-
1.
Comprehensive clinical-molecular transplant scoring system for myelofibrosis undergoing stem cell transplantation
Gagelmann, N., Ditschkowski, M., Bogdanov, R., Bredin, S., Robin, M., Cassinat, B., Shahswar, R., Thol, F., Heuser, M., Socie, G., et al
Blood. 2019
-
-
-
Free full text
-
Full text
-
Editor's Choice
Abstract
Allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation is curative in myelofibrosis and current prognostic scoring systems aim to select patients for transplantation. Here, we aimed to develop a prognostic score to determine prognosis after transplantation itself using clinical, molecular and transplant-specific information of a total of 361 myelofibrosis patients. Of these, 205 patients were used as a training cohort to create a clinical-molecular myelofibrosis transplant scoring system (MTSS), which was then externally validated in a cohort of 156 patients. Multivariable analysis on survival identified age ≥ 57 years, Karnofsky performance status < 90%, platelet count < 150 x 109/L and leukocyte count > 25 x 10(9)/L prior to transplantation, HLA-mismatched unrelated donor, ASXL1 mutation and non-CALR/MPL driver mutation genotype being independent predictors of outcome. The uncorrected concordance index for the final survival model was 0.723, and bias-corrected indices were similar. Risk factors were incorporated into a 4-level MTSS low (score of 0-2), intermediate (score of 3-4), high (score of 5), and very high (score of > 5). The 5-year survival according to risk groups in the validation cohort was 83% (95% CI, 71-95%), 64% (95% CI, 53-75%), 37% (95% CI, 17-57%), and 22% (95% CI, 4-39%), respectively (p < 0.001). Increasing score was predictive of non-relapse mortality (p < 0.001) and remained applicable to primary (0.718) and post-ET/PV myelofibrosis (0.701) improving prognostic ability in comparison to all currently available disease-specific systems. In conclusion, this myelofibrosis transplant score (MTSS) predicts outcome of primary and post-ET/PV myelofibrosis patients undergoing allogeneic stem cell transplantation.
PICO Summary
Population
361 myelofibrosis patients
Intervention
clinical-molecular Myelofibrosis Transplant Scoring System (MTSS)
Comparison
DIPSS, MIPSS70, and MYSEC-PM scoring systems
Outcome
MTSS predicts outcome of primary and post-ET/PV myelofibrosis patients undergoing allogeneic stem cell transplantation
-
2.
Comparison of DIPSS and MYSEC-PM for prediction of outcome in post-PV and ET myelofibrosis after allogeneic stem-cell transplantation
Gagelmann, N., Eikema, D. J., de Wreede, L. C., Koster, L., Wolschke, C., Arnold, R., Kanz, L., McQuaker, G., Marchand, T., Socie, G., et al
Biology of blood and marrow transplantation : journal of the American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation. 2019
-
-
-
Free full text
-
Editor's Choice
Abstract
We aimed to validate the MYelofibrosis SECondary to PV and ET prognostic model (MYSEC- PM) in 159 patients with myelofibrosis secondary to polycythemia vera (PV) and essential thrombocythemia (ET) from the European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation registry undergoing transplantation from matched siblings or unrelated donors. Furthermore, we aimed to test its prognostic performance in comparison with the Dynamic International Prognostic Scoring System (DIPSS). Score performance was analyzed using the concordance index (C): the probability that a patient who experienced an event had a higher risk score than a patient who did not (C >0.5 suggesting predictive ability). Median follow-up of the total cohort was 41 months (34-54 months) being different in post-PV (45 months) and post-ET myelofibrosis (38 months). Survival at one, two, and four years was 70% (63-77%), 61% (53- 69%) and 52% (43-61%) for the total cohort, 70% (59-80%), 61% (49-73%) and 51% (38-64%) for post-PV, and 71% (61-81%), 61% (50-72%) and 54% (42-66%) for post-ET myelofibrosis (p=0.78). Overall, the DIPSS was not significantly predictive of outcome (p=0.28). With respect to the MYSEC-PM, overall survival at four years was 69% for the low-risk, 55% for the intermediate-1-risk, 47% for the intermediate-2-risk, and 22% (0-45%) for the high-risk group. The prognostic model was predictive of survival overall (p=0.05) while groups with intermediate-2 and high risk showed no significant difference (p=0.44). Assessment of prognostic utility yielded C-index of 0.575 (0.502-0.648) for the DIPSS while assessment of the MYSEC-PM resulted in C-statistics of 0.636 (0.563-0.708) indicating improvement in prediction of posttransplant survival using the new MYSEC-PM. In addition, transplantations from an unrelated donor in comparison with an HLA-identical sibling showed worse outcome (p=0.04) and transplant recipients seropositive for cytomegalovirus in comparison with seronegative recipients (p=0.01) showed worse survival. In conclusion, incorporating transplant-specific as well as clinical and mutational information together with the MYSEC-PM may enhance risk stratification.
PICO Summary
Population
Patients with myelofibrosis secondary to polycythemia vera (PV) and essential thrombocythemia (ET) from the European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation registry undergoing transplantation from matched siblings or unrelated donors. (n=159)
Intervention
MYelofibrosis SECondary to PV and ET prognostic model (MYSEC- PM)
Comparison
Dynamic International Prognostic Scoring System (DIPSS)
Outcome
Overall, the DIPSS was not significantly predictive of outcome. MYSEC-PM was predictive of survival overall, while groups with intermediate-2 and high risk showed no significant difference. Assessment of prognostic utility yielded C-index of 0.575 for the DIPSS while assessment of the MYSEC-PM resulted in C-statistics of 0.636, indicating improvement in prediction of posttransplant survival using the new MYSEC-PM.
-
3.
Antilymphocyte Globulin for matched sibling donor transplantation in patients with myelofibrosis
Robin, M., Chevret, S., Koster, L., Wolschke, C., Yakoub-Agha, I., Bourhis, J. H., Chevallier, P., Cornelissen, J. J., Remenyi, P., Maertens, J., et al
Haematologica. 2019
Abstract
Antihuman T-lymphocyte immunoglobulin is still much debated in the setting of transplant from an HLA matched related donor. Acute and chronic graft-versus-host disease are the main cause of morbidity and mortality after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell in patients with myelofibrosis. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of antihuman T-lymphocyte immunoglobulin in a large cohort of patients with myelofibrosis. 287 patients were included in the study. Cumulative incidence of grade 2-4 acute graft-versus-host disease was 26% and 41% with or without antihuman T-lymphocyte immunoglobulin. Chronic graft-versus-host disease incidence was 52% and 55%. Non-adjusted overall Survival, Disease Free Survival and non-relapse mortality were 55% vs 53%, 49% vs 45%, and 32% vs 31%, respectively with or without antihuman T-lymphocyte immunoglobulin. An adjusted model confirmed that acute graft-versus-host disease risk was lower following antihuman T-lymphocyte immunoglobulin (Hazard ratio : 0.54, p=0.010) whilst it did not decrease the risk of chronic graft-versus-host disease. Hazard ratio for overall survival and non-relapse mortality were 0.66 and 0.64, with p-value at 0.05 and 0.09, respectively. Antihuman T-lymphocyte immunoglobulin did not influence disease-free survival, graft-versus-host disease and relapse free survival and relapse risk. In conclusion, in the setting of matched related transplantation in myelofibrosis patients, this study demonstrates that antihuman T-lymphocyte immunoglobulin decreases acute graft-versus-host disease risk without increasing relapse risk.
-
4.
Myeloablative and Reduced-intensity conditioned Allogeneic Haematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation in Myelofibrosis: A Retrospective Study by the Chronic Malignancies Working Party of EBMT
McLornan, D., Szydlo, R., Koster, L., Chalandon, Y., Robin, M., Wolschke, C., Beelen, D., Socie, G., Bornhauser, M., Angelucci, E., et al
Biology of blood and marrow transplantation : journal of the American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation. 2019
Abstract
This retrospective study by the EBMT analysed the outcome of 2224 Myelofibrosis patients who underwent allogeneic stem cell transplantation (allo-SCT) between 2000-2014; 781 (35%) underwent myeloablative conditioning (MAC) and 1443 (65%) reduced intensity conditioning (RIC). Median patient age was 52.9 years (r, 18-74) and 57.5 years (range(r), 21-76) in the MAC and RIC cohorts respectively. Donor type was similar: matched sibling donors (MAC- 317 (41%)) and RIC- 552 (38%) and unrelated donors (UD; MAC (464 (59%); RIC- 891 (62%)). Median time to both neutrophil and platelet (>20x10(9)/L) engraftment did not differ between cohorts. Rates of grade II-IV acute (a) GVHD were 28% (MAC) and 31% (RIC; (p=ns). Cumulative cGVHD rates (limited/ extensive) were 22%/27% (MAC) and 19%/ 31% (RIC; p=0.10). Cumulative incidences of Non-relapse mortality (NRM) at 1, 3 and 5-years were: 25.5%, 32.2% and 34.6% (MAC) and 26.3%, 32.8% and 34.4% (RIC). There was a trend towards a higher relapse rate with RIC regimens compared to MAC (p=0.08); rates at 1, 3 and 5-years were: 10.9%, 17.2% and 20.1% (MAC) and 14%, 19.7% and 23.2% (RIC), respectively. No significant difference in 5yr probabilities of overall survival (OS) was noted: MAC 53.0% (95% confidence intervals (CI) 49.1-56.9) and RIC 51.0% (95% CI: 48.3-53.7); p=0.78. Regarding the composite end point of GVHD-free/relapse-free survival (GRFS), the unadjusted Kaplan-Meier estimate of 5-year GRFS was 32.4% (95% CI: 29.0-36.1) in the MAC group and 26.1% (95% CI: 23.9-28.2) in the RIC group (p=0.001). In the MAC cohort, multivariable analysis confirmed worse OS and NRM with older age (>50 yrs), using an unrelated donor and a Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS) of 80 or less. For the RIC cohort, worse OS and NRM was associated with age 60- 70 years when compared to younger recipients, use of a mismatched donor and poor performance status. In conclusion, although similar OS rates existed for both cohorts overall, this study suggests that MAC should still be used for younger individuals suitable for such an approach due to a trend towards less relapse and an overall suggested advantage of improved GRFS; albeit this should be examined in a more homogeneous cohort. RIC allo-SCT still offers significant survival advantage in the older, fitter MF allograft patient and optimisation to reduce significant relapse and NRM rates are required.
-
5.
The Impact of Splenectomy in Myelofibrosis Patients before Allogeneic Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation
Robin, M., Zine, M., Chevret, S., Meignin, V., Munoz-Bongrand, N., Moatti, H., Xhaard, A., Sicre de Fontbrune, F., Peffault de Latour, R., Sarfati, E., et al
Biology of Blood & Marrow Transplantation. 2017;23(6):958-964
Abstract
Performing a pretransplantation splenectomy in patients with myelofibrosis (MF) is a matter of debate, as while the procedure improves hematological recovery, it may lead to severe morbidities. We retrospectively analyzed data from 85 consecutive patients who underwent transplantation in our center for MF, including 39 patients who underwent splenectomy before their transplantation. A majority of them had primary MF (78%), were considered high-risk patients (84% dynamic international prognostic scoring system intermediate-2 or higher), and had received transplants from HLA-matched sibling donors (56%) after a reduced-intensity conditioning regimen (82%). One-half of all splenectomized patients presented surgical or postsurgical morbidities, most frequently thrombosis and hemorrhage. After adjustment using Cox models, pretransplantation splenectomy was not associated with nonrelapse mortality or post-transplantation relapse but with an improved overall survival (OS) and event-free survival (EFS). We conclude that some patients with huge splenomegaly may undergo pretransplantation splenectomy without a deleterious impact on post-transplantation outcomes. OS and EFS improvement should in confirmed in controlled study. Copyright © 2017 The American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
-
6.
Outcome after Transplantation According to Reduced-Intensity Conditioning Regimen in Patients Undergoing Transplantation for Myelofibrosis
Robin, M., Porcher, R., Wolschke, C., Sicre de Fontbrune, F., Alchalby, H., Christopeit, M., Cassinat, B., Zabelina, T., Peffault de Latour, R., Ayuk, F., et al
Biology of Blood & Marrow Transplantation. 2016;22(7):1206-11
Abstract
Allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation remains the sole curative option for myelofibrosis. Many transplantation recipients receive a reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) regimen owing to age or comorbidities; however, there is little published evidence to guide the choice of RIC regimen. In this study, we compared outcomes in patients who received 1 of 2 frequently used RIC regimens for patients with myelofibrosis: fludarabine-busulfan (FB) and fludarabine-melphalan (FM). A total of 160 patients underwent a RIC allograft procedure (FB group, n = 105; FM group, n = 55). We have developed a complex statistical model involving weighting and adjustment to permit comparison between these 2 groups. After weighting, the incidence of acute graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) was 62% in the FM group and 31% in the FB group (P = .001), and the corresponding incidence of chronic GVHD was 49% and 53%, respectively. The 7-year progression-free survival was were 52% in the FM group versus 33% in the FB group, and the 7-year overall survival rate 52% in the FM group versus 59% in the FB group. Nonrelapse mortality (NRM) was 43% in the FM group and 31% in the FB group. Multivariable analyses revealed no significant differences in PFS between the 2 groups; however, the relapse rate was significantly lower in the FM group (hazard ratio, 9.21; P = .008), whereas a trend toward reduced NRM was seen in the FB group (hazard ratio, 0.51; P = .068). In conclusion, both regimens appear to be efficient in mediating disease control and can be used to successfully condition patients with myelofibrosis. The FM regimen appears to induce more NRM than the FB regimen, but with augmented control of disease, leading to comparable overall survival rates for both regimens. Copyright © 2016 American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.