Comparison of the safety and efficacy of prophylactic donor lymphocyte infusion after haploidentical versus matched-sibling PBSCT in very high-risk acute myeloid leukemia

Recent advances in allogeneic transplantation for acute myeloid leukemia

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review highlights recent advancements in allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HSCT) for patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML).

RECENT FINDINGS

Important improvements have been observed throughout the allo-HSCT procedure and patient management. Universal donor availability and reduced risk of graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) have been achieved with the introduction of posttransplant cyclophosphamide for GVHD prophylaxis. It has contributed, together with advances in conditioning regimens, GVHD treatment and supportive care, to a reduced overall toxicity of the procedure. Relapse is now the most frequent cause of transplant failure. With increased knowledge of the biological characterization of AML, better prediction of transplant risks and more profound and standardized minimal residual disease (MRD) monitoring, pharmacological, and immunological strategies to prevent relapse are been developed.

SUMMARY

Allo-HSCT remains the standard of care for high-risk AML. Increased access to transplant, reduced toxicity and relapse are improving patient outcomes. Further research is needed to optimize MRD monitoring, refine conditioning regimens, and explore new GVHD management and relapse prevention therapies.

Post-transplant maintenance therapy in acute myeloid leukemia after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation harmonizing multiple therapeutic modalities including targeted therapy, immunotherapy and cellular therapy

Allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HCT) has improved survival for patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML), especially for those at high risk of relapse. However, relapse remains the leading cause of treatment failure post-HCT, occurring in around 35-45% of patients, and leading to dismal outcomes. Strategies to reduce relapse risk are urgently needed, especially in the early post-transplant period before activation of the graft-versus-leukemia (GVL) effect. Maintenance therapy is a course of treatment given post-HCT with the expectation of reducing relapse risk. While there are currently no therapies approved for maintenance therapy for AML after HCT, there are a number of studies and ongoing investigations examining the role of maintenance therapies that include targeted agents against FLT3-ITD, BCL2, or IDH mutations, hypomethylating agents, immunomodulatory therapies and cellular therapies. In this review, we discuss the mechanistic and clinical data for post-transplant maintenance therapies in AML and strategies for maintenance therapy for AML after HCT.

Pre-emptive and prophylactic donor lymphocyte infusion following allogeneic stem cell transplantation

Donor lymphocyte infusion (DLI) is an allogenic immunotherapy used after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. DLI takes advantage of the graft-versus-tumor effect induced by the infused CD3 + T cells, but may induce graft-versus-host disease. To date, DLI has been attempted to prevent hematological relapse after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation in patients with mixed chimerism and molecular relapse (pre-emptive DLI), and as maintenance therapy in patients with high-risk hematological malignancies (prophylactic DLI). DLI response and efficacy depend on patient, disease, and DLI factors. This review discusses the efficacy and risks of DLI, with a focus on pre-emptive and prophylactic use.

Optimization of Donor Lymphocyte Infusion for AML Relapse After Allo-HCT in the Era of New Drugs and Cell Engineering

Donor lymphocyte infusion (DLI) is a key strategy for the treatment of AML relapse after allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (allo-HCT) and has been used for either prophylactic, pre-emptive, or therapeutic purposes. However, the prognosis of these patients remains dismal even after DLI infusion (2-year overall survival, ~25%), and the efficacy is achieved at the cost of toxicities such as graft-versus-host (GVH) disease. Attempts to optimize DLI efficacy and safety, such as dose/timing modification and the use of cytoreduction, before DLI have been performed previously. Recently, a great number of novel targeted and immunomodulatory agents have emerged. Some of them, such as hypomethylating agents, FLT3 and Bcl-2 inhibitors, have been used in combination with DLI, aiming to enhance the graft-versus-leukemia effect. Moreover, manipulation of the DLI graft through cell selection (e.g., donor NK cells) or cell engineering (donor CAR-T cells) has shown potentially superior anti-tumor effects but less GVH effect than conventional DLI in clinical trials. This review summarizes the recent advances on the use of DLI for the prophylaxis/treatment of AML relapse and discusses future strategies which may further improve the treatment efficacy.

Prevention and Treatment of Acute Myeloid Leukemia Relapse after Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation: The State of the Art and Future Perspectives

Allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) for high-risk acute myeloid leukemia (AML) represents the only curative option. Progress has been made in the last two decades in the pre-transplant induction therapies, supportive care, selection of donors and conditioning regimens that allowed to extend the HSCT to a larger number of patients, including those aged over 65 years and/or lacking an HLA-identical donor. Furthermore, improvements in the prophylaxis of the graft-versus-host disease and of infection have dramatically reduced transplant-related mortality. The relapse of AML remains the major reason for transplant failure affecting almost 40-50% of the patients. From 10 to 15 years ago to date, treatment options for AML relapsing after HSCT were limited to conventional cytotoxic chemotherapy and donor leukocyte infusions (DLI). Nowadays, novel agents and targeted therapies have enriched the therapeutic landscape. Moreover, very recently, the therapeutic landscape has been enriched by manipulated cellular products (CAR-T, CAR-CIK, CAR-NK). In light of these new perspectives, careful monitoring of minimal-residual disease (MRD) and prompt application of pre-emptive strategies in the post-transplant setting have become imperative. Herein, we review the current state of the art on monitoring, prevention and treatment of relapse of AML after HSCT with particular attention on novel agents and future directions.

Haematologic malignancies with unfavourable gene mutations benefit from donor lymphocyte infusion with/without decitabine for prophylaxis of relapse after allogeneic HSCT: A pilot study

Relapse is the main cause of treatment failure for leukaemia patients with unfavourable gene mutations who receive allogeneic haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo‐HSCT). There is no consensus on the indication of donor lymphocyte infusion (DLI) for prophylaxis of relapse after allo‐HSCT. To evaluate the tolerance and efficacy of prophylactic DLI in patients with unfavourable gene mutations such as FLT3‐ITD, TP53, ASXL1, DNMT3A or TET2, we performed a prospective, single‐arm study. Prophylactic use of decitabine followed by DLI was planned in patients with TP53 or epigenetic modifier gene mutations. The prophylaxis was planned in 46 recipients: it was administered in 28 patients and it was not administered in 18 patients due to contraindications. No DLI‐associated pancytopenia was observed. The cumulative incidences of grade II–IV and III–IV acute graft‐versus‐host disease (GVHD) at 100 days post‐DLI were 25.8% and 11.0%, respectively. The rates of chronic GVHD, non‐relapse mortality and relapse at 3 years post‐DLI were 21.6%, 25.0% and 26.1%, respectively. The 3‐year relapse‐free survival and overall survival (OS) rates were 48.9% and 48.2%, respectively. Acute GVHD (HR: 2.30, p = 0.016) and relapse (HR: 2.46, p = 0.003) after DLI were independently associated with inferior OS. Data in the current study showed the feasibility of prophylactic DLI with/without decitabine in the early stage after allo‐HSCT in patients with unfavourable gene mutations.

Grade 2 acute GVHD is a factor of good prognosis in patients receiving peripheral blood stem cells haplo-transplant with post-transplant cyclophosphamide

BACKGROUND

The impact of acute graft versus host disease (GVHD) on survivals for patients receiving a haploidentical allogeneic stem-cell transplant (Allo-SCT) with peripheral blood stem-cells (PBSC) complemented by post-transplant cyclophosphamide (PTCY) is ill-known.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This retrospective study included 131 patients who received a PBSC haplograft in order to precise the impact of acute GVHD on outcomes. There were 78 males and 53 females and the median age for the whole cohort was 59 years (range: 20-71). Thirty-five patients were allografted for a lymphoid disease and 96 for a myeloid malignancy, including 67 patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML).

RESULTS

The cumulative incidence (CI) of day 100 grade 2-4 and 3-4 acute GVHD was 43.4 + 4.6% and 16.7 + 3.4%, respectively. The 2-year CI of moderate/severe chronic GVHD was 10.1 + 2.8%. The only factor affecting the occurrence of GVHD was GVHD prophylaxis. Indeed, CI of day 100 grade 2-4 (but not grade 3-4) acute GVHD was significantly reduced when adding anti-thymoglobulin (ATG) to PTCY. However, in multivariate analysis, grade 2 acute GVHD was significantly associated with better disease-free (HR: 0.36; 95%CI: 0.19-0.69, p = .002) and overall (HR: 0.35; 95%CI: 0.1-0.70, p = .003) survivals. The same results were observed when considering only AML patients.

CONCLUSION

Acute grade 2 GVHD is a factor of good prognosis after PBSC haplotransplant with PTCY. Further and larger studies are needed to clarify the complex question of GVHD prophylaxis in the setting of haplo-transplant, especially that of combining ATG and PTCY.

Comparison of Two Strategies for Prophylactic Donor Lymphocyte Infusion in Patients With Refractory/Relapsed Acute Leukemia

Prophylactic donor lymphocyte infusion (pDLI) could reduce relapse in patients with refractory/relapsed acute leukemia (RRAL) undergoing allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HSCT), but optimal timing of pDLI remains uncertain. We compared the outcomes of two strategies for pDLI based on time from transplant and minimal residual disease (MRD) status in patients with RRAL. For patients without grade II–IV acute graft-versus-host disease (aGVHD) on day +60, pDLI was given on day +60 regardless of MRD in cohort 1, and was given on day +90 unless MRD was positive on day +60 in cohort 2. A total of 161 patients with RRAL were enrolled, including 83 in cohort 1 and 78 in cohort 2. The extensive chronic GVHD (cGVHD) incidence in cohort 2 was lower than that in cohort 1 (10.3% vs. 27.9%, P = 0.006) and GVHD-free/relapse-free survival (GRFS) in cohort 2 was superior to that in cohort 1 (55.1% vs. 41.0%, P = 0.042). The 2-year relapse rate, overall and leukemia-free survival were comparable between the two cohorts (29.0% vs. 28.2%, P = 0.986; 63.9% vs. 64.1%, P = 0.863; 57.8% vs. 61.5%, P = 0.666). Delaying pDLI to day +90 based on MRD for patients with RRAL undergoing allo-HSCT could lower extensive cGVHD incidence and improve GRFS without increasing incidence of leukemia relapse compared with pDLI on day +60.

Donor Lymphocyte Infusions After Allogeneic Stem Cell Transplantation in Acute Leukemia: A Survey From the Gruppo Italiano Trapianto Midollo Osseo (GITMO)

We conducted a retrospective multicenter study including pediatric and adult patients with acute leukemia (AL) who received donor lymphocyte infusions (DLIs) after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HCT) between January 1, 2010 and December 31, 2015, in order to determine the efficacy and toxicity of the immune treatment. Two hundred fifty-two patients, median age 45.1 years (1.6–73.4), were enrolled from 34 Italian transplant centers. The underlying disease was acute myeloid leukemia in 180 cases (71%). Donors were HLA identical or 1 locus mismatched sibling (40%), unrelated (40%), or haploidentical (20%). The first DLI was administered at a median time of 258 days (55–3,784) after HCT. The main indication for DLI was leukemia relapse (73%), followed by mixed chimerism (17%), and pre-emptive/prophylactic use (10%). Ninety-six patients (38%) received one single infusion, whereas 65 (26%), 42 (17%), and 49 patients (19%) received 2, 3, or ≥4 infusions, respectively, with a median of 31 days between two subsequent DLIs. Forty percent of evaluable patients received no treatment before the first DLI, whereas radiotherapy, conventional chemotherapy or targeted treatments were administered in 3, 39, and 18%, respectively. In informative patients, a few severe adverse events were reported: grade III–IV graft versus host disease (GVHD) (3%), grade III–IV hematological toxicity (11%), and DLI-related mortality (9%). Forty-six patients (18%) received a second HCT after a median of 232 days (32–1,390) from the first DLI. With a median follow-up of 461 days (2–3,255) after the first DLI, 1-, 3-, and 5- year overall survival (OS) of the whole group from start of DLI treatment was 55, 39, and 33%, respectively. In multivariate analysis, older recipient age, and transplants from haploidentical donors significantly reduced OS, whereas DLI for mixed chimerism or as pre-emptive/prophylactic treatment compared to DLI for AL relapse and a schedule including more than one DLI significantly prolonged OS. This GITMO survey confirms that DLI administration in absence of overt hematological relapse and multiple infusions are associated with a favorable outcome in AL patients. DLI from haploidentical donors had a poor outcome and may represent an area of further investigation.