThe rare myelomas, immunoglobulin (Ig)D, IgM, and non-secretory, have been associated with poorer outcomes following treatment than the common myelomas (IgG, IgA, and light-chain only). We show that even with "novel" therapies, augmented with autologous transplantation, this remains true for IgD myeloma. In contrast, IgM and non-secretory myelomas have a prognosis similar to the usual myelomas.Background: The Collaboration to Collect Autologous Transplant Outcomes in Lymphoma and Myeloma (CALM) study has provided an opportunity to evaluate the real-world outcomes of patients with myeloma. The aim of this study was to compare the outcome according to the different subtypes of myeloma using CALM data. Patients: This study compared overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and complete remission (CR) and the impact of novel versus non-novel drug containing induction regimens prior to autologous hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) of 2802 patients with "usual" and "rare" myelomas. Results: Our data suggest that IgM and non-secretory myeloma have superior PFS and OS compared with IgD myeloma and outcomes comparable to those for usual myeloma. Patients who received novel agent induction had higher rates of CR prior to transplant. Non-novel induction regimens were associated with inferior PFS but no difference in OS. Although not the primary focus of this study, we show that poor mobilization status is associated with reduced PFS and OS, but these differences disappear in multivariate analysis suggesting that poor mobilization status is a surrogate for other indicators of poor prognosis. Conclusion: We confirm that IgD myeloma is associated with the worst prognosis and inferior outcomes compared with the other isotypes. (C) 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. Show less
Background Allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HSCT) is a potentially curative treatment option in advanced-stage mycosis fungoides (MF) and Sezary syndrome (SS). This study... Show moreBackground Allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HSCT) is a potentially curative treatment option in advanced-stage mycosis fungoides (MF) and Sezary syndrome (SS). This study presents an updated analysis of the initial experience of the Lymphoma Working Party of the European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation (EBMT) describing the outcomes after allo-HSCT for MF and SS, with special emphasis on the impact of the use of unrelated donors (URD).Methods and patients Eligible for this study were patients with advanced-stage MF or SS who underwent a first allo-HSCT from matched HLA-identical related or URD between January/1997 and December/2011. Sixty patients have been previously reported.Results 113 patients were included [77 MF (68%)]; 61 (54%) were in complete or partial remission, 86 (76%) received reduced-intensity protocols and 44 (39%) an URD allo-HSCT. With a median follow up for surviving patients of 73 months, allo-HSCT resulted in an estimated overall survival (OS) of 38% at 5 years, and a progression-free survival (PFS) of 26% at 5 years. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that advanced-phase disease (complete remission/partial remission >3, primary refractory or relapse/progression in patients that had received 3 or more lines of systemic treatment prior to transplant or the number of treatment lines was not known), a short interval between diagnosis and transplant (<18 months) were independent adverse prognostic factors for PFS; advanced-phase disease and the use of URDs were independent adverse prognostic factors for OS.Conclusions This extended series supports that allo-HSCT is able to effectively rescue over one third of the population of patients with advanced-stage MF/SS. High relapse rate is still the major cause of failure and needs to be improved with better strategies before and after transplant. The negative impact of URD is a matter of concern and needs to be further elucidated in future studies. Show less
Schetelig, J.; Chevallier, P.; Gelder, M. van; Hoek, J.; Hermine, O.; Chakraverty, R.; ... ; Dreger, P. 2020
No studies have been reported so far on bridging treatment with idelalisib for patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) prior to allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (alloHCT). To... Show moreNo studies have been reported so far on bridging treatment with idelalisib for patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) prior to allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (alloHCT). To study potential carry-over effects of idelalisib and to assess the impact of pathway-inhibitor (PI) failure we performed a retrospective EBMT registry-based study. Patients with CLL who had a history of idelalisib treatment and received a first alloHCT between 2015 and 2017 were eligible. Data on 72 patients (median age 58 years) were analyzed. Forty percent of patients hadTP53(mut/del)CLL and 64% had failed on at least one PI. No primary graft failure occurred. Cumulative incidences of acute GVHD degrees II-IV and chronic GVHD were 51% and 39%, respectively. Estimates for 2-year overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and cumulative incidences of relapse/progression (CIR) and non-relapse mortality NRM were 59%, 44%, 25%, and 31%. In univariate analysis, drug sensitivity was a strong risk factor. For patients who had failed neither PI treatment nor chemoimmunotherapy (CIT) the corresponding 2-year estimates were 73%, 65%, 15%, and 20%, respectively. In conclusion, idelalisib may be considered as an option for bridging therapy prior to alloHCT. Owing to the high risk for acute GVHD intensified clinical monitoring is warranted. Show less
