A randomized phase III study of pretransplant conditioning for AML/MDS with fludarabine and once daily IV busulfan ± clofarabine in allogeneic stem cell transplantation

Pretransplant conditioning with Fludarabine (Flu)-Busulfan (Bu) is safe, but clofarabine (Clo) has improved antileukemic activity. Hypothesis: Flu+Clo-Bu (FCB) yields superior progression-free survival (PFS) after allogeneic transplantation. We randomized 250 AML/MDS patients aged 3–70, Karnofsky Score ≥80, with matched donors, to FCB (n = 120) or Flu-Bu (n = 130), stratifying complete remission (CR) vs. No CR, (NCR). HCT-CI scores varied, from 0 to 10. All evaluable patients engrafted. Median follow-up was 66 months (interquartile range: 58–80). Three-year relapse incidence (RI), 25% with FCB, vs. 39% with Flu-Bu (p = 0.018), offset by higher non-relapse mortality, 22.6% (95%CI: 16–30.2%) vs. 12.3% (95%CI: 6.5–19%). Three-year PFS was 52% (95%CI: 44–62%) (FCB), vs. 48% (95%CI: 41–58%) (Flu-Bu). FCB benefited CR patients less, NCR patients age ≤ 60 had 3-year 34% RI (95%CI: 19–49%) (FCB) vs. 56% (95%CI: 38–70%) after Flu-Bu (p = 0.037). NCR patients >60 years had 3-year RI 10.0% (FCB), vs. 56.0%, after Flu-Bu (p = 0.003). Bayesian regression analysis including treatment-covariate interactions showed FCB superiority in NCR patients with low HCT-CI (0–2). Serious adverse event profiles were similar for the regimens. Conditioning with FCB did not improve PFS overall, but improved disease control in NCR patients, mandating confirmatory trials. Remission status and HCT-CI should be considered when using FCB.

NCCN Guidelines® Insights: Hematopoietic Growth Factors, Version 1.2022

The NCCN Guidelines for Hematopoietic Growth Factors provide recommendations for the appropriate use of growth factors in the clinical management of febrile neutropenia (FN), chemotherapy-induced thrombocytopenia (CIT), and chemotherapy-induced anemia (CIA). Management and prevention of these sequelae are an integral part of supportive care for many patients undergoing cancer treatment. The purpose of these guidelines is to operationalize the evaluation, prevention, and treatment of FN, CIT, and CIA in adult patients with nonmyeloid malignancies and to enable the patient and clinician to assess management options for FN, CIT, and CIA in the context of an individual patient's condition. These NCCN Guidelines Insights provide a summary of the important recent updates to the NCCN Guidelines for Hematopoietic Growth Factors, with particular emphasis on the incorporation of a newly developed section on CIT.

NCCN Guidelines Insights: Hematopoietic Growth Factors, Version 1.2020

Management of febrile neutropenia (FN) is an integral part of supportive care for patients undergoing cancer treatment. The NCCN Guidelines for Hematopoietic Growth Factors provide suggestions for appropriate evaluation, risk determination, prophylaxis, and management of FN. These NCCN Guidelines are intended to guide clinicians in the appropriate use of growth factors for select patients undergoing treatment of nonmyeloid malignancies. These NCCN Guidelines Insights highlight important updates to the NCCN Guidelines regarding the incorporation of newly FDA-approved granulocyte-colony stimulating factor biosimilars for the prevention and treatment of FN.

Considerations for Use of Hematopoietic Growth Factors in Patients With Cancer Related to the COVID-19 Pandemic

Hematopoietic growth factors, including erythrocyte stimulating agents (ESAs), granulocyte colony-stimulating factors, and thrombopoietin mimetics, can mitigate anemia, neutropenia, and thrombocytopenia resulting from chemotherapy for the treatment of cancer. In the context of pandemic SARS-CoV-2 infection, patients with cancer have been identified as a group at high risk of morbidity and mortality from this infection. Our subcommittee of the NCCN Hematopoietic Growth Factors Panel convened a voluntary group to review the potential value of expanded use of such growth factors in the current high-risk environment. Although recommendations are available on the NCCN website in the COVID-19 Resources Section (https://www.nccn.org/covid-19/), these suggestions are provided without substantial context or reference. Herein we review the rationale and data underlying the suggested alterations to the use of hematopoietic growth factors for patients with cancer in the COVID-19 era.

Leukemia cell mobilization with G-CSF plus plerixafor during busulfan-fludarabine conditioning for allogeneic stem cell transplantation

We hypothesized that during conditioning chemotherapy for allogeneic stem cell transplant (allo-SCT), disruption of stromal-leukemia interactions using granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) in combination with the CXCR4-specific inhibitor plerixafor, may promote release of leukemic cells from the niche and increase tumor elimination. In a phase 1/2 investigation, we treated 45 AML/MDS/CML patients (34 AML, 7 MDS, and 4 CML) with G-CSF (10 μg/kg daily for 6 days starting on day −9) plus plerixafor (doses of 0, 80, 160 or 240 μg/kg daily for 4 days starting on day −7) along with the busulfan-fludarabine (Bu-Flu) conditioning regimen. In the phase 1 part, we determined that G-CSF plus plerixafor is safe in this setting. We compared clinical effects and outcomes of AML/MDS study patients (n = 40) to 164 patients from a historical data set who received Bu-Flu alone prior to allo-SCT by stratifying on cytogenetics and disease status to correct for bias. Study patients had increased myeloid chimerism and lower rates of GvHD. There was no significant difference in relapse free survival or overall survival. The G-CSF plus plerixafor combination increased circulating white blood cells, CD34+ cells, and CXCR4+ cells, and preferentially mobilized FISH+ leukemic cells. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier is NCT00822770.

The impact of pre-transplant valganciclovir on early cytomegalovirus reactivation after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation

Cytomegalovirus reactivation is a common complication of allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant. The use of pre-transplant valganciclovir during the conditioning regimen followed by preemptive therapy has been used in an attempt to reduce the rate of early cytomegalovirus reactivation, but efficacy data are lacking. In this retrospective study, we evaluated the impact of pre-transplant valganciclovir during the conditioning regimen followed by a preemptive approach on the rate of early cytomegalovirus reactivation through day 100. The rate of cytomegalovirus reactivation through day 100 was 41% in the no-valganciclovir group compared to 46% in the valganciclovir group (p = 0.4). Interestingly, median time to cytomegalovirus reactivation was earlier in the no-valganciclovir group compared to the valganciclovir group (26 vs. 34 days; p = 0.008) and there was a trend toward a higher rate of cytomegalovirus disease through day 100 in the no-valganciclovir group (0.7% valganciclovir vs. 4% no-valganciclovir; p = 0.1). Day 100 survival was similar between the groups (90% valganciclovir vs. 91% no-valganciclovir; p = 0.8). Although the time to cytomegalovirus reactivation is significantly longer in the valganciclovir group, this did not impact the rate of cytomegalovirus reactivation or survival by day 100 suggesting that other strategies need to be explored.