Consolidation therapy with decitabine and intermediate-dose cytarabine followed by HLA-mismatched peripheral blood stem cells infusion for older patients with acute myeloid leukemia in first remission

HLA-mismatched GPBSC infusion therapy in refractory Epstein-Barr virus-associated hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis: an observational study from a single center

Background

Hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis (HLH) is a severe or even fatal inflammatory state. Epstein–Barr virus (EBV) infection-associated HLH (EBV-HLH) is one of the most common secondary HLH and suffers a very poor prognosis. Allo-HSCT is often required for refractory EBV-HLH, but some patients still cannot proceed to the next allo-HSCT due to various factors. This study aimed to observe the efficacy of HLA-mismatched granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF)-mobilized peripheral blood stem cells (GPBSCs) infusion for refractory EBV-HLH.

Methods

A retrospective case-control study of refractory EBV-HLH patients with GPBSC infusion from HLA-mismatched donors after chemotherapy (as GPBSC group) and sole chemotherapy (as control group) was performed. Efficacy was evaluated 2 and 4 weeks and all patients were followed-up until March 1, 2018.

Results

There were 18 cases who accepted infusion between March 2016 and Sep 2017 and 19 were randomly selected from refractory EBV-HLH patients who underwent salvage therapy during the same period for the control group. In GPBSC group, WBC (p = 0.017), Fbg (p = 0.040), and ferritin (p = 0.039) improved significantly after treatment. The overall response rate was 66.7% (CR 22.2%, PR 44.4%). However, there are no significant differences in changes of WBC, HGB, PLT, TG, Fbg, Ferritin, AST, ALT, and T-bil between two groups. Only the Fbg level was recovered better in the GPBSC infusion group (p = 0.003). In the GPBSC group, EBV-DNA decreased significantly after 2 weeks (p = 0.001) and 4 weeks (p = 0.012) after treatment, and the effect of the decrease was significantly better than that of the chemotherapy alone group in 2 weeks but not 4 weeks (p2w = 0.011, p4w = 0.145). The median survival time in the infusion group was 20.4 weeks [95% CI 10.9, 29.9], and the median survival time in the control group was 10.8 weeks [95% CI 0–24.34]. In the short-term, the infusion group’s survival rate was better (2-month 88.89% vs. 52.63%, p = 0.008; 3-month 83.33% vs. 47.09%, p = 0.012), but there was no difference in OS (p = 0.287).

Conclusions

Infusing GPBSCs combined with chemotherapy is effective, especially in decreasing EBV-DNA, performs better than chemotherapy alone, and improves short-term survival rate. GPBSC infusion is suggested as a bridging treatment method to allo-HSCT.

[Indications and management of hematologic microtransplantation: Recommendations of the French Society of Bone Marrow transplantation and cellular Therapy (SFGM-TC)]

Microtransplantation (MT) is based on injection of HLA-mismatched G-CSF mobilized hematopoietic stem cells, in combination with chemotherapy but without use of conditioning regimen nor immunosuppressive drugs. As a result, a transient microchimerism is induced without engraftment. Its efficacy relies both on host immune system stimulation (recipient versus tumor) and on a graft versus tumor effect. Data are scarce and concern mostly Asian patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) and high risk myelodysplastic syndrome (HR-MDS). In comparison to conventional treatment without MT, higher complete remission rates and longer disease free survival and overall survival have been reported. Safety seems acceptable. The most frequent adverse event is non-severe cytokine release syndrome. Risk of GVHD remains very low. Here, we summarize the published data and detail the practical aspects of the procedure. Current data are not strong enough to provide recommendations on indications. Nevertheless, it seems reasonable to propose MT to patients with AML or HR-MDS, regardless of age, presenting an indication for allogeneic stem cell transplantation but ineligible for it. MT is still under investigation and rather be proposed within clinical trials.

Clinical efficacy of decitabine‑containing induction chemotherapy in de novo non‑elderly acute myeloid leukemia

To improve the complete response rate (CRR) and reduce the recurrence rate of newly diagnosed non‑elderly acute myeloid leukemia (AML), the present study compared the clinical efficacy of decitabine with cytarabine (A) and daunorubicin (D)‑based remission induction therapy with D + A‑based remission induction therapy. A total of 81 patients with newly diagnosed non‑elderly AML (non‑M3) were enrolled in the present study, and divided into the observation group [decitabine with D + A, demethoxydaunorubicin (I) + A or homoharringtonine (H) + A] and the control group (D + A, I + A or H + A). The observation group displayed a 91.4% CRR [95% confidence interval (CI), 81.7‑100%] and the control group displayed a 69.6% CRR (95% CI, 55.8‑83.4%). The 2‑year overall survival (OS) rate was improved in the observation group compared with the control group (P=0.008). Patients aged <60 years displayed a 92.9% CRR in the observational group and a 71.1% CRR in the control group (P<0.05). Patients with undetected methylation gene mutations displayed an improved CRR in the observation group compared with the control group (92.9 vs. 71.4%; P=0.028). Furthermore, relapse‑free survival (P=0.041) and OS (P=0.007) were significantly extended in the observation group compared with the control group. The present study suggested that the administration of decitabine with DA, IA or HA as an induction therapy improved the clinical efficacy and reduced the recurrence rate in patients with AML.

Low-dose decitabine priming with intermediate-dose cytarabine followed by umbilical cord blood infusion as consolidation therapy for elderly patients with acute myeloid leukemia: a phase II single-arm study

BACKGROUND

Treatment of acute myeloid leukemia (AML) in elderly patients remains a great challenge. In this prospective single arm study (ChiCTR-OPC-15006492), we evaluated the efficacy and safety of a novel consolidation therapy with low-dose decitabine (LD-DAC) priming with intermediate-dose cytarabine (ID-Ara-C) followed by umbilical cord blood (UCB) infusion in elderly patients with AML.

METHODS

A total of 25 patients with a median age of 64-years-old (60-74-years-old) who achieved complete remission (CR) after induction chemotherapy were enrolled in the study.

RESULTS

The 2-year actual overall survival (OS) rate and leukemia-free survival (LFS) was 68.0 and 60.0%, respectively. The hematological and non-hematological toxicity were mild to moderate, and only one patient died in remission due to infection with possible acute graft versus host disease (aGVHD). Compared to a concurrent cohort of patients receiving conventional consolidation therapy, the study group tended to have an improved OS and LFS (p = 0.046 and 0.057, respectively), while the toxicity was comparable between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggested the novel combination of LD-DAC, ID-Ara-C, and UCB infusion might be an optimal consolidation therapy for elderly patients with AML, and a prospective phase III randomized study is warranted to confirm this observation.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This single-arm phase II clinical trial in elderly AML patients was registered prospectively at www.chictr.org.cn (identifier: ChiCTR-OPC-15006492 ) on June 2, 2015.