Donor type, in addition to transplantation in chronic phase and myeloablative conditioning, influence transplant survival for patients with advanced chronic myeloid leukemia in the era of tyrosine kinase inhibitors

Questions concerning tyrosine kinase-inhibitor therapy and transplants in chronic phase chronic myeloid leukaemia

In this provocative commentary, we consider several questions posed by the late chronic myeloid leukaemia (CML) expert Prof. Michele Baccarani, which he challenged us to address after his death. He noted only a small proportion of people with chronic phase CML receiving tyrosine kinase-inhibitor (TKI)-therapy are likely to achieve sustained therapy-free remission (TFR) and even fewer are likely to be cured. Persons most likely to fail TKItherapy can be identified at diagnosis or soon after starting TKI-therapy. These persons are likely to need lifetime TKI-therapy with attendant risks of adverse events, cost and psychological consequences. Allogeneic transplants achieve much higher rates of leukaemia-free survival compared with TKI-therapy but are associated with transplant-related adverse events including an almost 20 percent risk of transplant-related deaths within 1 year post-transplant and a compromised quality-of-life because of complications such as chronic graft-versus-host disease. Subject-, disease- and transplant-related co-variates associated with transplant outcomes are known with reasonable accuracy. Not everyone likely to fail TKI-therapy is a transplant candidate. However, in those who candidates are physicians and patients need to weigh benefits and risks of TKI-therapy versus a transplant. We suggest transplants should be more often considered in the metric when counseling people with chronic phase CML unlikely to achieve TFR with TKI-therapy. We question whether we are discounting a possible important therapy intervention; we think so.

Is human leukocyte antigen-matched sibling donor transplant always better than haploidentical allograft?

Currently, haploidentical donor has been an alternative source of stem cell allografts for patients who have no human leukocyte antigen-matched sibling donor or unrelated donors. A number of studies indicated that treating hematological malignancy patients with haploidentical stem cell transplantation (haplo-SCT) could achieve comparable outcomes to those who underwent matched sibling donor transplantation (MSDT). In recent years, more and more evidence support the notion that haploidentical allografts may have a stronger graft-vs-leukemia (GVL) effect than MSDT. In this review, we summarized the transplant outcomes of haplo-SCT and MSDT, mainly focusing on the subgroup of patients who will benefit from the stronger GVL effects of haplo-SCT compared with MSDT. We also offered strategies of how to translate the strong antileukemia activity of haploidentical allograft into superior survival. Future directions of GVL effects in haplo-SCT settings were also discussed.

Insights into the management of chronic myeloid leukemia in resource-poor settings: a Mexican perspective

INTRODUCTION

The arrival of targeted therapy for chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) was revolutionary. However, due to the high cost of tyrosine kinase inhibitors, access to this highly effective therapy with strict monitoring strategies is limited in low to middle-income countries. In this context, following standard recommendations proposed by experts in developed countries is difficult. Areas covered: This review aims to provide an insight into the management of patients with CML living in a resource-limited setting. It addresses several issues: diagnosis, initial treatment, disease monitoring, and additional treatment alternatives including allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Expert commentary: Imatinib is probably the most cost-effective TKI for initial treatment in developing and underdeveloped countries. Generic imatinib preparations should be evaluated before considering their widespread use. Adherence to treatment should be emphasized. Adequate monitoring can be performed through several methods successfully and is important for predicting outcomes, particularly early in the first year, and if treatment suspension is being considered. Access to further therapeutic alternatives should define our actions after failure or intolerance to imatinib, preferring additional TKIs if possible. Allogeneic transplantation in chronic phase is a viable option in this context.