Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorChhabra, Saurabh
dc.contributor.authorCerny, Jan
dc.date2022-08-11T08:09:51.000
dc.date.accessioned2022-08-23T16:46:19Z
dc.date.available2022-08-23T16:46:19Z
dc.date.issued2018-11-13
dc.date.submitted2018-12-21
dc.identifier.citation<p>Blood Adv. 2018 Nov 13;2(21):2922-2936. doi: 10.1182/bloodadvances.2018024844. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1182/bloodadvances.2018024844">Link to article on publisher's site</a></p>
dc.identifier.issn2473-9529 (Linking)
dc.identifier.doi10.1182/bloodadvances.2018024844
dc.identifier.pmid30396912
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14038/40856
dc.description<p>Full author list omitted for brevity. For the full list of authors, see article.</p>
dc.description.abstractAllogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (allo-HCT) is a potentially curative treatment of chronic myeloid leukemia (CML). Optimal conditioning intensity for allo-HCT for CML in the era of tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) is unknown. Using the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research database, we sought to determine whether reduced-intensity/nonmyeloablative conditioning (RIC) allo-HCT and myeloablative conditioning (MAC) result in similar outcomes in CML patients. We evaluated 1395 CML allo-HCT recipients between the ages of 18 and 60 years. The disease status at transplant was divided into the following categories: chronic phase 1, chronic phase 2 or greater, and accelerated phase. Patients in blast phase at transplant and alternative donor transplants were excluded. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS) after allo-HCT. MAC (n = 1204) and RIC allo-HCT recipients (n = 191) from 2007 to 2014 were included. Patient, disease, and transplantation characteristics were similar, with a few exceptions. Multivariable analysis showed no significant difference in OS between MAC and RIC groups. In addition, leukemia-free survival and nonrelapse mortality did not differ significantly between the 2 groups. Compared with MAC, the RIC group had a higher risk of early relapse after allo-HCT (hazard ratio [HR], 1.85; P = .001). The cumulative incidence of chronic graft-versus-host disease (cGVHD) was lower with RIC than with MAC (HR, 0.77; P = .02). RIC provides similar survival and lower cGVHD compared with MAC and therefore may be a reasonable alternative to MAC for CML patients in the TKI era.
dc.language.isoen_US
dc.relation<p><a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&list_uids=30396912&dopt=Abstract">Link to Article in PubMed</a></p>
dc.relation.urlhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6234373/
dc.subjectMyeloid Neoplasia
dc.subjectTransplantation
dc.subjectEnzymes and Coenzymes
dc.subjectHematology
dc.subjectHemic and Lymphatic Diseases
dc.subjectNeoplasms
dc.subjectOncology
dc.subjectSurgical Procedures, Operative
dc.subjectTherapeutics
dc.titleMyeloablative vs reduced-intensity conditioning allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation for chronic myeloid leukemia
dc.typeJournal Article
dc.source.journaltitleBlood advances
dc.source.volume2
dc.source.issue21
dc.identifier.legacycoverpagehttps://escholarship.umassmed.edu/oapubs/3661
dc.identifier.contextkey13525550
html.description.abstract<p>Allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (allo-HCT) is a potentially curative treatment of chronic myeloid leukemia (CML). Optimal conditioning intensity for allo-HCT for CML in the era of tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) is unknown. Using the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research database, we sought to determine whether reduced-intensity/nonmyeloablative conditioning (RIC) allo-HCT and myeloablative conditioning (MAC) result in similar outcomes in CML patients. We evaluated 1395 CML allo-HCT recipients between the ages of 18 and 60 years. The disease status at transplant was divided into the following categories: chronic phase 1, chronic phase 2 or greater, and accelerated phase. Patients in blast phase at transplant and alternative donor transplants were excluded. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS) after allo-HCT. MAC (n = 1204) and RIC allo-HCT recipients (n = 191) from 2007 to 2014 were included. Patient, disease, and transplantation characteristics were similar, with a few exceptions. Multivariable analysis showed no significant difference in OS between MAC and RIC groups. In addition, leukemia-free survival and nonrelapse mortality did not differ significantly between the 2 groups. Compared with MAC, the RIC group had a higher risk of early relapse after allo-HCT (hazard ratio [HR], 1.85; P = .001). The cumulative incidence of chronic graft-versus-host disease (cGVHD) was lower with RIC than with MAC (HR, 0.77; P = .02). RIC provides similar survival and lower cGVHD compared with MAC and therefore may be a reasonable alternative to MAC for CML patients in the TKI era.</p>
dc.identifier.submissionpathoapubs/3661
dc.contributor.departmentDepartment of Medicine, Division of Hematology Oncology
dc.source.pages2922-2936


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record