Transplant

BOSTON – A short course of direct-acting antiviral therapy combined with ezetimibe prevented or rapidly cured hepatitis C virus infection in transplant recipients receiving organs from infected donors, results of a recent study show.

The regimen, given right before transplantation and for 7 days afterward, reduced the cost of direct-acting antiviral (DAA) therapy and allowed patients to complete hepatitis C virus (HCV) therapy before hospital discharge, according to authors of the study, which was presented at the annual meeting of the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases.

If confirmed in subsequent studies, this regimen could become the standard of care for donor-positive, recipient-negative transplantation, said lead study author Jordan J. Feld, MD, R. Phelan Chair in translational liver disease research at the University of Toronto and research director at the Toronto Centre for Liver Disease.

“Transplant recipients are understandably nervous about accepting organs from people with HCV infection,” said Dr. Feld in a press release. “This very short therapy allows them to leave hospital free of HCV, which is a huge benefit. Not only is it cheaper and likely safer, but the patients really prefer not having to worry about HCV with all of the other challenges after a transplant.”

Results of this study come at a time when the proportion of overdose death organ donors is on the rise, from just 1% in 2000 to 15% in 2016, according to Dr. Feld. Overdose deaths account for the largest percentage of HCV-infected donors, most of whom are young and often otherwise healthy, he added.

Recipients of HCV-infected organs can be cured after transplant as a number of studies have previously shown. However, preventing transmission would be better than cure, Dr. Feld said, in part because of issues with drug-drug interactions, potential for relapse, and issues with procuring the drugs after transplant.

Accordingly, Dr. Feld and colleagues sought to evaluate “preemptive” treatment with DAA therapy combined with ezetimibe, which they said has been shown to inhibit HCV entry blockers. The recipients, who were listed for heart, lung, kidney, or kidney-pancreas transplant, were given glecaprevir/pibrentasvir plus ezetimibe starting 6-12 hours prior to transplantation, and then daily for 7 days.

The median age was 36 years for the 16 donors reported, and 61 years for the 25 recipients. Most recipients (12 patients) had a lung transplant, while 8 had a heart transplant, 4 had a kidney transplant, and 1 had a kidney-pancreas transplant.

There were no virologic failures, according to the investigators, with sustained virologic response (SVR) after 6 weeks in 7 patients, and SVR after 12 weeks in the remaining 18. Three recipients did have detectable HCV RNA, though all cleared and had SVR at 6 weeks in one case, and SVR at 12 weeks in the other two, according to the investigators’ report.

Of 22 serious adverse events noted in the study, 1 was considered treatment related, according to the report, and there were 2 deaths among lung transplant patients, caused by sepsis in 1 case to sepsis and subarachnoid hemorrhage in another.

It’s not clear whether ezetimibe is needed in this short-duration regimen, but in any case, it is well tolerated and inexpensive, and so there is “minimal downside” to include it, Dr. Feld and coinvestigators wrote in their report.

Dr. Feld reported disclosures related to Abbvie, Abbott, Enanta Pharmaceuticals, Gilead, Janssen, Merck, and Roche.

SOURCE: Feld JJ et al. The Liver Meeting 2019, Abstract 38.

BOSTON – A short course of direct-acting antiviral therapy combined with ezetimibe prevented or rapidly cured hepatitis C virus infection in transplant recipients receiving organs from infected donors, results of a recent study show.

The regimen, given right before transplantation and for 7 days afterward, reduced the cost of direct-acting antiviral (DAA) therapy and allowed patients to complete hepatitis C virus (HCV) therapy before hospital discharge, according to authors of the study, which was presented at the annual meeting of the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases.

If confirmed in subsequent studies, this regimen could become the standard of care for donor-positive, recipient-negative transplantation, said lead study author Jordan J. Feld, MD, R. Phelan Chair in translational liver disease research at the University of Toronto and research director at the Toronto Centre for Liver Disease.

“Transplant recipients are understandably nervous about accepting organs from people with HCV infection,” said Dr. Feld in a press release. “This very short therapy allows them to leave hospital free of HCV, which is a huge benefit. Not only is it cheaper and likely safer, but the patients really prefer not having to worry about HCV with all of the other challenges after a transplant.”

Results of this study come at a time when the proportion of overdose death organ donors is on the rise, from just 1% in 2000 to 15% in 2016, according to Dr. Feld. Overdose deaths account for the largest percentage of HCV-infected donors, most of whom are young and often otherwise healthy, he added.

Recipients of HCV-infected organs can be cured after transplant as a number of studies have previously shown. However, preventing transmission would be better than cure, Dr. Feld said, in part because of issues with drug-drug interactions, potential for relapse, and issues with procuring the drugs after transplant.

Accordingly, Dr. Feld and colleagues sought to evaluate “preemptive” treatment with DAA therapy combined with ezetimibe, which they said has been shown to inhibit HCV entry blockers. The recipients, who were listed for heart, lung, kidney, or kidney-pancreas transplant, were given glecaprevir/pibrentasvir plus ezetimibe starting 6-12 hours prior to transplantation, and then daily for 7 days.

The median age was 36 years for the 16 donors reported, and 61 years for the 25 recipients. Most recipients (12 patients) had a lung transplant, while 8 had a heart transplant, 4 had a kidney transplant, and 1 had a kidney-pancreas transplant.

There were no virologic failures, according to the investigators, with sustained virologic response (SVR) after 6 weeks in 7 patients, and SVR after 12 weeks in the remaining 18. Three recipients did have detectable HCV RNA, though all cleared and had SVR at 6 weeks in one case, and SVR at 12 weeks in the other two, according to the investigators’ report.

Of 22 serious adverse events noted in the study, 1 was considered treatment related, according to the report, and there were 2 deaths among lung transplant patients, caused by sepsis in 1 case to sepsis and subarachnoid hemorrhage in another.

It’s not clear whether ezetimibe is needed in this short-duration regimen, but in any case, it is well tolerated and inexpensive, and so there is “minimal downside” to include it, Dr. Feld and coinvestigators wrote in their report.

Dr. Feld reported disclosures related to Abbvie, Abbott, Enanta Pharmaceuticals, Gilead, Janssen, Merck, and Roche.

SOURCE: Feld JJ et al. The Liver Meeting 2019, Abstract 38.

BOSTON – A short course of direct-acting antiviral therapy combined with ezetimibe prevented or rapidly cured hepatitis C virus infection in transplant recipients receiving organs from infected donors, results of a recent study show.

The regimen, given right before transplantation and for 7 days afterward, reduced the cost of direct-acting antiviral (DAA) therapy and allowed patients to complete hepatitis C virus (HCV) therapy before hospital discharge, according to authors of the study, which was presented at the annual meeting of the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases.

If confirmed in subsequent studies, this regimen could become the standard of care for donor-positive, recipient-negative transplantation, said lead study author Jordan J. Feld, MD, R. Phelan Chair in translational liver disease research at the University of Toronto and research director at the Toronto Centre for Liver Disease.

“Transplant recipients are understandably nervous about accepting organs from people with HCV infection,” said Dr. Feld in a press release. “This very short therapy allows them to leave hospital free of HCV, which is a huge benefit. Not only is it cheaper and likely safer, but the patients really prefer not having to worry about HCV with all of the other challenges after a transplant.”

Results of this study come at a time when the proportion of overdose death organ donors is on the rise, from just 1% in 2000 to 15% in 2016, according to Dr. Feld. Overdose deaths account for the largest percentage of HCV-infected donors, most of whom are young and often otherwise healthy, he added.

Recipients of HCV-infected organs can be cured after transplant as a number of studies have previously shown. However, preventing transmission would be better than cure, Dr. Feld said, in part because of issues with drug-drug interactions, potential for relapse, and issues with procuring the drugs after transplant.

Accordingly, Dr. Feld and colleagues sought to evaluate “preemptive” treatment with DAA therapy combined with ezetimibe, which they said has been shown to inhibit HCV entry blockers. The recipients, who were listed for heart, lung, kidney, or kidney-pancreas transplant, were given glecaprevir/pibrentasvir plus ezetimibe starting 6-12 hours prior to transplantation, and then daily for 7 days.

The median age was 36 years for the 16 donors reported, and 61 years for the 25 recipients. Most recipients (12 patients) had a lung transplant, while 8 had a heart transplant, 4 had a kidney transplant, and 1 had a kidney-pancreas transplant.

There were no virologic failures, according to the investigators, with sustained virologic response (SVR) after 6 weeks in 7 patients, and SVR after 12 weeks in the remaining 18. Three recipients did have detectable HCV RNA, though all cleared and had SVR at 6 weeks in one case, and SVR at 12 weeks in the other two, according to the investigators’ report.

Of 22 serious adverse events noted in the study, 1 was considered treatment related, according to the report, and there were 2 deaths among lung transplant patients, caused by sepsis in 1 case to sepsis and subarachnoid hemorrhage in another.

It’s not clear whether ezetimibe is needed in this short-duration regimen, but in any case, it is well tolerated and inexpensive, and so there is “minimal downside” to include it, Dr. Feld and coinvestigators wrote in their report.

Dr. Feld reported disclosures related to Abbvie, Abbott, Enanta Pharmaceuticals, Gilead, Janssen, Merck, and Roche.

SOURCE: Feld JJ et al. The Liver Meeting 2019, Abstract 38.

Recommendations for the diagnosis and management of acute and chronic graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) are the central focus of the first National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guideline on hematopoietic cell transplantation.

The guideline presents detailed recommendations for the evaluation of hematopoietic cell transplant (HCT) recipients, and an extensive section on the diagnosis and workup of GVHD, including information on staging and grading of acute GVHD, grading of chronic GVHD, treatment response criteria, and suggested systemic therapies for steroid-refractory disease.

“We wanted to both build on the commonly used approach to stage and treat graft-versus-host disease, and make sure that this information is readily available for physicians-in-training and young physicians who are learning about transplants,” said guideline committee chair Ayman Saad, MB BCh, of The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, James Cancer Hospital and Solove Research Institute in Columbus, Ohio.

In an interview, Dr. Saad emphasized that an important goal of the guidelines is to encourage general oncologists to recognize early signs of GVHD and refer potential candidates to transplant centers for further evaluation.

“We also urge oncologists who may be caring for patients after HCT to familiarize themselves with the varied manifestations of GVHD – a very common and significant posttransplant complication – and to consult with transplant providers to optimize their ongoing care. The guidelines explain how to diagnose and treat this condition in order to achieve the best possible outcomes,” guideline panel member Alison W. Loren, MD, director of blood and marrow transplantation at Abraham Cancer Center, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, said in a statement.

The guideline includes links to other NCCN guidelines for diseases where HCT is a common therapeutic option, including leukemias, myeloid malignancies, lymphomas, central nervous system cancers, and testicular cancer.

The HCT guideline includes:

• Pretransplant recipient evaluation with recommendations for clinical assessment and imaging.
• Diagnosis and workup of GVHD, with separate algorithms for suspected acute or chronic GVHD.
• Specific interventions for management of acute GVHD with corticosteroids or other systemic agents.
• Chronic GVHD diagnosis by organ site and symptoms, with a severity scoring system.
• Chronic GVHD steroid response definitions and criteria.
• Suggested systemic agents for steroid-refractory GVHD.

One feature that is unusual for an NCCN guideline document is a page of photographs to assist clinicians in diagnosing range-of-motion abnormalities in the shoulder, elbow, hand, and ankle of patients with suspected or confirmed GVHD. Dr. Saad said that future iterations of the guideline will include additional photos to help clinicians develop a visual repertoire of potential GVHD signs.

Future versions will also include a discussion section and more comprehensive information on other common complications following HCT transplant, as well as management of posttransplant relapse.

Ideally, the guideline will help clinicians document and justify clinical decisions surrounding HCT and GVHD management in discussions with third-party payers, Dr. Saad said.

“Sometimes we struggle with payers when we want to use a certain modality to treat GVHD, and they respond ‘that’s not approved,’ or ‘that’s not a common indication,’ et cetera,” he said. “What we’re trying to put here are the commonly used therapies that most, but not all, experts agree on, and we can use this to negotiate with payers.”

He also emphasized that the guideline is meant to be instructive rather than prescriptive and is not meant to hinder innovations that may emerge from clinical trials.

“We would appreciate any feedback from non-NCCN centers as well as experts at NCCN centers, and we’ll be more than happy to address any concerns or criticisms they have,” he said.

Dr. Saad reported financial relationships with Actinium and Incysus Biomedical. Dr. Loren has previously reported having no disclosures.

Recommendations for the diagnosis and management of acute and chronic graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) are the central focus of the first National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guideline on hematopoietic cell transplantation.

The guideline presents detailed recommendations for the evaluation of hematopoietic cell transplant (HCT) recipients, and an extensive section on the diagnosis and workup of GVHD, including information on staging and grading of acute GVHD, grading of chronic GVHD, treatment response criteria, and suggested systemic therapies for steroid-refractory disease.

“We wanted to both build on the commonly used approach to stage and treat graft-versus-host disease, and make sure that this information is readily available for physicians-in-training and young physicians who are learning about transplants,” said guideline committee chair Ayman Saad, MB BCh, of The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, James Cancer Hospital and Solove Research Institute in Columbus, Ohio.

In an interview, Dr. Saad emphasized that an important goal of the guidelines is to encourage general oncologists to recognize early signs of GVHD and refer potential candidates to transplant centers for further evaluation.

“We also urge oncologists who may be caring for patients after HCT to familiarize themselves with the varied manifestations of GVHD – a very common and significant posttransplant complication – and to consult with transplant providers to optimize their ongoing care. The guidelines explain how to diagnose and treat this condition in order to achieve the best possible outcomes,” guideline panel member Alison W. Loren, MD, director of blood and marrow transplantation at Abraham Cancer Center, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, said in a statement.

The guideline includes links to other NCCN guidelines for diseases where HCT is a common therapeutic option, including leukemias, myeloid malignancies, lymphomas, central nervous system cancers, and testicular cancer.

The HCT guideline includes:

• Pretransplant recipient evaluation with recommendations for clinical assessment and imaging.
• Diagnosis and workup of GVHD, with separate algorithms for suspected acute or chronic GVHD.
• Specific interventions for management of acute GVHD with corticosteroids or other systemic agents.
• Chronic GVHD diagnosis by organ site and symptoms, with a severity scoring system.
• Chronic GVHD steroid response definitions and criteria.
• Suggested systemic agents for steroid-refractory GVHD.

One feature that is unusual for an NCCN guideline document is a page of photographs to assist clinicians in diagnosing range-of-motion abnormalities in the shoulder, elbow, hand, and ankle of patients with suspected or confirmed GVHD. Dr. Saad said that future iterations of the guideline will include additional photos to help clinicians develop a visual repertoire of potential GVHD signs.

Future versions will also include a discussion section and more comprehensive information on other common complications following HCT transplant, as well as management of posttransplant relapse.

Ideally, the guideline will help clinicians document and justify clinical decisions surrounding HCT and GVHD management in discussions with third-party payers, Dr. Saad said.

“Sometimes we struggle with payers when we want to use a certain modality to treat GVHD, and they respond ‘that’s not approved,’ or ‘that’s not a common indication,’ et cetera,” he said. “What we’re trying to put here are the commonly used therapies that most, but not all, experts agree on, and we can use this to negotiate with payers.”

He also emphasized that the guideline is meant to be instructive rather than prescriptive and is not meant to hinder innovations that may emerge from clinical trials.

“We would appreciate any feedback from non-NCCN centers as well as experts at NCCN centers, and we’ll be more than happy to address any concerns or criticisms they have,” he said.

Dr. Saad reported financial relationships with Actinium and Incysus Biomedical. Dr. Loren has previously reported having no disclosures.

Recommendations for the diagnosis and management of acute and chronic graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) are the central focus of the first National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guideline on hematopoietic cell transplantation.

The guideline presents detailed recommendations for the evaluation of hematopoietic cell transplant (HCT) recipients, and an extensive section on the diagnosis and workup of GVHD, including information on staging and grading of acute GVHD, grading of chronic GVHD, treatment response criteria, and suggested systemic therapies for steroid-refractory disease.

“We wanted to both build on the commonly used approach to stage and treat graft-versus-host disease, and make sure that this information is readily available for physicians-in-training and young physicians who are learning about transplants,” said guideline committee chair Ayman Saad, MB BCh, of The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, James Cancer Hospital and Solove Research Institute in Columbus, Ohio.

In an interview, Dr. Saad emphasized that an important goal of the guidelines is to encourage general oncologists to recognize early signs of GVHD and refer potential candidates to transplant centers for further evaluation.

“We also urge oncologists who may be caring for patients after HCT to familiarize themselves with the varied manifestations of GVHD – a very common and significant posttransplant complication – and to consult with transplant providers to optimize their ongoing care. The guidelines explain how to diagnose and treat this condition in order to achieve the best possible outcomes,” guideline panel member Alison W. Loren, MD, director of blood and marrow transplantation at Abraham Cancer Center, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, said in a statement.

The guideline includes links to other NCCN guidelines for diseases where HCT is a common therapeutic option, including leukemias, myeloid malignancies, lymphomas, central nervous system cancers, and testicular cancer.

The HCT guideline includes:

• Pretransplant recipient evaluation with recommendations for clinical assessment and imaging.
• Diagnosis and workup of GVHD, with separate algorithms for suspected acute or chronic GVHD.
• Specific interventions for management of acute GVHD with corticosteroids or other systemic agents.
• Chronic GVHD diagnosis by organ site and symptoms, with a severity scoring system.
• Chronic GVHD steroid response definitions and criteria.
• Suggested systemic agents for steroid-refractory GVHD.

One feature that is unusual for an NCCN guideline document is a page of photographs to assist clinicians in diagnosing range-of-motion abnormalities in the shoulder, elbow, hand, and ankle of patients with suspected or confirmed GVHD. Dr. Saad said that future iterations of the guideline will include additional photos to help clinicians develop a visual repertoire of potential GVHD signs.

Future versions will also include a discussion section and more comprehensive information on other common complications following HCT transplant, as well as management of posttransplant relapse.

Ideally, the guideline will help clinicians document and justify clinical decisions surrounding HCT and GVHD management in discussions with third-party payers, Dr. Saad said.

“Sometimes we struggle with payers when we want to use a certain modality to treat GVHD, and they respond ‘that’s not approved,’ or ‘that’s not a common indication,’ et cetera,” he said. “What we’re trying to put here are the commonly used therapies that most, but not all, experts agree on, and we can use this to negotiate with payers.”

He also emphasized that the guideline is meant to be instructive rather than prescriptive and is not meant to hinder innovations that may emerge from clinical trials.

“We would appreciate any feedback from non-NCCN centers as well as experts at NCCN centers, and we’ll be more than happy to address any concerns or criticisms they have,” he said.

Dr. Saad reported financial relationships with Actinium and Incysus Biomedical. Dr. Loren has previously reported having no disclosures.

Allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation is a better option than consolidation chemotherapy in patients with secondary acute myeloid leukemia, yielding significantly better survival outcomes, according to findings from an observational study.

National Institutes of Health/Wikimedia Commons/Public Domain

Although secondary AML has been identified as an independent predictor of poor prognosis, it is not included in current risk classifications that provide the basis of deciding when to perform HCT.

Christer Nilsson, MD, of Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, and colleagues, used two nationwide Swedish registries – the Swedish AML Registry and the Swedish Cancer Registry – to characterize how often HCT is performed in these patients and to evaluate its impact in a real-world setting. The registries include all patients with AML diagnosed between 1997 and 2013.

Their findings are in Biology of Blood and Marrow Transplantation.

The analysis included 3,337 adult patients with AML who were intensively treated and did not have acute promyelocytic leukemia. More than three-quarters of the patients had de novo AML and the remainder had secondary AML that was either therapy related or developed after an antecedent myeloid disease. In total, 100 patients with secondary AML underwent HCT while in first complete remission.

In terms of crude survival at 5 years after diagnosis, patients with secondary AML who did not undergo HCT did very poorly. The survival rate was 0% in those with AML preceded by myeloproliferative neoplasm (MPN-AML), 2% in patients with AML preceded by myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS-AML), and 4% in patients with therapy-related AML (t-AML). In contrast, the 5-year overall survival in patients who underwent HCT at any time point or disease stage was 32% for patients with MPN-AML, 18% for patients with MDS-AML, and 25% for patients t-AML.

These crude survival figures suggest that “HCT is the sole realistic curable treatment option for [secondary] AML,” the researchers wrote.

The researchers also performed a propensity score matching analysis of HCT versus chemotherapy consolidation in patients with secondary AML who had been in first complete remission for more than 90 days. The model matched 45 patients who underwent HCT with 66 patients treated with chemotherapy consolidation. The projected 5-year overall survival was 48% in the HCT group, compared with 20% in the consolidation group (P = .01). Similarly, 5-year relapse-free survival was also higher in the HCT group, compared with the consolidation group (43% vs. 21%, P = .02).

“Ideally, the role of transplantation in [secondary] AML should be evaluated in a prospective randomized trial, minimizing the risk of any bias,” the researchers wrote. “However, such a trial is lacking and most likely will never be performed.”

The researchers concluded that HCT should be considered for all patients with secondary AML who are eligible and fit for transplantation.

The study was supported by the Swedish Cancer Foundation, Swedish Research Council, Stockholm County Council, Gothenberg Medical Society, and Assar Gabrielsson Foundation. The researchers reported having no conflicts of interest.

mschneider@mdedge.com

SOURCE: Nilson C et al. Biol Blood Marrow Tranplant. 2019;25:1770-8.

Allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation is a better option than consolidation chemotherapy in patients with secondary acute myeloid leukemia, yielding significantly better survival outcomes, according to findings from an observational study.

National Institutes of Health/Wikimedia Commons/Public Domain

Although secondary AML has been identified as an independent predictor of poor prognosis, it is not included in current risk classifications that provide the basis of deciding when to perform HCT.

Christer Nilsson, MD, of Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, and colleagues, used two nationwide Swedish registries – the Swedish AML Registry and the Swedish Cancer Registry – to characterize how often HCT is performed in these patients and to evaluate its impact in a real-world setting. The registries include all patients with AML diagnosed between 1997 and 2013.

Their findings are in Biology of Blood and Marrow Transplantation.

The analysis included 3,337 adult patients with AML who were intensively treated and did not have acute promyelocytic leukemia. More than three-quarters of the patients had de novo AML and the remainder had secondary AML that was either therapy related or developed after an antecedent myeloid disease. In total, 100 patients with secondary AML underwent HCT while in first complete remission.

In terms of crude survival at 5 years after diagnosis, patients with secondary AML who did not undergo HCT did very poorly. The survival rate was 0% in those with AML preceded by myeloproliferative neoplasm (MPN-AML), 2% in patients with AML preceded by myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS-AML), and 4% in patients with therapy-related AML (t-AML). In contrast, the 5-year overall survival in patients who underwent HCT at any time point or disease stage was 32% for patients with MPN-AML, 18% for patients with MDS-AML, and 25% for patients t-AML.

These crude survival figures suggest that “HCT is the sole realistic curable treatment option for [secondary] AML,” the researchers wrote.

The researchers also performed a propensity score matching analysis of HCT versus chemotherapy consolidation in patients with secondary AML who had been in first complete remission for more than 90 days. The model matched 45 patients who underwent HCT with 66 patients treated with chemotherapy consolidation. The projected 5-year overall survival was 48% in the HCT group, compared with 20% in the consolidation group (P = .01). Similarly, 5-year relapse-free survival was also higher in the HCT group, compared with the consolidation group (43% vs. 21%, P = .02).

“Ideally, the role of transplantation in [secondary] AML should be evaluated in a prospective randomized trial, minimizing the risk of any bias,” the researchers wrote. “However, such a trial is lacking and most likely will never be performed.”

The researchers concluded that HCT should be considered for all patients with secondary AML who are eligible and fit for transplantation.

The study was supported by the Swedish Cancer Foundation, Swedish Research Council, Stockholm County Council, Gothenberg Medical Society, and Assar Gabrielsson Foundation. The researchers reported having no conflicts of interest.

mschneider@mdedge.com

SOURCE: Nilson C et al. Biol Blood Marrow Tranplant. 2019;25:1770-8.

Allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation is a better option than consolidation chemotherapy in patients with secondary acute myeloid leukemia, yielding significantly better survival outcomes, according to findings from an observational study.

National Institutes of Health/Wikimedia Commons/Public Domain

Although secondary AML has been identified as an independent predictor of poor prognosis, it is not included in current risk classifications that provide the basis of deciding when to perform HCT.

Christer Nilsson, MD, of Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, and colleagues, used two nationwide Swedish registries – the Swedish AML Registry and the Swedish Cancer Registry – to characterize how often HCT is performed in these patients and to evaluate its impact in a real-world setting. The registries include all patients with AML diagnosed between 1997 and 2013.

Their findings are in Biology of Blood and Marrow Transplantation.

The analysis included 3,337 adult patients with AML who were intensively treated and did not have acute promyelocytic leukemia. More than three-quarters of the patients had de novo AML and the remainder had secondary AML that was either therapy related or developed after an antecedent myeloid disease. In total, 100 patients with secondary AML underwent HCT while in first complete remission.

In terms of crude survival at 5 years after diagnosis, patients with secondary AML who did not undergo HCT did very poorly. The survival rate was 0% in those with AML preceded by myeloproliferative neoplasm (MPN-AML), 2% in patients with AML preceded by myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS-AML), and 4% in patients with therapy-related AML (t-AML). In contrast, the 5-year overall survival in patients who underwent HCT at any time point or disease stage was 32% for patients with MPN-AML, 18% for patients with MDS-AML, and 25% for patients t-AML.

These crude survival figures suggest that “HCT is the sole realistic curable treatment option for [secondary] AML,” the researchers wrote.

The researchers also performed a propensity score matching analysis of HCT versus chemotherapy consolidation in patients with secondary AML who had been in first complete remission for more than 90 days. The model matched 45 patients who underwent HCT with 66 patients treated with chemotherapy consolidation. The projected 5-year overall survival was 48% in the HCT group, compared with 20% in the consolidation group (P = .01). Similarly, 5-year relapse-free survival was also higher in the HCT group, compared with the consolidation group (43% vs. 21%, P = .02).

“Ideally, the role of transplantation in [secondary] AML should be evaluated in a prospective randomized trial, minimizing the risk of any bias,” the researchers wrote. “However, such a trial is lacking and most likely will never be performed.”

The researchers concluded that HCT should be considered for all patients with secondary AML who are eligible and fit for transplantation.

The study was supported by the Swedish Cancer Foundation, Swedish Research Council, Stockholm County Council, Gothenberg Medical Society, and Assar Gabrielsson Foundation. The researchers reported having no conflicts of interest.

mschneider@mdedge.com

SOURCE: Nilson C et al. Biol Blood Marrow Tranplant. 2019;25:1770-8.

NEW ORLEANS – Race compatibility is a factor that can affect survival and needs to be considered when matching lung transplant candidates to potential donors, results from a large retrospective analysis suggest.

Andrew D. Bowser/MDedge News

Specifically, whites had significantly worse survival when receiving lungs from African American donors in this registry analysis, according to study investigator Alexis Kofi Okoh, MD.

By contrast, donor-to-recipient race compatibility (DRRC) did not affect posttransplant survival among African American or Hispanic patients, said Dr. Okoh, who is with the lung transplant division at the Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick, N.J.

While race mismatch has been shown to affect outcomes in kidney, heart, and liver transplant settings, the data for DRRC in lung transplant prior to this analysis generally has been limited to small, single-center studies, according to Dr. Okoh.

“If you do have the option, [race compatibility] should highly be considered, because it clearly has an impact on outcomes,” Dr. Okoh said in an interview here at the annual meeting of the American College of Chest Physicians.

Considering the race of both donor and recipient is especially important now that the lung transplant population is becoming more ethnically diverse, he added.

The study was based on an analysis of 19,504 lung transplant recipients in the prospectively maintained United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) database during 2006-2018. In that cohort, 16,485 recipients were white, 1,787 were African American, and 1,232 were Hispanic.

Race-matched donor organs were used in two-thirds (66.2%) of white recipients, about one-quarter (26.8%) of African American recipients, and one-third (33.0%) of Hispanic recipients.

Overall, survival post–lung transplant was significantly poorer among recipients who did not receive a race-matched organ in Kaplan-Meier survival estimates, Dr. Okoh said, though, that this effect was diminished after they adjusted for patient baseline characteristics (P = 0.2809).

For African American recipients, the unadjusted and adjusted survival estimates were no different regardless of donor race, and likewise, there were no apparent survival differences between Hispanic recipients who received race matched or mismatched organs.

Survival among white recipients, however, was significantly affected by race of the recipient, with decreased survival estimates noted even after adjustment for patient characteristics, according to Dr. Okoh’s presentation.

Results of regression analysis showed that white recipient/African American donor was the only race mismatch to significantly affect survival, Dr. Okoh said in the interview.

The posttransplant survival hazard ratios (and 95% confidence intervals) reported by Dr. Okoh with a no race mismatch serving as reference were 1.15 (1.08-1.23) for whites with African American donors, and 1.09 (1.01-1.18) for whites with Hispanic donors.

Dr. Okoh and coinvestigators reported no relevant conflicts in relation to their study.

SOURCE: Okoh A et al. CHEST 2019. Abstract, doi: 10.1016/j.chest.2019.08.220.

NEW ORLEANS – Race compatibility is a factor that can affect survival and needs to be considered when matching lung transplant candidates to potential donors, results from a large retrospective analysis suggest.

Andrew D. Bowser/MDedge News

Specifically, whites had significantly worse survival when receiving lungs from African American donors in this registry analysis, according to study investigator Alexis Kofi Okoh, MD.

By contrast, donor-to-recipient race compatibility (DRRC) did not affect posttransplant survival among African American or Hispanic patients, said Dr. Okoh, who is with the lung transplant division at the Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick, N.J.

While race mismatch has been shown to affect outcomes in kidney, heart, and liver transplant settings, the data for DRRC in lung transplant prior to this analysis generally has been limited to small, single-center studies, according to Dr. Okoh.

“If you do have the option, [race compatibility] should highly be considered, because it clearly has an impact on outcomes,” Dr. Okoh said in an interview here at the annual meeting of the American College of Chest Physicians.

Considering the race of both donor and recipient is especially important now that the lung transplant population is becoming more ethnically diverse, he added.

The study was based on an analysis of 19,504 lung transplant recipients in the prospectively maintained United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) database during 2006-2018. In that cohort, 16,485 recipients were white, 1,787 were African American, and 1,232 were Hispanic.

Race-matched donor organs were used in two-thirds (66.2%) of white recipients, about one-quarter (26.8%) of African American recipients, and one-third (33.0%) of Hispanic recipients.

Overall, survival post–lung transplant was significantly poorer among recipients who did not receive a race-matched organ in Kaplan-Meier survival estimates, Dr. Okoh said, though, that this effect was diminished after they adjusted for patient baseline characteristics (P = 0.2809).

For African American recipients, the unadjusted and adjusted survival estimates were no different regardless of donor race, and likewise, there were no apparent survival differences between Hispanic recipients who received race matched or mismatched organs.

Survival among white recipients, however, was significantly affected by race of the recipient, with decreased survival estimates noted even after adjustment for patient characteristics, according to Dr. Okoh’s presentation.

Results of regression analysis showed that white recipient/African American donor was the only race mismatch to significantly affect survival, Dr. Okoh said in the interview.

The posttransplant survival hazard ratios (and 95% confidence intervals) reported by Dr. Okoh with a no race mismatch serving as reference were 1.15 (1.08-1.23) for whites with African American donors, and 1.09 (1.01-1.18) for whites with Hispanic donors.

Dr. Okoh and coinvestigators reported no relevant conflicts in relation to their study.

SOURCE: Okoh A et al. CHEST 2019. Abstract, doi: 10.1016/j.chest.2019.08.220.

NEW ORLEANS – Race compatibility is a factor that can affect survival and needs to be considered when matching lung transplant candidates to potential donors, results from a large retrospective analysis suggest.

Andrew D. Bowser/MDedge News

Specifically, whites had significantly worse survival when receiving lungs from African American donors in this registry analysis, according to study investigator Alexis Kofi Okoh, MD.

By contrast, donor-to-recipient race compatibility (DRRC) did not affect posttransplant survival among African American or Hispanic patients, said Dr. Okoh, who is with the lung transplant division at the Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick, N.J.

While race mismatch has been shown to affect outcomes in kidney, heart, and liver transplant settings, the data for DRRC in lung transplant prior to this analysis generally has been limited to small, single-center studies, according to Dr. Okoh.

“If you do have the option, [race compatibility] should highly be considered, because it clearly has an impact on outcomes,” Dr. Okoh said in an interview here at the annual meeting of the American College of Chest Physicians.

Considering the race of both donor and recipient is especially important now that the lung transplant population is becoming more ethnically diverse, he added.

The study was based on an analysis of 19,504 lung transplant recipients in the prospectively maintained United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) database during 2006-2018. In that cohort, 16,485 recipients were white, 1,787 were African American, and 1,232 were Hispanic.

Race-matched donor organs were used in two-thirds (66.2%) of white recipients, about one-quarter (26.8%) of African American recipients, and one-third (33.0%) of Hispanic recipients.

Overall, survival post–lung transplant was significantly poorer among recipients who did not receive a race-matched organ in Kaplan-Meier survival estimates, Dr. Okoh said, though, that this effect was diminished after they adjusted for patient baseline characteristics (P = 0.2809).

For African American recipients, the unadjusted and adjusted survival estimates were no different regardless of donor race, and likewise, there were no apparent survival differences between Hispanic recipients who received race matched or mismatched organs.

Survival among white recipients, however, was significantly affected by race of the recipient, with decreased survival estimates noted even after adjustment for patient characteristics, according to Dr. Okoh’s presentation.

Results of regression analysis showed that white recipient/African American donor was the only race mismatch to significantly affect survival, Dr. Okoh said in the interview.

The posttransplant survival hazard ratios (and 95% confidence intervals) reported by Dr. Okoh with a no race mismatch serving as reference were 1.15 (1.08-1.23) for whites with African American donors, and 1.09 (1.01-1.18) for whites with Hispanic donors.

Dr. Okoh and coinvestigators reported no relevant conflicts in relation to their study.

SOURCE: Okoh A et al. CHEST 2019. Abstract, doi: 10.1016/j.chest.2019.08.220.

Kidneys from donors with hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection function well despite adverse quality assessment and are a valuable resource for transplantation candidates independent of HCV status, according to the findings of a large U.S. registry study.

Mohammed Haneefa Nizamudeen/Getty Images

A total of 260 HCV-viremic kidneys were transplanted in the first quarter of 2019, with 105 additional viremic kidneys being discarded, according to a report in the Journal of the American Society of Nephrology by Vishnu S. Potluri, MD, of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, and colleagues.

Donor HCV viremia was defined as an HCV nucleic acid test–positive result reported to the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN). Donors who were HCV negative in this test were labeled as HCV nonviremic. Kidney transplantation recipients were defined as either HCV seropositive or seronegative based on HCV antibody testing.

During the first quarter of 2019, 74% of HCV-viremic kidneys were transplanted into seronegative recipients, which is a major change from how HCV-viremic kidneys were allocated a few years ago, according to the researchers. The results of small trials showing the benefits of such transplantations and the success of direct-acting antiviral therapy (DAA) on clearing HCV infections were indicated as likely responsible for the change.

HCV-viremic kidneys had similar function, compared with HCV-nonviremic kidneys, when matched on the donor elements included in the Kidney Profile Donor Index (KDPI), excluding HCV, they added. In addition, the 12-month estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) was similar between the seropositive and seronegative recipients, respectively 65.4 and 71.1 mL/min per 1.73 m² (P = .05), which suggests that recipient HCV serostatus does not negatively affect 1-year graft function using HCV-viremic kidneys in the era of DAA treatments, according to the authors.

Also, among HCV-seropositive recipients of HCV-viremic kidneys, seven (3.4%) died by 1 year post transplantation, while none of the HCV-seronegative recipients of HCV-viremic kidneys experienced graft failure or death.

“These striking results provide important additional evidence that the KDPI, with its current negative weighting for HCV status, does not accurately assess the quality of kidneys from HCV-viremic donors,” the authors wrote.

“HCV-viremic kidneys are a valuable resource for transplantation. Disincentives for accepting these organs should be addressed by the transplantation community,” Dr. Potluri and colleagues concluded.

This work was supported in part by the Health Resources and Services Administration of the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services. The various authors reported grant funding and advisory board participation with a number of pharmaceutical companies.

mlesney@mdedge.com

SOURCE: Potluri VS et al. J Am Soc Nephrol. 2019;30:1939-51.

Kidneys from donors with hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection function well despite adverse quality assessment and are a valuable resource for transplantation candidates independent of HCV status, according to the findings of a large U.S. registry study.

Mohammed Haneefa Nizamudeen/Getty Images

A total of 260 HCV-viremic kidneys were transplanted in the first quarter of 2019, with 105 additional viremic kidneys being discarded, according to a report in the Journal of the American Society of Nephrology by Vishnu S. Potluri, MD, of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, and colleagues.

Donor HCV viremia was defined as an HCV nucleic acid test–positive result reported to the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN). Donors who were HCV negative in this test were labeled as HCV nonviremic. Kidney transplantation recipients were defined as either HCV seropositive or seronegative based on HCV antibody testing.

During the first quarter of 2019, 74% of HCV-viremic kidneys were transplanted into seronegative recipients, which is a major change from how HCV-viremic kidneys were allocated a few years ago, according to the researchers. The results of small trials showing the benefits of such transplantations and the success of direct-acting antiviral therapy (DAA) on clearing HCV infections were indicated as likely responsible for the change.

HCV-viremic kidneys had similar function, compared with HCV-nonviremic kidneys, when matched on the donor elements included in the Kidney Profile Donor Index (KDPI), excluding HCV, they added. In addition, the 12-month estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) was similar between the seropositive and seronegative recipients, respectively 65.4 and 71.1 mL/min per 1.73 m² (P = .05), which suggests that recipient HCV serostatus does not negatively affect 1-year graft function using HCV-viremic kidneys in the era of DAA treatments, according to the authors.

Also, among HCV-seropositive recipients of HCV-viremic kidneys, seven (3.4%) died by 1 year post transplantation, while none of the HCV-seronegative recipients of HCV-viremic kidneys experienced graft failure or death.

“These striking results provide important additional evidence that the KDPI, with its current negative weighting for HCV status, does not accurately assess the quality of kidneys from HCV-viremic donors,” the authors wrote.

“HCV-viremic kidneys are a valuable resource for transplantation. Disincentives for accepting these organs should be addressed by the transplantation community,” Dr. Potluri and colleagues concluded.

This work was supported in part by the Health Resources and Services Administration of the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services. The various authors reported grant funding and advisory board participation with a number of pharmaceutical companies.

mlesney@mdedge.com

SOURCE: Potluri VS et al. J Am Soc Nephrol. 2019;30:1939-51.

Kidneys from donors with hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection function well despite adverse quality assessment and are a valuable resource for transplantation candidates independent of HCV status, according to the findings of a large U.S. registry study.

Mohammed Haneefa Nizamudeen/Getty Images

A total of 260 HCV-viremic kidneys were transplanted in the first quarter of 2019, with 105 additional viremic kidneys being discarded, according to a report in the Journal of the American Society of Nephrology by Vishnu S. Potluri, MD, of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, and colleagues.

Donor HCV viremia was defined as an HCV nucleic acid test–positive result reported to the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN). Donors who were HCV negative in this test were labeled as HCV nonviremic. Kidney transplantation recipients were defined as either HCV seropositive or seronegative based on HCV antibody testing.

During the first quarter of 2019, 74% of HCV-viremic kidneys were transplanted into seronegative recipients, which is a major change from how HCV-viremic kidneys were allocated a few years ago, according to the researchers. The results of small trials showing the benefits of such transplantations and the success of direct-acting antiviral therapy (DAA) on clearing HCV infections were indicated as likely responsible for the change.

HCV-viremic kidneys had similar function, compared with HCV-nonviremic kidneys, when matched on the donor elements included in the Kidney Profile Donor Index (KDPI), excluding HCV, they added. In addition, the 12-month estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) was similar between the seropositive and seronegative recipients, respectively 65.4 and 71.1 mL/min per 1.73 m² (P = .05), which suggests that recipient HCV serostatus does not negatively affect 1-year graft function using HCV-viremic kidneys in the era of DAA treatments, according to the authors.

Also, among HCV-seropositive recipients of HCV-viremic kidneys, seven (3.4%) died by 1 year post transplantation, while none of the HCV-seronegative recipients of HCV-viremic kidneys experienced graft failure or death.

“These striking results provide important additional evidence that the KDPI, with its current negative weighting for HCV status, does not accurately assess the quality of kidneys from HCV-viremic donors,” the authors wrote.

“HCV-viremic kidneys are a valuable resource for transplantation. Disincentives for accepting these organs should be addressed by the transplantation community,” Dr. Potluri and colleagues concluded.

This work was supported in part by the Health Resources and Services Administration of the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services. The various authors reported grant funding and advisory board participation with a number of pharmaceutical companies.

mlesney@mdedge.com

SOURCE: Potluri VS et al. J Am Soc Nephrol. 2019;30:1939-51.

The Food and Drug Administration has approved daratumumab in combination with certain therapies for newly diagnosed patients with multiple myeloma who are eligible for autologous stem cell transplant.

Olivier Le Moal/Getty Images

The approval specifies combination of this CD38-directed antibody with bortezomib (Velcade), thalidomide, and dexamethasone (VTd), according to an announcement from Janssen.

The approval is based on results from the CASSIOPEIA study. The first part of the study randomized 1,085 patients (median age, 58 years) and showed that, compared with VTd alone, the daratumumab-VTd combination had significantly better postconsolidation stringent complete response (29% vs. 20%; odds ratio, 1.60; 95% confidence interval, 1.21-2.12; P = .001) and a 53% reduction in risk of disease progression or death (hazard ratio, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.33-0.67; P = .0001).

The most frequent adverse reactions with 5% greater frequency in the daratumumab-VTd group were infusion reactions (including anaphylaxis), nausea, pyrexia, upper respiratory tract infection, and bronchitis. Full prescribing information, including contraindications and warnings, can be found on the Janssen website.

Daratumumab was initially approved in 2015, and in June 2019, it received approval, in combination with lenalidomide and dexamethasone, for treatment of patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma who are ineligible for autologous stem cell transplant.

cpalmer@mdedge.com

The Food and Drug Administration has approved daratumumab in combination with certain therapies for newly diagnosed patients with multiple myeloma who are eligible for autologous stem cell transplant.

Olivier Le Moal/Getty Images

The approval specifies combination of this CD38-directed antibody with bortezomib (Velcade), thalidomide, and dexamethasone (VTd), according to an announcement from Janssen.

The approval is based on results from the CASSIOPEIA study. The first part of the study randomized 1,085 patients (median age, 58 years) and showed that, compared with VTd alone, the daratumumab-VTd combination had significantly better postconsolidation stringent complete response (29% vs. 20%; odds ratio, 1.60; 95% confidence interval, 1.21-2.12; P = .001) and a 53% reduction in risk of disease progression or death (hazard ratio, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.33-0.67; P = .0001).

The most frequent adverse reactions with 5% greater frequency in the daratumumab-VTd group were infusion reactions (including anaphylaxis), nausea, pyrexia, upper respiratory tract infection, and bronchitis. Full prescribing information, including contraindications and warnings, can be found on the Janssen website.

Daratumumab was initially approved in 2015, and in June 2019, it received approval, in combination with lenalidomide and dexamethasone, for treatment of patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma who are ineligible for autologous stem cell transplant.

cpalmer@mdedge.com

The Food and Drug Administration has approved daratumumab in combination with certain therapies for newly diagnosed patients with multiple myeloma who are eligible for autologous stem cell transplant.

Olivier Le Moal/Getty Images

The approval specifies combination of this CD38-directed antibody with bortezomib (Velcade), thalidomide, and dexamethasone (VTd), according to an announcement from Janssen.

The approval is based on results from the CASSIOPEIA study. The first part of the study randomized 1,085 patients (median age, 58 years) and showed that, compared with VTd alone, the daratumumab-VTd combination had significantly better postconsolidation stringent complete response (29% vs. 20%; odds ratio, 1.60; 95% confidence interval, 1.21-2.12; P = .001) and a 53% reduction in risk of disease progression or death (hazard ratio, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.33-0.67; P = .0001).

The most frequent adverse reactions with 5% greater frequency in the daratumumab-VTd group were infusion reactions (including anaphylaxis), nausea, pyrexia, upper respiratory tract infection, and bronchitis. Full prescribing information, including contraindications and warnings, can be found on the Janssen website.

Daratumumab was initially approved in 2015, and in June 2019, it received approval, in combination with lenalidomide and dexamethasone, for treatment of patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma who are ineligible for autologous stem cell transplant.

cpalmer@mdedge.com

Researchers are leading several studies designed to improve hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) for patients with sickle cell disease (SCD), experts at the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute reported during a recent webinar.

bubaone/DigitalVision Vectors

“HSCT offers a potential cure [for SCD], which may improve quantity and quality of life [for patients],” said Courtney D. Fitzhugh, MD, a Lasker Clinical Research Scholar in the Laboratory of Early Sickle Mortality Prevention at NHLBI.

Currently, HLA-matched sibling and matched unrelated donor sources provide the best outcomes for sickle cell patients undergoing allogeneic HSCT, she explained. Alternative stem cell sources include umbilical cord blood and haploidentical donors.

Over the past 2 years, the majority of novel transplant techniques have been primarily aimed at improving conditioning regimens and lowering rates of graft-versus-host disease (GVHD).
 

Recent evidence

A recent international survey found high survival rates in patients with SCD who underwent HLA-matched sibling HSCT during 1986-2013. At 5-years, overall- and event-free survival rates were 92.9% and 91.4%, respectively, with even higher rates (95% and 93%) seen in children aged younger than 16 years.

With respect to safety, the cumulative incidence rates of acute and chronic GVHD were 14.8% and 14.3%, Dr. Fitzhugh reported.

Much of the success seen with HLA-matched sibling donors is attributable to recent data demonstrating that complete transformation of patient’s bone marrow is unnecessary to illicit a curative effect.

With donor myeloid chimerism levels of at least 20%, the sickle disease phenotype can be reversed, and there’s a reduced risk of GVHD, she said.

In mouse models, researchers have found that inclusion of sirolimus in HLA-matched pretransplant conditioning regimens leads to higher levels of donor cell engraftment. As a result, some conditioning regimens now administer sirolimus (target 10-15 ng/dL) one-day prior to transplantation.

In 55 patients transplanted using this technique, overall- and event-free survival rates of 93% and 87% have been reported, with no transplant-related mortality or evidence of GVHD. Other institutions have also begun to adopt this technique, and have reported similar findings, Dr. Fitzhugh reported.

“When you [administer high-dose] chemotherapy, you don’t expect that patients are able to have children, but we are excited to report that 8 of our patients have had 13 healthy babies post transplant,” Dr. Fitzhugh said.

As a whole, several recent studies have emphasized the importance of the conditioning regimen in successful transplantation for patients with SCD.

With HLA-matched sibling donors, myeloablative regimens that include antithymocyte globulin have demonstrated greater efficacy, she said.

In patients receiving a transplant from a matched unrelated donor, early use of alemtuzumab is linked to higher rates of GVHD, while ongoing studies are exploring whether abatacept reduces the risk of GVHD, she further explained.

With respect to haploidentical and unrelated umbilical cord donors, T-cell depletion and higher-intensity conditioning have been shown to reduce graft rejection rates, she said.

Dr. Fitzhugh acknowledged that long-term efficacy and safety of these novel conditioning regimens is largely unknown. Thus, ongoing follow-up is essential to monitor for potential late effects.
 

NHLBI-funded trials

Nancy L. DiFronzo, PhD, program director at NHLBI, explained that the agency has funded specific clinical studies evaluating allogeneic HSCT in patients with severe SCD.

“[Surprisingly], this treatment modality is [actually] quite rare, with [only] approximately 9,000 allogeneic transplants occurring in the United States each year,” she said.

One of the primary barriers to HSCT for SCD is a lack of compatible donors. Currently, fewer than 20% of sickle cell patients have a matched unrelated donor or HLA-matched sibling donor, she reported.

Another common barrier are the risks associated with the procedure, including treatment-related toxicities and death. Active participation in a clinical trial is one strategy that can mitigate these risks, she said.

The Blood and Marrow Transplant Clinical Trials Network (BMT CTN) is a group of transplant centers that are recognized experts in HSCT. Dr. DiFronzo explained that the consortium is cosponsored by the National Cancer Institute and NHLBI, with the goal of improving outcomes for both pediatric and adult patients with SCD undergoing HSCT.

At present, the BMT CTN has directly funded three multicenter clinical studies for SCD, including the SCURT study, which has now been completed, as well as the STRIDE2 and Haploidentical HCT trials, both of which are currently enrolling patients.

“The goal of these new approaches [being studied in these 3 trials] is cure, where individuals can live longer with a better quality of life,” Dr. DiFronzo said. “We’ve [specifically] adjusted regimens with [this goal] in mind.”

Dr. Fitzhugh and Dr. DiFronzo did not provide information on financial disclosures.

Researchers are leading several studies designed to improve hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) for patients with sickle cell disease (SCD), experts at the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute reported during a recent webinar.

bubaone/DigitalVision Vectors

“HSCT offers a potential cure [for SCD], which may improve quantity and quality of life [for patients],” said Courtney D. Fitzhugh, MD, a Lasker Clinical Research Scholar in the Laboratory of Early Sickle Mortality Prevention at NHLBI.

Currently, HLA-matched sibling and matched unrelated donor sources provide the best outcomes for sickle cell patients undergoing allogeneic HSCT, she explained. Alternative stem cell sources include umbilical cord blood and haploidentical donors.

Over the past 2 years, the majority of novel transplant techniques have been primarily aimed at improving conditioning regimens and lowering rates of graft-versus-host disease (GVHD).
 

Recent evidence

A recent international survey found high survival rates in patients with SCD who underwent HLA-matched sibling HSCT during 1986-2013. At 5-years, overall- and event-free survival rates were 92.9% and 91.4%, respectively, with even higher rates (95% and 93%) seen in children aged younger than 16 years.

With respect to safety, the cumulative incidence rates of acute and chronic GVHD were 14.8% and 14.3%, Dr. Fitzhugh reported.

Much of the success seen with HLA-matched sibling donors is attributable to recent data demonstrating that complete transformation of patient’s bone marrow is unnecessary to illicit a curative effect.

With donor myeloid chimerism levels of at least 20%, the sickle disease phenotype can be reversed, and there’s a reduced risk of GVHD, she said.

In mouse models, researchers have found that inclusion of sirolimus in HLA-matched pretransplant conditioning regimens leads to higher levels of donor cell engraftment. As a result, some conditioning regimens now administer sirolimus (target 10-15 ng/dL) one-day prior to transplantation.

In 55 patients transplanted using this technique, overall- and event-free survival rates of 93% and 87% have been reported, with no transplant-related mortality or evidence of GVHD. Other institutions have also begun to adopt this technique, and have reported similar findings, Dr. Fitzhugh reported.

“When you [administer high-dose] chemotherapy, you don’t expect that patients are able to have children, but we are excited to report that 8 of our patients have had 13 healthy babies post transplant,” Dr. Fitzhugh said.

As a whole, several recent studies have emphasized the importance of the conditioning regimen in successful transplantation for patients with SCD.

With HLA-matched sibling donors, myeloablative regimens that include antithymocyte globulin have demonstrated greater efficacy, she said.

In patients receiving a transplant from a matched unrelated donor, early use of alemtuzumab is linked to higher rates of GVHD, while ongoing studies are exploring whether abatacept reduces the risk of GVHD, she further explained.

With respect to haploidentical and unrelated umbilical cord donors, T-cell depletion and higher-intensity conditioning have been shown to reduce graft rejection rates, she said.

Dr. Fitzhugh acknowledged that long-term efficacy and safety of these novel conditioning regimens is largely unknown. Thus, ongoing follow-up is essential to monitor for potential late effects.
 

NHLBI-funded trials

Nancy L. DiFronzo, PhD, program director at NHLBI, explained that the agency has funded specific clinical studies evaluating allogeneic HSCT in patients with severe SCD.

“[Surprisingly], this treatment modality is [actually] quite rare, with [only] approximately 9,000 allogeneic transplants occurring in the United States each year,” she said.

One of the primary barriers to HSCT for SCD is a lack of compatible donors. Currently, fewer than 20% of sickle cell patients have a matched unrelated donor or HLA-matched sibling donor, she reported.

Another common barrier are the risks associated with the procedure, including treatment-related toxicities and death. Active participation in a clinical trial is one strategy that can mitigate these risks, she said.

The Blood and Marrow Transplant Clinical Trials Network (BMT CTN) is a group of transplant centers that are recognized experts in HSCT. Dr. DiFronzo explained that the consortium is cosponsored by the National Cancer Institute and NHLBI, with the goal of improving outcomes for both pediatric and adult patients with SCD undergoing HSCT.

At present, the BMT CTN has directly funded three multicenter clinical studies for SCD, including the SCURT study, which has now been completed, as well as the STRIDE2 and Haploidentical HCT trials, both of which are currently enrolling patients.

“The goal of these new approaches [being studied in these 3 trials] is cure, where individuals can live longer with a better quality of life,” Dr. DiFronzo said. “We’ve [specifically] adjusted regimens with [this goal] in mind.”

Dr. Fitzhugh and Dr. DiFronzo did not provide information on financial disclosures.

Researchers are leading several studies designed to improve hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) for patients with sickle cell disease (SCD), experts at the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute reported during a recent webinar.

bubaone/DigitalVision Vectors

“HSCT offers a potential cure [for SCD], which may improve quantity and quality of life [for patients],” said Courtney D. Fitzhugh, MD, a Lasker Clinical Research Scholar in the Laboratory of Early Sickle Mortality Prevention at NHLBI.

Currently, HLA-matched sibling and matched unrelated donor sources provide the best outcomes for sickle cell patients undergoing allogeneic HSCT, she explained. Alternative stem cell sources include umbilical cord blood and haploidentical donors.

Over the past 2 years, the majority of novel transplant techniques have been primarily aimed at improving conditioning regimens and lowering rates of graft-versus-host disease (GVHD).
 

Recent evidence

A recent international survey found high survival rates in patients with SCD who underwent HLA-matched sibling HSCT during 1986-2013. At 5-years, overall- and event-free survival rates were 92.9% and 91.4%, respectively, with even higher rates (95% and 93%) seen in children aged younger than 16 years.

With respect to safety, the cumulative incidence rates of acute and chronic GVHD were 14.8% and 14.3%, Dr. Fitzhugh reported.

Much of the success seen with HLA-matched sibling donors is attributable to recent data demonstrating that complete transformation of patient’s bone marrow is unnecessary to illicit a curative effect.

With donor myeloid chimerism levels of at least 20%, the sickle disease phenotype can be reversed, and there’s a reduced risk of GVHD, she said.

In mouse models, researchers have found that inclusion of sirolimus in HLA-matched pretransplant conditioning regimens leads to higher levels of donor cell engraftment. As a result, some conditioning regimens now administer sirolimus (target 10-15 ng/dL) one-day prior to transplantation.

In 55 patients transplanted using this technique, overall- and event-free survival rates of 93% and 87% have been reported, with no transplant-related mortality or evidence of GVHD. Other institutions have also begun to adopt this technique, and have reported similar findings, Dr. Fitzhugh reported.

“When you [administer high-dose] chemotherapy, you don’t expect that patients are able to have children, but we are excited to report that 8 of our patients have had 13 healthy babies post transplant,” Dr. Fitzhugh said.

As a whole, several recent studies have emphasized the importance of the conditioning regimen in successful transplantation for patients with SCD.

With HLA-matched sibling donors, myeloablative regimens that include antithymocyte globulin have demonstrated greater efficacy, she said.

In patients receiving a transplant from a matched unrelated donor, early use of alemtuzumab is linked to higher rates of GVHD, while ongoing studies are exploring whether abatacept reduces the risk of GVHD, she further explained.

With respect to haploidentical and unrelated umbilical cord donors, T-cell depletion and higher-intensity conditioning have been shown to reduce graft rejection rates, she said.

Dr. Fitzhugh acknowledged that long-term efficacy and safety of these novel conditioning regimens is largely unknown. Thus, ongoing follow-up is essential to monitor for potential late effects.
 

NHLBI-funded trials

Nancy L. DiFronzo, PhD, program director at NHLBI, explained that the agency has funded specific clinical studies evaluating allogeneic HSCT in patients with severe SCD.

“[Surprisingly], this treatment modality is [actually] quite rare, with [only] approximately 9,000 allogeneic transplants occurring in the United States each year,” she said.

One of the primary barriers to HSCT for SCD is a lack of compatible donors. Currently, fewer than 20% of sickle cell patients have a matched unrelated donor or HLA-matched sibling donor, she reported.

Another common barrier are the risks associated with the procedure, including treatment-related toxicities and death. Active participation in a clinical trial is one strategy that can mitigate these risks, she said.

The Blood and Marrow Transplant Clinical Trials Network (BMT CTN) is a group of transplant centers that are recognized experts in HSCT. Dr. DiFronzo explained that the consortium is cosponsored by the National Cancer Institute and NHLBI, with the goal of improving outcomes for both pediatric and adult patients with SCD undergoing HSCT.

At present, the BMT CTN has directly funded three multicenter clinical studies for SCD, including the SCURT study, which has now been completed, as well as the STRIDE2 and Haploidentical HCT trials, both of which are currently enrolling patients.

“The goal of these new approaches [being studied in these 3 trials] is cure, where individuals can live longer with a better quality of life,” Dr. DiFronzo said. “We’ve [specifically] adjusted regimens with [this goal] in mind.”

Dr. Fitzhugh and Dr. DiFronzo did not provide information on financial disclosures.

New research suggests several factors are associated with failure to discontinue immune suppression after allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant (HCT).

Patients older than 50 years, those with advanced stage disease, patients with a mismatched unrelated donor, and those who received peripheral blood stem cells from an unrelated donor were less likely to discontinue immune suppression successfully, Joseph Pidala, MD, PhD, of Moffitt Cancer Center in Tampa, Fla., and colleagues reported in JAMA Oncology.

The researchers analyzed data from 827 patients in two national Blood and Marrow Transplant Clinical Trial Network studies (NCT00075816 and NCT00406393). These randomized, phase 3 trials enrolled patients with hematologic malignancies who received myeloablative conditioning before allogeneic HCT.

The patients’ median age at HCT was 44 years (range, less than 1 to 67 years), and 55.1% were male. The median follow-up was 72 months (range, 11-124 months).

At 5 years, 20% of patients (n = 168) had successfully discontinued immune suppression and were still alive. A total of 342 patients (41.4%) were able to stop immune suppression, but 127 of them had to resume it after developing graft-versus-host disease (GVHD). There were an additional 47 patients who died or relapsed after stopping immune suppression.

The researchers identified several factors that were significantly associated with lower odds of discontinuing immune suppression and being free of GVHD, including:
 

• Being older than 50 years versus younger than 30 years (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.27; 99% confidence interval [CI], 0.14-0.50; P less than .001).
• Having a mismatched unrelated donor versus having a matched sibling (aOR, 0.37; 99% CI, 0.14-0.97; P = .008).
• Receiving peripheral blood stem cells versus bone marrow, from unrelated donors only (aOR, 0.46; 99% CI, 0.26-0.82; P less than .001).
• Having advanced stage disease versus early disease (aOR, 0.45; 99%CI, 0.23-0.86; P = .002).

The researchers also found that discontinuing immune suppression was not significantly associated with a decreased risk of relapse, with a hazard ratio (HR) of 1.95 (99% CI, 0.88-4.31; P = .03).

There was no significant association between acute GVHD–related variables and discontinuation of immune suppression. However, there were a few factors significantly associated with a lower likelihood of discontinuation after chronic GVHD, including:
 

• Current skin involvement (HR, 0.33; 99% CI, 0.14-0.80; P = .001).
• Unrelated well-matched donor versus matched sibling donor (HR, 0.29; 99% CI, 0.10-0.79; P = .001).
• Unrelated mismatched donor versus matched sibling donor (HR, 0.17; 99% CI, 0.03-0.95; P = .008).

In total, 127 patients had to resume immune suppression because of GVHD. Such failed attempts at discontinuing immune suppression were associated with receiving peripheral blood stem cells from an unrelated donor versus bone marrow from an unrelated donor, with an HR of 2.62 (99% CI, 1.30-5.29; P less than .001).

A history of acute or chronic GVHD was associated with failure to discontinue immune suppression, the researchers noted.

Lastly, the researchers developed dynamic prediction models for the probability of freedom from immune suppression and GVHD at 1, 3, and 5 years in the future. The team found that graft type, donor type, age, state history, and timing of immune suppression discontinuation were all associated with the likelihood of being free from immune suppression and GVHD at all three time points. Disease risk was only associated with freedom from immune suppression and GVHD at the 1-year mark.

The researchers said their findings must be validated in an independent cohort of patients and, after that, should be tested in a prospective trial.

The current study was funded by the National Heart Lung and Blood Institute. Two of the researchers reported relationships with more than 30 pharmaceutical companies.

jensmith@mdedge.com

SOURCE: Pidala J et al. JAMA Oncol. 2019 Sep 26. doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2019.2974.

New research suggests several factors are associated with failure to discontinue immune suppression after allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant (HCT).

Patients older than 50 years, those with advanced stage disease, patients with a mismatched unrelated donor, and those who received peripheral blood stem cells from an unrelated donor were less likely to discontinue immune suppression successfully, Joseph Pidala, MD, PhD, of Moffitt Cancer Center in Tampa, Fla., and colleagues reported in JAMA Oncology.

The researchers analyzed data from 827 patients in two national Blood and Marrow Transplant Clinical Trial Network studies (NCT00075816 and NCT00406393). These randomized, phase 3 trials enrolled patients with hematologic malignancies who received myeloablative conditioning before allogeneic HCT.

The patients’ median age at HCT was 44 years (range, less than 1 to 67 years), and 55.1% were male. The median follow-up was 72 months (range, 11-124 months).

At 5 years, 20% of patients (n = 168) had successfully discontinued immune suppression and were still alive. A total of 342 patients (41.4%) were able to stop immune suppression, but 127 of them had to resume it after developing graft-versus-host disease (GVHD). There were an additional 47 patients who died or relapsed after stopping immune suppression.

The researchers identified several factors that were significantly associated with lower odds of discontinuing immune suppression and being free of GVHD, including:
 

• Being older than 50 years versus younger than 30 years (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.27; 99% confidence interval [CI], 0.14-0.50; P less than .001).
• Having a mismatched unrelated donor versus having a matched sibling (aOR, 0.37; 99% CI, 0.14-0.97; P = .008).
• Receiving peripheral blood stem cells versus bone marrow, from unrelated donors only (aOR, 0.46; 99% CI, 0.26-0.82; P less than .001).
• Having advanced stage disease versus early disease (aOR, 0.45; 99%CI, 0.23-0.86; P = .002).

The researchers also found that discontinuing immune suppression was not significantly associated with a decreased risk of relapse, with a hazard ratio (HR) of 1.95 (99% CI, 0.88-4.31; P = .03).

There was no significant association between acute GVHD–related variables and discontinuation of immune suppression. However, there were a few factors significantly associated with a lower likelihood of discontinuation after chronic GVHD, including:
 

• Current skin involvement (HR, 0.33; 99% CI, 0.14-0.80; P = .001).
• Unrelated well-matched donor versus matched sibling donor (HR, 0.29; 99% CI, 0.10-0.79; P = .001).
• Unrelated mismatched donor versus matched sibling donor (HR, 0.17; 99% CI, 0.03-0.95; P = .008).

In total, 127 patients had to resume immune suppression because of GVHD. Such failed attempts at discontinuing immune suppression were associated with receiving peripheral blood stem cells from an unrelated donor versus bone marrow from an unrelated donor, with an HR of 2.62 (99% CI, 1.30-5.29; P less than .001).

A history of acute or chronic GVHD was associated with failure to discontinue immune suppression, the researchers noted.

Lastly, the researchers developed dynamic prediction models for the probability of freedom from immune suppression and GVHD at 1, 3, and 5 years in the future. The team found that graft type, donor type, age, state history, and timing of immune suppression discontinuation were all associated with the likelihood of being free from immune suppression and GVHD at all three time points. Disease risk was only associated with freedom from immune suppression and GVHD at the 1-year mark.

The researchers said their findings must be validated in an independent cohort of patients and, after that, should be tested in a prospective trial.

The current study was funded by the National Heart Lung and Blood Institute. Two of the researchers reported relationships with more than 30 pharmaceutical companies.

jensmith@mdedge.com

SOURCE: Pidala J et al. JAMA Oncol. 2019 Sep 26. doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2019.2974.

New research suggests several factors are associated with failure to discontinue immune suppression after allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant (HCT).

Patients older than 50 years, those with advanced stage disease, patients with a mismatched unrelated donor, and those who received peripheral blood stem cells from an unrelated donor were less likely to discontinue immune suppression successfully, Joseph Pidala, MD, PhD, of Moffitt Cancer Center in Tampa, Fla., and colleagues reported in JAMA Oncology.

The researchers analyzed data from 827 patients in two national Blood and Marrow Transplant Clinical Trial Network studies (NCT00075816 and NCT00406393). These randomized, phase 3 trials enrolled patients with hematologic malignancies who received myeloablative conditioning before allogeneic HCT.

The patients’ median age at HCT was 44 years (range, less than 1 to 67 years), and 55.1% were male. The median follow-up was 72 months (range, 11-124 months).

At 5 years, 20% of patients (n = 168) had successfully discontinued immune suppression and were still alive. A total of 342 patients (41.4%) were able to stop immune suppression, but 127 of them had to resume it after developing graft-versus-host disease (GVHD). There were an additional 47 patients who died or relapsed after stopping immune suppression.

The researchers identified several factors that were significantly associated with lower odds of discontinuing immune suppression and being free of GVHD, including:
 

• Being older than 50 years versus younger than 30 years (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.27; 99% confidence interval [CI], 0.14-0.50; P less than .001).
• Having a mismatched unrelated donor versus having a matched sibling (aOR, 0.37; 99% CI, 0.14-0.97; P = .008).
• Receiving peripheral blood stem cells versus bone marrow, from unrelated donors only (aOR, 0.46; 99% CI, 0.26-0.82; P less than .001).
• Having advanced stage disease versus early disease (aOR, 0.45; 99%CI, 0.23-0.86; P = .002).

The researchers also found that discontinuing immune suppression was not significantly associated with a decreased risk of relapse, with a hazard ratio (HR) of 1.95 (99% CI, 0.88-4.31; P = .03).

There was no significant association between acute GVHD–related variables and discontinuation of immune suppression. However, there were a few factors significantly associated with a lower likelihood of discontinuation after chronic GVHD, including:
 

• Current skin involvement (HR, 0.33; 99% CI, 0.14-0.80; P = .001).
• Unrelated well-matched donor versus matched sibling donor (HR, 0.29; 99% CI, 0.10-0.79; P = .001).
• Unrelated mismatched donor versus matched sibling donor (HR, 0.17; 99% CI, 0.03-0.95; P = .008).

In total, 127 patients had to resume immune suppression because of GVHD. Such failed attempts at discontinuing immune suppression were associated with receiving peripheral blood stem cells from an unrelated donor versus bone marrow from an unrelated donor, with an HR of 2.62 (99% CI, 1.30-5.29; P less than .001).

A history of acute or chronic GVHD was associated with failure to discontinue immune suppression, the researchers noted.

Lastly, the researchers developed dynamic prediction models for the probability of freedom from immune suppression and GVHD at 1, 3, and 5 years in the future. The team found that graft type, donor type, age, state history, and timing of immune suppression discontinuation were all associated with the likelihood of being free from immune suppression and GVHD at all three time points. Disease risk was only associated with freedom from immune suppression and GVHD at the 1-year mark.

The researchers said their findings must be validated in an independent cohort of patients and, after that, should be tested in a prospective trial.

The current study was funded by the National Heart Lung and Blood Institute. Two of the researchers reported relationships with more than 30 pharmaceutical companies.

jensmith@mdedge.com

SOURCE: Pidala J et al. JAMA Oncol. 2019 Sep 26. doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2019.2974.

Prompt autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) is often curative in rituximab-naive patients with follicular lymphoma who have experienced early failure of first-line therapy and achieved a response to second-line therapy, suggest results from a registry-based study conducted by GELTAMO (the Spanish Lymphoma and Bone Marrow Transplant Group).

Patho/Wikimedia Commons/CC BY-SA 3.0(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0)], via Wikimedia Commons

“Overall, our results suggest that, whereas some patients might benefit from more aggressive therapies, such as allogenic stem cell transplantations, or novel drugs, such as immunomodulatory agents, monoclonal antibodies, phosphoinositide 3-kinase inhibitors, or even the application of bispecific T-cell engagers and chimeric antigen receptor T cells, there are a considerable number of patients in this high-risk [early therapy failure] subgroup that can be cured with ASCT, even in the absence of rituximab,” Ana Jiménez-Ubieto, MD, PhD, of the Hospital Universitario, 12 de Octubre, Madrid, Spain, and colleagues wrote.

The results are more favorable when ASCT is performed in patients experiencing early therapy failure, with less than 1 year from first relapse after primary treatment to ASCT.

“Early ASCT could be a hopeful option in patients with difficult access to rituximab,” the researchers wrote in Hematology/Oncology and Stem Cell Therapy.

Patients with follicular lymphoma who experience relapse or progression during or soon after first-line therapy have poor overall survival, and there is no standard therapy for this population, according to the researchers. Previous research has shown that ASCT prolongs survival in those who have received rituximab before transplantation, but benefit in the absence of this agent is unknown.

Dr. Jiménez-Ubieto and colleagues conducted a multicenter registry-based retrospective cohort study of 134 patients with nontransformed follicular lymphoma who underwent ASCT during 1989-2007 while in second complete or partial response to rescue chemotherapy and had not received rituximab.

Overall, 65% of the patients had experienced early therapy failure (relapse or progression within 2 years of starting first-line chemotherapy). Within this group, 78% underwent ASCT within 1 year, and 67% underwent ASCT while in second complete response. Median posttransplantation follow-up for the entire study cohort was 13.4 years.

Study results showed that patients who had experienced early therapy failure versus who had not had poorer 5-year progression-free survival (43% vs. 57%; P = .048) but similar 5-year overall survival (69% vs. 77%; P = .4). However, those patients with early therapy failure who underwent ASCT within 1 year had a statistically indistinguishable 5-year progression-free survival relative to counterparts without early therapy failure (48% vs. 66%; P = .44).

Additionally, the 48% progression-free survival seen in this subset was almost identical to the 49% seen in a historical cohort of patients with early therapy failure who similarly underwent ASCT within 1 year of first relapse but received rituximab before transplantation (Hematol Oncol. 2018;36[5]:765-72). This suggests “that the possible synergistic effect of rituximab plus ASCT is not as relevant if ASCT is offered soon in the course of the disease,” the researchers wrote.

Patients who had experienced early therapy failure achieved better overall survival if they underwent ASCT while in second complete response, as opposed to second partial response. Notably, 56% of those who underwent ASCT while in second complete response were alive at 13.7 years of follow-up and remained so long term.

The study was funded by the Foundation Research Institute at the Hospital Universitario 12 de Octubre. The researchers reported having no relevant conflicts of interest.

SOURCE: Jiménez-Ubieto A et al. Hematol Oncol Stem Cell Ther. 2019 Jul 9. doi: 10.1016/j.hemonc.2019.06.001.

Prompt autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) is often curative in rituximab-naive patients with follicular lymphoma who have experienced early failure of first-line therapy and achieved a response to second-line therapy, suggest results from a registry-based study conducted by GELTAMO (the Spanish Lymphoma and Bone Marrow Transplant Group).

Patho/Wikimedia Commons/CC BY-SA 3.0(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0)], via Wikimedia Commons

“Overall, our results suggest that, whereas some patients might benefit from more aggressive therapies, such as allogenic stem cell transplantations, or novel drugs, such as immunomodulatory agents, monoclonal antibodies, phosphoinositide 3-kinase inhibitors, or even the application of bispecific T-cell engagers and chimeric antigen receptor T cells, there are a considerable number of patients in this high-risk [early therapy failure] subgroup that can be cured with ASCT, even in the absence of rituximab,” Ana Jiménez-Ubieto, MD, PhD, of the Hospital Universitario, 12 de Octubre, Madrid, Spain, and colleagues wrote.

The results are more favorable when ASCT is performed in patients experiencing early therapy failure, with less than 1 year from first relapse after primary treatment to ASCT.

“Early ASCT could be a hopeful option in patients with difficult access to rituximab,” the researchers wrote in Hematology/Oncology and Stem Cell Therapy.

Patients with follicular lymphoma who experience relapse or progression during or soon after first-line therapy have poor overall survival, and there is no standard therapy for this population, according to the researchers. Previous research has shown that ASCT prolongs survival in those who have received rituximab before transplantation, but benefit in the absence of this agent is unknown.

Dr. Jiménez-Ubieto and colleagues conducted a multicenter registry-based retrospective cohort study of 134 patients with nontransformed follicular lymphoma who underwent ASCT during 1989-2007 while in second complete or partial response to rescue chemotherapy and had not received rituximab.

Overall, 65% of the patients had experienced early therapy failure (relapse or progression within 2 years of starting first-line chemotherapy). Within this group, 78% underwent ASCT within 1 year, and 67% underwent ASCT while in second complete response. Median posttransplantation follow-up for the entire study cohort was 13.4 years.

Study results showed that patients who had experienced early therapy failure versus who had not had poorer 5-year progression-free survival (43% vs. 57%; P = .048) but similar 5-year overall survival (69% vs. 77%; P = .4). However, those patients with early therapy failure who underwent ASCT within 1 year had a statistically indistinguishable 5-year progression-free survival relative to counterparts without early therapy failure (48% vs. 66%; P = .44).

Additionally, the 48% progression-free survival seen in this subset was almost identical to the 49% seen in a historical cohort of patients with early therapy failure who similarly underwent ASCT within 1 year of first relapse but received rituximab before transplantation (Hematol Oncol. 2018;36[5]:765-72). This suggests “that the possible synergistic effect of rituximab plus ASCT is not as relevant if ASCT is offered soon in the course of the disease,” the researchers wrote.

Patients who had experienced early therapy failure achieved better overall survival if they underwent ASCT while in second complete response, as opposed to second partial response. Notably, 56% of those who underwent ASCT while in second complete response were alive at 13.7 years of follow-up and remained so long term.

The study was funded by the Foundation Research Institute at the Hospital Universitario 12 de Octubre. The researchers reported having no relevant conflicts of interest.

SOURCE: Jiménez-Ubieto A et al. Hematol Oncol Stem Cell Ther. 2019 Jul 9. doi: 10.1016/j.hemonc.2019.06.001.

Prompt autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) is often curative in rituximab-naive patients with follicular lymphoma who have experienced early failure of first-line therapy and achieved a response to second-line therapy, suggest results from a registry-based study conducted by GELTAMO (the Spanish Lymphoma and Bone Marrow Transplant Group).

Patho/Wikimedia Commons/CC BY-SA 3.0(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0)], via Wikimedia Commons

“Overall, our results suggest that, whereas some patients might benefit from more aggressive therapies, such as allogenic stem cell transplantations, or novel drugs, such as immunomodulatory agents, monoclonal antibodies, phosphoinositide 3-kinase inhibitors, or even the application of bispecific T-cell engagers and chimeric antigen receptor T cells, there are a considerable number of patients in this high-risk [early therapy failure] subgroup that can be cured with ASCT, even in the absence of rituximab,” Ana Jiménez-Ubieto, MD, PhD, of the Hospital Universitario, 12 de Octubre, Madrid, Spain, and colleagues wrote.

The results are more favorable when ASCT is performed in patients experiencing early therapy failure, with less than 1 year from first relapse after primary treatment to ASCT.

“Early ASCT could be a hopeful option in patients with difficult access to rituximab,” the researchers wrote in Hematology/Oncology and Stem Cell Therapy.

Patients with follicular lymphoma who experience relapse or progression during or soon after first-line therapy have poor overall survival, and there is no standard therapy for this population, according to the researchers. Previous research has shown that ASCT prolongs survival in those who have received rituximab before transplantation, but benefit in the absence of this agent is unknown.

Dr. Jiménez-Ubieto and colleagues conducted a multicenter registry-based retrospective cohort study of 134 patients with nontransformed follicular lymphoma who underwent ASCT during 1989-2007 while in second complete or partial response to rescue chemotherapy and had not received rituximab.

Overall, 65% of the patients had experienced early therapy failure (relapse or progression within 2 years of starting first-line chemotherapy). Within this group, 78% underwent ASCT within 1 year, and 67% underwent ASCT while in second complete response. Median posttransplantation follow-up for the entire study cohort was 13.4 years.

Study results showed that patients who had experienced early therapy failure versus who had not had poorer 5-year progression-free survival (43% vs. 57%; P = .048) but similar 5-year overall survival (69% vs. 77%; P = .4). However, those patients with early therapy failure who underwent ASCT within 1 year had a statistically indistinguishable 5-year progression-free survival relative to counterparts without early therapy failure (48% vs. 66%; P = .44).

Additionally, the 48% progression-free survival seen in this subset was almost identical to the 49% seen in a historical cohort of patients with early therapy failure who similarly underwent ASCT within 1 year of first relapse but received rituximab before transplantation (Hematol Oncol. 2018;36[5]:765-72). This suggests “that the possible synergistic effect of rituximab plus ASCT is not as relevant if ASCT is offered soon in the course of the disease,” the researchers wrote.

Patients who had experienced early therapy failure achieved better overall survival if they underwent ASCT while in second complete response, as opposed to second partial response. Notably, 56% of those who underwent ASCT while in second complete response were alive at 13.7 years of follow-up and remained so long term.

The study was funded by the Foundation Research Institute at the Hospital Universitario 12 de Octubre. The researchers reported having no relevant conflicts of interest.

SOURCE: Jiménez-Ubieto A et al. Hematol Oncol Stem Cell Ther. 2019 Jul 9. doi: 10.1016/j.hemonc.2019.06.001.

Can receiving all posttransplant care at home benefit patients undergoing hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT)? Researchers are conducting phase 2 trials to find out.

Nelson Chao, MD, and colleagues at Duke University in Durham, N.C., completed a phase 1 trial that suggested post-HSCT care at home was feasible and safe (Blood. 2017;130:745).

Now, the team is conducting phase 2 trials – NCT01725022 and NCT02218151 – comparing patients who receive all posttransplant care at home with patients treated in the hospital or in the outpatient setting with daily visits to the clinic.

The main goal is to determine if allogeneic HSCT recipients treated at home can maintain their normal microbiome and, as a result, have a lower risk of graft-versus-host disease (GVHD). The researchers are also looking at other outcomes such as quality of life, treatment-related morbidities and mortality, and the cost of care for both allogeneic and autologous transplant recipients.

To be eligible for home care after HSCT, a patient must live within a 90-minute driving distance of Duke and have a caregiver available at home. The patient’s home must pass an inspection, showing it to be free of sources for potential infection, such as mold or pets that sleep in the patient’s bed.

When the time comes for treatment, the patient receives conditioning at the hospital but can return home the day before or the day of transplant. After discharge, the patient is visited by a nurse practitioner or physician assistant each morning for a physical examination and blood draw.

In the afternoon, the patient is visited by a clinic nurse who brings any necessary supplies or treatments, such as blood products or intravenous antibiotics. The patient also has daily video calls with an attending physician and can be admitted to the hospital for any events that cannot be managed in the home setting.

Patients can have visitors and spend time away from home, but precautions are necessary. Friends or family who are sick should not be allowed to visit, and patients should avoid crowds when they go out.

Vidyard Video

Initial findings

The Duke team has treated 41 HSCT recipients at home so far. Dr. Chao said it’s still too early to draw any conclusions about differences in outcomes between home care and inpatient/outpatient HSCT.

However, a preliminary analysis of costs suggests home care is cheaper than inpatient HSCT. The researchers found that, for the first several transplants, at day 60, the cost of home care was roughly half that of inpatient HSCT.

In addition, patients seem to be happy with posttransplant care at home.

“The patients love being at home, in their own environment, with their families,” Dr. Chao said. “Almost every single patient [in the phase 1 trial] said that he or she liked it much better. There was one patient in the phase 1 that felt a little isolated, and I can see why because we say, ‘You can stay home, but don’t have a whole lot of people in.’ ”

 

 

One patient’s experience

Beth Vanderkin said it was “a blessing” to receive care at home after undergoing HSCT at Duke.

Ms. Vanderkin was diagnosed with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma in 2014. After two chemotherapy regimens failed to shrink the tumor in her chest, she underwent radiotherapy and responded well. When a PET scan revealed the tumor had gone completely, she proceeded to transplant.

She received a haploidentical HSCT using cells donated by her eldest daughter, Hannah Eichhorst. Ms. Vanderkin received the transplant in the hospital, and for 2 weeks after that, she made daily visits to the transplant clinic.

After those 2 weeks, Ms. Vanderkin continued her treatment at home. Like other patients eligible for home care, Ms. Vanderkin lived close to Duke, had a caregiver available, and had passed a home inspection. The Duke team shipped the needed medical supplies to her house and arranged twice-daily visits from nurses and daily video calls with a doctor.

Ms. Vanderkin said receiving care at home was “a game changer.” She derived comfort from recovering in her own environment, could spend more time with her family, and didn’t have to miss special events. While receiving care at home, Ms. Vanderkin attended the homecoming event where her son, Josiah, was part of the court. Wearing a face mask and carrying a portable pump in her purse, Ms. Vanderkin joined other mothers in escorting their children onto the football field.

“I got to escort my son out onto the field, and he was crowned king that night,” Ms. Vanderkin said. “I didn’t do a lot of things [while receiving care at home], but there were things I didn’t have to miss because I was at home and not in the hospital.”

Ms. Vanderkin said home care was also beneficial for her husband, who was her caregiver. Thomas Vanderkin was able to work from home while caring for his wife, and the daily nurses’ visits allowed him to run errands without having to leave Ms. Vanderkin alone.

Since her experience with home care, Ms. Vanderkin has spent many more days in the hospital and clinic. She experienced a relapse after the transplant and went on to receive more chemotherapy as well as ipilimumab. She responded to that treatment and has now been cancer-free for 3 years.

The ipilimumab did cause side effects, including intestinal problems that resulted in the need for parenteral nutrition. This side effect was made more bearable, Ms. Vanderkin said, because she was able to receive the parenteral nutrition at home. She and her husband were comfortable with additional home care because of their positive experience with posttransplant care.

“I think we’re conditioned to think that, to receive the best care, we have to be sitting in a hospital room or a clinic, but I think there’s a lot of things we can probably do at home,” Ms. Vanderkin said. “And we might fare a lot better as patients if we’re in an environment that we feel comfortable in.”

 

 

Experience at other centers

The team at Duke is not the first to study HSCT care at home. In fact, researchers in Sweden have been studying posttransplant home care since 1998.

A pilot trial the group published in 2000 suggested that home care was safe and, in some ways, superior to inpatient HSCT (Bone Marrow Transplant. 2000 Nov;26[10]:1057-60). Patients treated at home had a lower rate of bacteremia, fewer days of total parenteral nutrition, fewer erythrocyte transfusions, and fewer days on antibiotics and analgesics. Rates of fever, engraftment time, and acute GVHD were similar between the inpatient and home-care groups.

A study published by the same researchers in 2002 showed that patients who received home care had lower rates of grade 2-4 acute GVHD and transplant-related mortality compared to inpatients (Blood. 2002 Dec 15;100[13]:4317-24). Two-year overall survival was superior with home care as well.

On the other hand, a study the group published in 2013 showed no significant differences in 5-year survival, transplant-related mortality, relapse, or chronic GVHD between inpatients and those who received care at home (Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2013. doi: 10.1016/j.bbmt.2012.11.5189).

The phase 2 trials at Duke should provide more insight into patient outcomes, but results probably won’t be available for 2 more years, Dr. Chao said.

In the meantime, other U.S. researchers are studying home care as well. Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center is conducting a pilot study to determine if HSCT care at home is feasible (NCT02671448).

Dr. Chao said home care should be possible for other centers, particularly those that already perform outpatient HSCT.

“Having the outpatient infrastructure to support these patients is a big step,” he said. “And I think we were able to do that mainly because we do most of our transplants in the outpatient setting already. So that jump to the home is a little less compared to a center that does no outpatient transplants.”

He added, “There’s a certain amount of inertia to overcome and a certain amount of apprehension from the caregivers initially because [patients aren’t] sitting in your unit all the time, but I don’t see this as a huge barrier.”

In fact, Dr. Chao said, if results with home care are favorable, it could potentially replace inpatient HSCT for certain patients.

Dr. Chao’s research is supported by Duke University, and he reported having no relevant financial disclosures.

jensmith@mdedge.com

Can receiving all posttransplant care at home benefit patients undergoing hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT)? Researchers are conducting phase 2 trials to find out.

Nelson Chao, MD, and colleagues at Duke University in Durham, N.C., completed a phase 1 trial that suggested post-HSCT care at home was feasible and safe (Blood. 2017;130:745).

Now, the team is conducting phase 2 trials – NCT01725022 and NCT02218151 – comparing patients who receive all posttransplant care at home with patients treated in the hospital or in the outpatient setting with daily visits to the clinic.

The main goal is to determine if allogeneic HSCT recipients treated at home can maintain their normal microbiome and, as a result, have a lower risk of graft-versus-host disease (GVHD). The researchers are also looking at other outcomes such as quality of life, treatment-related morbidities and mortality, and the cost of care for both allogeneic and autologous transplant recipients.

To be eligible for home care after HSCT, a patient must live within a 90-minute driving distance of Duke and have a caregiver available at home. The patient’s home must pass an inspection, showing it to be free of sources for potential infection, such as mold or pets that sleep in the patient’s bed.

When the time comes for treatment, the patient receives conditioning at the hospital but can return home the day before or the day of transplant. After discharge, the patient is visited by a nurse practitioner or physician assistant each morning for a physical examination and blood draw.

In the afternoon, the patient is visited by a clinic nurse who brings any necessary supplies or treatments, such as blood products or intravenous antibiotics. The patient also has daily video calls with an attending physician and can be admitted to the hospital for any events that cannot be managed in the home setting.

Patients can have visitors and spend time away from home, but precautions are necessary. Friends or family who are sick should not be allowed to visit, and patients should avoid crowds when they go out.

Vidyard Video

Initial findings

The Duke team has treated 41 HSCT recipients at home so far. Dr. Chao said it’s still too early to draw any conclusions about differences in outcomes between home care and inpatient/outpatient HSCT.

However, a preliminary analysis of costs suggests home care is cheaper than inpatient HSCT. The researchers found that, for the first several transplants, at day 60, the cost of home care was roughly half that of inpatient HSCT.

In addition, patients seem to be happy with posttransplant care at home.

“The patients love being at home, in their own environment, with their families,” Dr. Chao said. “Almost every single patient [in the phase 1 trial] said that he or she liked it much better. There was one patient in the phase 1 that felt a little isolated, and I can see why because we say, ‘You can stay home, but don’t have a whole lot of people in.’ ”

 

 

One patient’s experience

Beth Vanderkin said it was “a blessing” to receive care at home after undergoing HSCT at Duke.

Ms. Vanderkin was diagnosed with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma in 2014. After two chemotherapy regimens failed to shrink the tumor in her chest, she underwent radiotherapy and responded well. When a PET scan revealed the tumor had gone completely, she proceeded to transplant.

She received a haploidentical HSCT using cells donated by her eldest daughter, Hannah Eichhorst. Ms. Vanderkin received the transplant in the hospital, and for 2 weeks after that, she made daily visits to the transplant clinic.

After those 2 weeks, Ms. Vanderkin continued her treatment at home. Like other patients eligible for home care, Ms. Vanderkin lived close to Duke, had a caregiver available, and had passed a home inspection. The Duke team shipped the needed medical supplies to her house and arranged twice-daily visits from nurses and daily video calls with a doctor.

Ms. Vanderkin said receiving care at home was “a game changer.” She derived comfort from recovering in her own environment, could spend more time with her family, and didn’t have to miss special events. While receiving care at home, Ms. Vanderkin attended the homecoming event where her son, Josiah, was part of the court. Wearing a face mask and carrying a portable pump in her purse, Ms. Vanderkin joined other mothers in escorting their children onto the football field.

“I got to escort my son out onto the field, and he was crowned king that night,” Ms. Vanderkin said. “I didn’t do a lot of things [while receiving care at home], but there were things I didn’t have to miss because I was at home and not in the hospital.”

Ms. Vanderkin said home care was also beneficial for her husband, who was her caregiver. Thomas Vanderkin was able to work from home while caring for his wife, and the daily nurses’ visits allowed him to run errands without having to leave Ms. Vanderkin alone.

Since her experience with home care, Ms. Vanderkin has spent many more days in the hospital and clinic. She experienced a relapse after the transplant and went on to receive more chemotherapy as well as ipilimumab. She responded to that treatment and has now been cancer-free for 3 years.

The ipilimumab did cause side effects, including intestinal problems that resulted in the need for parenteral nutrition. This side effect was made more bearable, Ms. Vanderkin said, because she was able to receive the parenteral nutrition at home. She and her husband were comfortable with additional home care because of their positive experience with posttransplant care.

“I think we’re conditioned to think that, to receive the best care, we have to be sitting in a hospital room or a clinic, but I think there’s a lot of things we can probably do at home,” Ms. Vanderkin said. “And we might fare a lot better as patients if we’re in an environment that we feel comfortable in.”

 

 

Experience at other centers

The team at Duke is not the first to study HSCT care at home. In fact, researchers in Sweden have been studying posttransplant home care since 1998.

A pilot trial the group published in 2000 suggested that home care was safe and, in some ways, superior to inpatient HSCT (Bone Marrow Transplant. 2000 Nov;26[10]:1057-60). Patients treated at home had a lower rate of bacteremia, fewer days of total parenteral nutrition, fewer erythrocyte transfusions, and fewer days on antibiotics and analgesics. Rates of fever, engraftment time, and acute GVHD were similar between the inpatient and home-care groups.

A study published by the same researchers in 2002 showed that patients who received home care had lower rates of grade 2-4 acute GVHD and transplant-related mortality compared to inpatients (Blood. 2002 Dec 15;100[13]:4317-24). Two-year overall survival was superior with home care as well.

On the other hand, a study the group published in 2013 showed no significant differences in 5-year survival, transplant-related mortality, relapse, or chronic GVHD between inpatients and those who received care at home (Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2013. doi: 10.1016/j.bbmt.2012.11.5189).

The phase 2 trials at Duke should provide more insight into patient outcomes, but results probably won’t be available for 2 more years, Dr. Chao said.

In the meantime, other U.S. researchers are studying home care as well. Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center is conducting a pilot study to determine if HSCT care at home is feasible (NCT02671448).

Dr. Chao said home care should be possible for other centers, particularly those that already perform outpatient HSCT.

“Having the outpatient infrastructure to support these patients is a big step,” he said. “And I think we were able to do that mainly because we do most of our transplants in the outpatient setting already. So that jump to the home is a little less compared to a center that does no outpatient transplants.”

He added, “There’s a certain amount of inertia to overcome and a certain amount of apprehension from the caregivers initially because [patients aren’t] sitting in your unit all the time, but I don’t see this as a huge barrier.”

In fact, Dr. Chao said, if results with home care are favorable, it could potentially replace inpatient HSCT for certain patients.

Dr. Chao’s research is supported by Duke University, and he reported having no relevant financial disclosures.

jensmith@mdedge.com

Can receiving all posttransplant care at home benefit patients undergoing hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT)? Researchers are conducting phase 2 trials to find out.

Nelson Chao, MD, and colleagues at Duke University in Durham, N.C., completed a phase 1 trial that suggested post-HSCT care at home was feasible and safe (Blood. 2017;130:745).

Now, the team is conducting phase 2 trials – NCT01725022 and NCT02218151 – comparing patients who receive all posttransplant care at home with patients treated in the hospital or in the outpatient setting with daily visits to the clinic.

The main goal is to determine if allogeneic HSCT recipients treated at home can maintain their normal microbiome and, as a result, have a lower risk of graft-versus-host disease (GVHD). The researchers are also looking at other outcomes such as quality of life, treatment-related morbidities and mortality, and the cost of care for both allogeneic and autologous transplant recipients.

To be eligible for home care after HSCT, a patient must live within a 90-minute driving distance of Duke and have a caregiver available at home. The patient’s home must pass an inspection, showing it to be free of sources for potential infection, such as mold or pets that sleep in the patient’s bed.

When the time comes for treatment, the patient receives conditioning at the hospital but can return home the day before or the day of transplant. After discharge, the patient is visited by a nurse practitioner or physician assistant each morning for a physical examination and blood draw.

In the afternoon, the patient is visited by a clinic nurse who brings any necessary supplies or treatments, such as blood products or intravenous antibiotics. The patient also has daily video calls with an attending physician and can be admitted to the hospital for any events that cannot be managed in the home setting.

Patients can have visitors and spend time away from home, but precautions are necessary. Friends or family who are sick should not be allowed to visit, and patients should avoid crowds when they go out.

Vidyard Video

Initial findings

The Duke team has treated 41 HSCT recipients at home so far. Dr. Chao said it’s still too early to draw any conclusions about differences in outcomes between home care and inpatient/outpatient HSCT.

However, a preliminary analysis of costs suggests home care is cheaper than inpatient HSCT. The researchers found that, for the first several transplants, at day 60, the cost of home care was roughly half that of inpatient HSCT.

In addition, patients seem to be happy with posttransplant care at home.

“The patients love being at home, in their own environment, with their families,” Dr. Chao said. “Almost every single patient [in the phase 1 trial] said that he or she liked it much better. There was one patient in the phase 1 that felt a little isolated, and I can see why because we say, ‘You can stay home, but don’t have a whole lot of people in.’ ”

 

 

One patient’s experience

Beth Vanderkin said it was “a blessing” to receive care at home after undergoing HSCT at Duke.

Ms. Vanderkin was diagnosed with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma in 2014. After two chemotherapy regimens failed to shrink the tumor in her chest, she underwent radiotherapy and responded well. When a PET scan revealed the tumor had gone completely, she proceeded to transplant.

She received a haploidentical HSCT using cells donated by her eldest daughter, Hannah Eichhorst. Ms. Vanderkin received the transplant in the hospital, and for 2 weeks after that, she made daily visits to the transplant clinic.

After those 2 weeks, Ms. Vanderkin continued her treatment at home. Like other patients eligible for home care, Ms. Vanderkin lived close to Duke, had a caregiver available, and had passed a home inspection. The Duke team shipped the needed medical supplies to her house and arranged twice-daily visits from nurses and daily video calls with a doctor.

Ms. Vanderkin said receiving care at home was “a game changer.” She derived comfort from recovering in her own environment, could spend more time with her family, and didn’t have to miss special events. While receiving care at home, Ms. Vanderkin attended the homecoming event where her son, Josiah, was part of the court. Wearing a face mask and carrying a portable pump in her purse, Ms. Vanderkin joined other mothers in escorting their children onto the football field.

“I got to escort my son out onto the field, and he was crowned king that night,” Ms. Vanderkin said. “I didn’t do a lot of things [while receiving care at home], but there were things I didn’t have to miss because I was at home and not in the hospital.”

Ms. Vanderkin said home care was also beneficial for her husband, who was her caregiver. Thomas Vanderkin was able to work from home while caring for his wife, and the daily nurses’ visits allowed him to run errands without having to leave Ms. Vanderkin alone.

Since her experience with home care, Ms. Vanderkin has spent many more days in the hospital and clinic. She experienced a relapse after the transplant and went on to receive more chemotherapy as well as ipilimumab. She responded to that treatment and has now been cancer-free for 3 years.

The ipilimumab did cause side effects, including intestinal problems that resulted in the need for parenteral nutrition. This side effect was made more bearable, Ms. Vanderkin said, because she was able to receive the parenteral nutrition at home. She and her husband were comfortable with additional home care because of their positive experience with posttransplant care.

“I think we’re conditioned to think that, to receive the best care, we have to be sitting in a hospital room or a clinic, but I think there’s a lot of things we can probably do at home,” Ms. Vanderkin said. “And we might fare a lot better as patients if we’re in an environment that we feel comfortable in.”

 

 

Experience at other centers

The team at Duke is not the first to study HSCT care at home. In fact, researchers in Sweden have been studying posttransplant home care since 1998.

A pilot trial the group published in 2000 suggested that home care was safe and, in some ways, superior to inpatient HSCT (Bone Marrow Transplant. 2000 Nov;26[10]:1057-60). Patients treated at home had a lower rate of bacteremia, fewer days of total parenteral nutrition, fewer erythrocyte transfusions, and fewer days on antibiotics and analgesics. Rates of fever, engraftment time, and acute GVHD were similar between the inpatient and home-care groups.

A study published by the same researchers in 2002 showed that patients who received home care had lower rates of grade 2-4 acute GVHD and transplant-related mortality compared to inpatients (Blood. 2002 Dec 15;100[13]:4317-24). Two-year overall survival was superior with home care as well.

On the other hand, a study the group published in 2013 showed no significant differences in 5-year survival, transplant-related mortality, relapse, or chronic GVHD between inpatients and those who received care at home (Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2013. doi: 10.1016/j.bbmt.2012.11.5189).

The phase 2 trials at Duke should provide more insight into patient outcomes, but results probably won’t be available for 2 more years, Dr. Chao said.

In the meantime, other U.S. researchers are studying home care as well. Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center is conducting a pilot study to determine if HSCT care at home is feasible (NCT02671448).

Dr. Chao said home care should be possible for other centers, particularly those that already perform outpatient HSCT.

“Having the outpatient infrastructure to support these patients is a big step,” he said. “And I think we were able to do that mainly because we do most of our transplants in the outpatient setting already. So that jump to the home is a little less compared to a center that does no outpatient transplants.”

He added, “There’s a certain amount of inertia to overcome and a certain amount of apprehension from the caregivers initially because [patients aren’t] sitting in your unit all the time, but I don’t see this as a huge barrier.”

In fact, Dr. Chao said, if results with home care are favorable, it could potentially replace inpatient HSCT for certain patients.

Dr. Chao’s research is supported by Duke University, and he reported having no relevant financial disclosures.

jensmith@mdedge.com