Dataset Information

Impact of Conditioning Intensity and Genomics on Relapse After Allogeneic Transplantation for Patients With Myelodysplastic Syndrome.

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

Patients with myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) are at risk of relapse after allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation. The utility of ultra-deep genomic testing to predict and the impact of conditioning intensity to prevent MDS relapse are unknown.

Methods

Targeted error-corrected DNA sequencing was performed on preconditioning blood samples from patients with MDS (n = 48) from the Blood and Marrow Transplant Clinical Trials Network 0901 phase III randomized clinical trial, which compared outcomes by allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation conditioning intensity in adult patients with < 5% marrow myeloblasts and no leukemic myeloblasts in blood on morphological analysis at the time of pretransplant assessment. Clinical end points (53-month median follow-up) included transplant-related mortality (TRM), relapse, relapse-free survival (RFS), and overall survival (OS). Of the 48 patients examined, 14 experienced TRM, 23 are relapse-free, and 11 relapsed, of which 7 died.

Results

Using a previously described set of 10 gene regions, 42% of patients (n = 20) had mutations detectable before random assignment to reduced intensity conditioning (RIC) or myeloablative conditioning (MAC). Testing positive was associated with increased rates of relapse (3-year relapse, 40% v 11%; P = .022) and decreased OS (3-year OS, 55% v 79%, P = .045). In those testing positive, relapse rates were higher (3-year relapse, 75% v 17%; P = .003) and RFS was lower (3-year RFS, 13% v 49%; P = .003) in RIC versus MAC arms. Testing additional genes, including those associated with MDS, did not improve prognostication.

Conclusion

This study provides evidence that targeted DNA sequencing in patients with MDS before transplant can identify those with highest post-transplant relapse rates. In those testing positive, random assignment to MAC lowered but did not eliminate relapse risk.

SUBMITTER: Dillon LW

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8140814 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) regimens are frequently used for allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (allo-HCT) in patients with diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL). However, the RIC regimen with the best risk/benefit profile for allo-HCT in DLBCL is not known. This is particularly important because patients with DLBCL undergoing allo-HCT in the future would be enriched for those whose lymphoma has failed chimeric antigen receptor T cell (CAR-T) therapy or other novel immunotherapies, with potentially more advanced disease and suboptimal performance scores. Using the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research (CIBMTR) database, we report the outcomes of the 3 most commonly used allo-HCT RIC regimens in patients with DLBCL. Our analysis included a total of 562 adult DLBCL patients in the CIBMTR registry undergoing allo-HCT using matched related or unrelated donors, between 2008 and 2016. Patients received 1 of 3 RIC regimens: fludarabine/i.v. busulfan ~6.4 mg/kg (Flu/Bu), fludarabine/melphalan 140 mg/m2 (Flu/Mel140), or BCNU/etoposide/cytarabine/melphalan (BEAM). Accordingly, the study group was divided into 3 groups: Flu/Bu (n = 151), Flu/Mel140 (n = 296), and BEAM (n = 115). Relative to Flu/Bu, the Flu/Mel140 (hazard ratio [HR], 2.33; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.42 to 3.82; P = .001) and BEAM (HR, 2.54; 95% CI, 1.34 to 4.80; P = .004) regimens were associated with a risk of higher nonrelapse mortality (NRM). Although the risk of relapse with Flu/Mel140 was lower than that with Flu/Bu (HR, .70; 95% CI, .52 to .95; P = .02), this did not translate to improved progression-free survival (HR, 1.04) or overall survival (HR, 1.30). There was a significantly higher risk of grade III-IV acute graft-versus-host disease with BEAM compared with Flu/Bu (HR, 2.19; 95% CI, 1.10 to 4.35; P = .03). In the chemosensitive subset, multivariate analysis showed a significantly higher mortality risk with Flu/Mel140 (HR, 1.48; 95% CI, 1.07 to 2.04; P = .02) relative to Flu/Bu conditioning. In the largest analysis comparing the impact of various RIC regimens on the survival of DLBCL patients undergoing allo-HCT, our results suggest that Flu/Bu is a better RIC choice in less fit or heavily pretreated patients due to lowest NRM risk.