Mycophenolate mofetil-based salvage as acute GVHD prophylaxis after early discontinuation of tacrolimus and/or sirolimus

Corticosteroids as graft-versus-host disease prophylaxis for allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant recipients with calcineurin inhibitor intolerance

BACKGROUND AIMS

Although calcineurin inhibitors (CNIs) have a well-established role in the prevention of graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) after allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT), their use can be limited by significant toxicities, which may result in premature treatment discontinuation. The optimal management of patients with CNI intolerance is unknown. The objective of this study was to determine the effectiveness of corticosteroids as GVHD prophylaxis for patients with CNI intolerance.

METHODS

This retrospective single-center study included consecutive adult patients with hematologic malignancies who underwent myeloablative peripheral blood allogeneic HCT with anti-thymocyte globulin, CNI, and methotrexate GVHD prophylaxis in Alberta, Canada. Multivariable competing-risks regression was used to compare cumulative incidences of GVHD, relapse, and non-relapse mortality between recipients of corticosteroid versus continuous CNI prophylaxis, and multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression was applied to compare overall survival, relapse-free survival (RFS) and moderate-to-severe chronic GVHD and RFS.

RESULTS

Among 509 allogeneic HCT recipients, 58 (11%) patients developed CNI intolerance and were switched to corticosteroid prophylaxis at median 28 days (range 1-53) after HCT. Compared with patients who received continuous CNI prophylaxis, recipients of corticosteroid prophylaxis had significantly greater cumulative incidences of grade 2-4 acute GVHD (subhazard ratio [SHR] 1.74, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.08-2.80, P = 0.024), grade 3-4 acute GVHD (SHR 3.22, 95% CI 1.55-6.72, P = 0.002), and GVHD-related non-relapse mortality (SHR 3.07, 95% CI 1.54-6.12, P = 0.001). There were no significant differences in moderate-to-severe chronic GVHD (SHR 0.84, 95% CI 0.43-1.63, P = 0.60) or relapse (SHR 0.92, 95% CI 0.53-1.62, P = 0.78), but corticosteroid prophylaxis was associated with significantly inferior overall survival (hazard ratio [HR] 1.77, 95% CI 1.20-2.61, P = 0.004), RFS (HR 1.54, 95% CI 1.06-2.25, P = 0.024), and chronic GVHD and RFS (HR 1.46, 95% CI 1.04-2.05, P = 0.029).

CONCLUSIONS

Allogeneic HCT recipients with CNI intolerance are at increased risks of acute GVHD and poor outcomes despite institution of corticosteroid prophylaxis following premature CNI discontinuation. Alternative GVHD prophylaxis strategies are needed for this high-risk population.

Outcomes Following Intolerance to Tacrolimus/Sirolimus Graft-Versus-Host Disease Prophylaxis for Allogeneic Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation

BACKGROUND

Although tacrolimus and sirolimus (TAC/SIR) is an accepted graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) prophylaxis following allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant (HCT), toxicity from this regimen can lead to premature discontinuation of immunosuppression. There are limited studies reporting outcomes and subsequent treatment of patients with TAC/SIR intolerance.

OBJECTIVES

To assess outcomes of patients with TAC/SIR intolerance and guide subsequent management after intolerance.

STUDY DESIGN

We retrospectively analyzed transplant outcomes of consecutive adult patients at Moffitt Cancer Center who received allogeneic HCT with TAC/SIR as GVHD prophylaxis from 2009 to 2018. TAC/SIR intolerance was defined as discontinuation due to toxicity of either TAC or SIR before post-transplant day 100.

RESULTS

777 patients met the inclusion criteria. Median follow-up was 22 (0.2-125) months. Intolerance occurred in 13% (n = 104) of patients at a median of 30 (range 5-90) days. The most common causes of intolerance were acute kidney injury (n = 53 [51%]), thrombotic microangiopathy (n = 31 [28%]), and veno-occlusive disease (n = 23 [22%]). The cumulative incidence of grade 2 to 4 acute GVHD at 100 days in TAC/SIR-intolerant patients was 50% (95% CI, 39%-64%) and 25% (95% CI, 22%-29%) in patients tolerant to this regimen (P < .0001). In multivariate analyses, grade 2 to 4 acute GVHD was significantly higher in TAC/SIR-intolerant patients (HR 2.40; 95% CI, 1.59-3.61; P < .0001). Similarly, in multivariate analyses, TAC/SIR-intolerant patients had more chronic GVHD (HR 1.48, 95% CI, 1.03-2.12; P = .03). The non-relapse mortality (NRM) at 1 year in TAC/SIR-intolerant patients was 47% (95% CI, 38%-59%) and 12% (95% CI, 10%-15%) in those tolerant to the regimen (P < .0001). The 2-year relapse free survival of TAC/SIR-intolerant patients was 35% (95% CI, 25%-44%) and 60% (95% CI, 57%-65%) among TAC/SIR-tolerant patients, (HR 2.30; 95% CI, 1.61-3.28; P < .0001). Intolerance stratified by early (≤30 days) versus late (31-100 days) significantly affected the cumulative incidence of acute GVHD at 75% (early [95% CI, 59%-94%]) versus 33% ([late] 95% CI, 21%-50%) (P = .001) as well as the cumulative incidence of NRM at 61% ([early] 95% CI, 48%-77%) versus 35% ([late] 95% CI, 24%-51%) (P = .006). After developing TAC/SIR intolerance, most patients were switched to an alternative 2-drug regimen (71/104 [68%]), with the most common being mycophenolate mofetil in addition to continuing TAC or SIR (68/71 [96%]).

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, TAC/SIR intolerance was associated with poorer outcomes. Early intolerance contributed to higher risk of acute GVHD, increased NRM, and inferior survival. Patients with early intolerance were often switched to an alternative agent, and patients with late intolerance tended to be continued on single-drug therapy without substitution. Single-drug versus 2-drug regimens after intolerance did not appear to affect outcomes. Management strategies to mitigate the risks of intolerance are warranted.

Combination of Low-Dose, Short-Course Mycophenolate Mofetil With Cyclosporine and Methotrexate for Graft-Versus-Host Disease Prophylaxis in Allogeneic Stem Cell Transplant

OBJECTIVES

With the standard regimen for graft-versushost disease prophylaxis in allogeneic stem cell transplant with human leukocyte antigen-matched donor, grade II-IV acute graft-versus-host disease occurs in 30% to 50% of sibling and up to 80% of unrelated recipients. Studies with limited patient numbers have shown efficacy and safety of mycophenolate mofetil for graft-versus-host disease prophylaxis. We investigated the effect of low-dose mycophenolate mofetil added to a standardized prophylaxis regimen for graft-versus-host disease in related human leukocyte antigen-matched allogeneic stem cell transplant.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this prospective randomized clinical trial, we compared cyclosporine and methotrexate versus the combination of cyclosporine, methotrexate, and mycophenolate mofetil in all patients who underwent human leukocyte antigencompatible related donor allogeneic stem cell transplant for acute leukemia during 3 years at the Bone Marrow Transplant Unit at Namazi Hospital, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences (Shiraz, Iran).

RESULTS

All 134 patients in both groups underwent successful engraftment. Recovery times for neutrophils and platelets were not significantly different between groups (P < .05). Incidence of acute graft-versus-host disease in the cyclosporine, methotrexate, and mycophenolate mofetil group was less than in the cyclosporine and methotrexate group (21.6% vs 40.9%; P = .041). Incidence of grade II-IV acute graftversus-host disease in the mycophenolate mofetil group was 15.2% versus the control group at 33% (P = .045).

CONCLUSIONS

Our single-center study suggests the combination of mycophenolate mofetil, cyclosporine, and methotrexate is superior to the standard regimen of cyclosporine and methotrexate for graft-versushost disease prophylaxis after human leukocyte antigen-matched related donor allogeneic stem cell transplant.

Feasibility of thiotepa addition to the fludarabine-busulfan conditioning with tacrolimus/sirolimus as graft vs host disease prophylaxis

In classical reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) regimens, including the fludarabine and busulphan (BF) combination, sirolimus and tacrolimus (SIR-TAC) as graft vs host disease (GVHD) prophylaxis has shown acceptable results. The outcomes of SIR-TAC in a more intense RIC regimen as Thiotepa-fludarabine-busulfan (TBF) have been hardly investigated. This retrospective study included all consecutive patients receiving an allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation for myeloid malignancies (January 2009-2017) conditioned with either TBF or BF and receiving SIR-TAC. Patients receiving TBF presented higher non-relapse mortality (31.6 vs 12.3%, p = .01), along with shorter overall survival (51.8% vs 77.8%, p < .01) at 2 years than patients treated with BF. There were no significant differences in the cumulative incidence of grade II-IV acute GVHD or moderate-severe chronic GVHD or relapse between both groups. These results suggest that TBF does not seem to improve the traditional RIC BF regimen, at least when associated with SIR-TAC prophylaxis.