Allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation in chemotherapy-induced aplasia in children with high-risk acute myeloid leukemia or myelodysplasia

The Role of Allogeneic Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation in Pediatric Leukemia

Allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) offers potentially curative treatment for many children with high-risk or relapsed acute leukemia (AL), thanks to the combination of intense preparative radio/chemotherapy and the graft-versus-leukemia (GvL) effect. Over the years, progress in high-resolution donor typing, choice of conditioning regimen, graft-versus-host disease (GvHD) prophylaxis and supportive care measures have continuously improved overall transplant outcome, and recent successes using alternative donors have extended the potential application of allotransplantation to most patients. In addition, the importance of minimal residual disease (MRD) before and after transplantation is being increasingly clarified and MRD-directed interventions may be employed to further ameliorate leukemia-free survival after allogeneic HSCT. These advances have occurred in parallel with continuous refinements in chemotherapy protocols and the development of targeted therapies, which may redefine the indications for HSCT in the coming years. This review discusses the role of HSCT in childhood AL by analysing transplant indications in both acute lymphoblastic and acute myeloid leukemia, together with current and most promising strategies to further improve transplant outcome, including optimization of conditioning regimen and MRD-directed interventions.

Comparison of melphalan- And busulfan-based myeloablative conditioning in children undergoing allogeneic transplantation for acute myeloid leukemia or myelodysplasia

BACKGROUND

The optimal conditioning regimen for alloHCT in children with myeloid malignancies remains undefined.

PROCEDURE

We performed a retrospective review of children undergoing alloHCT for AML and MDS over a 10-year period (2008-2018) at our institution, comparing the outcomes of recipients of either a myeloablative busulfan- or reduced toxicity mel/thio-based conditioning regimen.

RESULTS

A total of 49 patients underwent alloHCT for AML/MDS (mel/thio, N = 21; busulfan, N = 28). Mel/thio recipients were selected due to pretransplant comorbidities. Recipients of mel/thio were more likely to have t-AML, and less likely to have MRD <0.1% at the time of alloHCT (57.1% vs 82.1%). Graft failure was more common in busulfan recipients; engraftment kinetics were similar between groups. Sinusoidal obstructive syndrome was diagnosed in 21% of busulfan and no mel/thio recipients (P = .03). One patient in each group died from TRM. Relapse incidence was comparable (mel/thio-29% vs busulfan-32%); however, relapse occurred significantly later in recipients of mel/thio conditioning (median d + 396 vs d + 137; P = .01). As a result, there was a trend toward improved OS at 1 and 3 years in mel/thio recipients (95% vs 74%, P = .06; and 75% vs 50%, P = .11; respectively).

CONCLUSION

In our single institution, when compared to myeloablative busulfan-based conditioning, use of a mel/thio-based reduced toxicity regimen resulted in comparable outcomes, despite higher risk patient and disease characteristics. Mel/thio recipients had both more comorbidities and higher risk disease profile, which did not translate into higher rates of either TRM or relapse.