Autologous Stem Cell Transplant: Still the Standard for Fit Patients With Mantle Cell Lymphoma

Neutrophil decline rate following autologous transplant for lymphoma is a predictor of patients' outcome

Neutropenia postchemotherapy is associated with favorable outcomes, which was attributed to optimal dosing. However, little is known about the neutrophil decline rate as a predictor of cancer outcomes, which may reflect a dynamic marker of chemosensitivity. We assessed the association between the neutrophil decline rate and disease outcomes in a known cohort of 212 lymphoma patients, treated with thiotepa, etoposide, cyclophosphamide, cytarabine, and melphalan (TECAM) conditioning followed by autologous transplant in our center between 2000 and 2013. Slower neutrophil decline rate was correlated with worse overall survival, mediated not by shorter time to progression (TTP), but rather by worse survival post-progression, possibly pointing to chemosensitivity at each line of therapy as the responsible mechanism. The effect was seen across histologies and was independent of stronger predictors of outcome like performance status (PS) and response before transplant. Prospective research is needed to confirm our results and expand their validity to other clinical scenarios.

Invited Review: Will Consolidation with ASCT Be a Thing of the Past for MCL and PTCL?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The treatment landscape of mantle cell (MCL) and peripheral T-cell lymphomas (PTCL) is rapidly changing; however, despite improvement in patients' survival, they still remain a largely incurable diseases. Treatment choice is dependent on patient factors, prior therapy, remission duration, and candidacy for stem cell transplantation (SCT). There are subsets of high-risk patients who do not benefit substantially from autologous SCT (ASCT) and for whom alternative targeted approaches are being examined. Here, we critically analyze the actual role of ASCT in PTCL and MCL.

RECENT FINDINGS

Research in areas of maintenance therapy and minimal residual disease is ongoing to identify MCL patients who may not require ASCT for durable response. Moreover, there are subsets of high-risk MCL patients who do not benefit substantially from ASCT and for whom alternative, targeted approaches are being examined. Much less clear evidence exists regarding the impact of consolidative ASCT in PTCL, mainly for the heterogeneity of these lymphomas: it is still controversial whether patients who achieved a complete response significantly take advantage of this procedure over active surveillance only. Several clinical and biologic markers are available to predict prognosis; however, despite improvements in outcomes, standard therapeutic approaches have not been able to overcome high-risk disease features for PTCL and MCL. Thus, the need of ASCT for these diseases is still matter of debate among hematologists.