Nonmyeloablative allogeneic stem cell transplantation for chronic lymphocytic leukaemia offers the possibility of disease control with minimal morbidity and mortality--a single institution experience.

Allogeneic stem cell transplantation is a treatment option for patients with poor risk CLL. We conducted a retrospective analysis of all CLL patients allografted at our institution, the University Hospital of Cologne, Germany. Data was collected on 40 patients from 2004 to 2012. The mean age was 54, and the majority were male (75 %). On average, the patients were diagnosed 6 years (range 2-12) prior to transplant with an average of 4 years (range 1-8) from time of first-line therapy to transplant. The remission states at the time of transplant were complete remission (CR) (n = 4), stable disease (n = 10), partial remission (n = 20) and progressive disease (n = 6). Only reduced intensity conditioning regimens were employed. The average CD34(+) cell dose was 4.16 × 10(6)/kg. Neutrophil engraftment was seen by day +17 (range 10-23) post-transplant, and 88 % achieved 95-100 % donor chimerism by day 100. Overall survival, progression-free survival and non-relapse mortality at 2 years post-transplant were 65, 52.5 and 27.5 %, respectively. A total of 51 % of patients were found to be minimal residual disease (MRD)-negative at 1 year post-transplant. Our single-centre experience confirms the valuable role of allogeneic stem cell transplantation (allo-SCT) in the treatment of poor risk CLL patients with promising long-term survival and acceptable transplant-related mortality. The advent of newer therapeutic agents should not hinder the consideration of allo-SCT for this patient cohort as it remains the only curative option for these patients.

EBV-associated post-transplant lymphoproliferative disorder following in vivo T-cell-depleted allogeneic transplantation: clinical features, viral load correlates and prognostic factors in the rituximab era.

EBV-associated post-transplant lymphoproliferative disease (PTLD) following Alemtuzumab-based allo-SCT is a relatively uncommon and challenging clinical problem but has not received detailed study in a large cohort. Quantitative-PCR (qPCR) monitoring for EBV reactivation post allo-SCT is now commonplace but its diagnostic and predictive value remains unclear. Sixty-nine patients with PTLD following Alemtuzumab-based allo-SCT were studied. Marked clinicopathological heterogeneity was evident; lymphadenopathy was frequently absent, whereas advanced extranodal disease was common. The median viral load at clinical presentation was 49 300 copies/mL (50-65 200 000 copies/mL) and, notably, 23% and 45% of cases, respectively, had 10 000 and 40 000 copies/mL. The overall response rate to rituximab as first-line therapy was 70%. For rituximab failures, chemotherapy was ineffectual but DLIs were successful. A four-parameter prognostic index predicted response to therapy (OR 0.30 (0.12-0.74); P=0.009] and PTLD mortality (hazard ratio (HR) 1.81 (1.12-2.93) P=0.02) on multivariate analysis. This is the largest detailed series of EBV-associated PTLD after allo-SCT. At clinical presentation, EBV-qPCR values are frequently below customary thresholds for pre-emptive therapy, challenging current paradigms for monitoring and intervention. A four-point score identifies a proportion of patients at risk of rituximab-refractory disease for whom alternative therapy is needed.

Midazolam in conjunction with local anaesthesia is superior to Entonox in providing pain relief during bone marrow aspirate and trephine biopsy.

AIM: To compare intravenous titrated midazolam 5-10 mg and inhaled Entonox in addition to local anaesthesia in order to identify which agent provides optimum pain relief. METHODS: Randomised, controlled trial. 49 patients were recruited, of which 46 were evaluable. 24 and 22 patients were recruited into the Entonox and midazolam arms, respectively. Patient experiences as well as staff observations were recorded with questionnaires after recovery from the procedure and 24 hours later. RESULTS: 45% and 59% of the patients in the midazolam arm could recollect the procedure after 15 minutes and 24 hours, respectively, compared to 96% and 88% who received Entonox. Midazolam provided a more comfortable experience (p<0.01) and improved pain relief (p = 0.01) compared to Entonox immediately after the procedure; this further improved when recalled 24 hours later. Nausea, dizziness and hallucinations were observed with both treatments, but dizziness was significantly more frequent with Entonox (p = 0.048). Clinically relevant respiratory depression (O(2) saturation <90%) occurred in 19% of patients in the midazolam arm; sedation was reversed with flumazenil. CONCLUSION: Midazolam in conjunction with local anaesthesia provides rapid and reversible sedation as well as effective pain relief during bone marrow biopsy, and is superior to Entonox; however, care must be taken to monitor respiratory function.