All content on this site is intended for healthcare professionals only. By acknowledging this message and accessing the information on this website you are confirming that you are a Healthcare Professional. If you are a patient or carer, please visit Know ALL.
Introducing
Now you can personalise
your ALL Hub experience!
Bookmark content to read later
Select your specific areas of interest
View content recommended for you
Find out moreThe ALL Hub website uses a third-party service provided by Google that dynamically translates web content. Translations are machine generated, so may not be an exact or complete translation, and the ALL Hub cannot guarantee the accuracy of translated content. The ALL Hub and its employees will not be liable for any direct, indirect, or consequential damages (even if foreseeable) resulting from use of the Google Translate feature. For further support with Google Translate, visit Google Translate Help.
The ALL Hub is an independent medical education platform, sponsored by Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Amgen, and Pfizer. The funders are allowed no direct influence on our content. The levels of sponsorship listed are reflective of the amount of funding given. View funders.
Bookmark this article
There is limited evidence supporting the use of haploidentical hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) as an alternative to traditional matched sibling donor (MSD) and matched unrelated donor (MUD) allogeneic HCT for acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL). The existing retrospective, comparative studies have found no differences in the overall survival (OS) between haploidentical HCT and MSD, MUD, or mismatched MUD (MMUD) HCT, and there is a lack of data to establish a superior donor approach among haploidentical HCT with posttransplant cyclophosphamide (PTCy), 7/8 human leukocyte antigen-matched unrelated donor (7/8 HLA-matched-UD) HCT, and umbilical cord blood (UCB) HCT for adult patients with ALL.1
Wieduwilt and colleagues recently published in Blood Advances, a retrospective study comparing outcomes between adult patients with ALL undergoing haploidentical HCT using PTCy versus MSD HCT, MUD HCT, 7/8-HLA-matched-UD HCT, or UCB HCT.1 Here we summarize the key findings.
This was a retrospective, cohort study using patient data generated from the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research (CIBMTR) registry. Eligible patients were aged >18 years, were in complete remission (CR) 1, 2, or 3+ undergoing their first allogeneic HCT from a haploidentical, HLA-matched sibling, 8/8 HLA-matched unrelated, 7/8 HLA-matched unrelated, or UCB donor.
Secondary outcomes included:
A total of 4,201 patients were included in the five cohorts and the baseline characteristics were well balanced for age, sex, Karnofsky performance status, HCT-comorbidity index (HCT-CI), immunophenotype, cytogenetic risk, Philadelphia chromosome (Ph)/BCR-ABL1 status, disease status, minimal residual disease (MRD) status at transplantation, and recipient cytomegalovirus (CMV) serostatus (Table 1).
There were, however, some notable differences between the cohorts as summarized in Table 1. The haploidentical HCT cohort had the lowest percentage of non-Hispanic white patients, and included patients who were more likely to use reduced intensity conditioning (RIC) and bone marrow as graft source.
Table 1. Baseline characteristics*
Characteristic, % (unless otherwise stated) |
Donor/HCT cohort |
||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Haploidentical |
MSD |
MUD |
7/8 HLA-matched-UD |
UCB |
|
Median donor age, range |
35 |
41 |
28 |
31 |
NA‡ |
Race |
|||||
Hispanic white |
22 |
15 |
8 |
18 |
21 |
Non-Hispanic white |
43 |
52 |
74 |
49 |
49 |
Black |
15 |
5 |
3 |
8 |
9 |
Asian |
6 |
7 |
4 |
4 |
7 |
Other/not specified† |
14 |
22 |
10 |
20 |
14 |
Time from diagnosis to HCT (CR1-only) |
|||||
0–5 months |
48 |
65 |
59 |
38 |
44 |
6–11 months |
43 |
30 |
37 |
54 |
48 |
≥12 months |
9 |
6 |
5 |
8 |
8 |
Conditioning regimen |
|||||
MAC, TBI-based |
41 |
60 |
58 |
60 |
71 |
MAC, chemotherapy-based |
16 |
20 |
19 |
22 |
4 |
RIC/NMA |
42 |
19 |
23 |
17 |
25 |
Graft source |
|||||
Bone marrow |
41 |
14 |
19 |
29 |
— |
Peripheral blood |
59 |
86 |
81 |
71 |
— |
GvHD prophylaxis |
|||||
CNI + MTX ± others |
0 |
68 |
71 |
70 |
2 |
CNI + MMF ± others |
0 |
15 |
12 |
8 |
87 |
CNI + others |
0 |
7 |
9 |
6 |
2 |
CNI alone |
0 |
4 |
4 |
2 |
5 |
PTCy + CNI ± MMF |
100 |
5 |
4 |
13 |
<1 |
Other prophylaxis |
0 |
1 |
<1 |
<1 |
3 |
In vivo T-cell depletion |
|||||
Antithymocyte globulin |
1 |
5 |
34 |
50 |
13 |
Alemtuzumab |
0 |
2 |
4 |
3 |
0 |
None |
99 |
93 |
61 |
46 |
87 |
CMV, cytomegalovirus; CNI, calcineurin inhibitor; CR, complete remission; F, female; HCT, hematopoietic cell transplant; HLA-matched-UD, human leukocyte antigen-matched unrelated donor; M, male; MAC, myeloablative conditioning; MMF, mycophenolate mofetil; MRD, minimal residual disease; MSD, matched sibling donor; MTX, methotrexate; MUD, matched unrelated donor; NA, not applicable; NMA, non-myeloablative; PTCy, posttransplant cyclophosphamide; RIC, reduced intensity conditioning; TBI, total body irradiation; UCB, umbilical cord blood. |
In multivariate analysis, compared to haploidentical HCT:
Table 2. Multivariate analysis for outcomes*
Outcome |
HR (95% CI), p value† |
|||
---|---|---|---|---|
MSD HCT vs Haploidentical HCT |
MUD HCT vs Haploidentical HCT |
7/8 HLA-matched-UD HCT vs Haploidentical HCT |
UCB HCT vs Haploidentical HCT |
|
OS |
1.13 |
1.17 |
1.38 |
— |
≤18 months |
— |
— |
— |
1.93 |
>18 months |
— |
— |
— |
0.68 |
LFS |
1.03 |
1.03 |
1.21 |
— |
≤18 months |
— |
— |
— |
1.40 |
>18 months |
— |
— |
— |
0.58 |
NRM |
1.06 |
1.42 |
2.13 |
2.08 |
Relapse |
0.99 |
0.83 |
0.81 |
0.83 |
aGvHD |
0.92 |
1.17 |
1.33 |
1.83 |
aGvHD |
1.09 |
1.59 |
1.86 |
1.97 |
cGvHD |
— |
— |
1.72 |
1.13 |
D/R sex match = F/M |
2.59 |
2.91 |
— |
— |
D/R sex match = other |
1.37 |
1.38 |
— |
— |
aGvHD, acute graft-versus-host disease; cGvHD, chronic graft-versus-host disease; CI, confidence interval; D, donor; F, female; HCT, hematopoietic cell transplantation; HR, hazard ratio; LFS, leukemia-free survival; M, male; MSD, matched sibling donor; MUD, matched unrelated donor; NRM, nonrelapse mortality; OS, overall survival; R, recipient; UCB, umbilical cord blood. |
This retrospective study demonstrated that haploidentical HCT using PTCy could be a preferred alternative donor HCT approach in adult patients with ALL, with superior OS compared with 7/8-HLA-matched-UD and UCB HCT. Although the OS was similar with haploidentical HCT compared to traditional MDS and MUD HCT, the risk of GvHD was reduced in the haploidentical HCT cohort. Further research aiming to prevent relapse, reduce death by infections, and establishing the role of haploidentical HCT using PTCy at different stages of ALL remission with a longer-term follow-up are warranted.
Your opinion matters
Subscribe to get the best content related to ALL delivered to your inbox