Donor's age influences outcome in haploidentical hematopoietic stem cell transplantation with post-transplant cyclophosphamide - a single center experience.

Haploidentical stem cell transplantation (haplo-SCT) using post-transplantation cyclophosphamide (post-Cy) is considered a reasonable therapeutic option for patients who lack matched donor or who urgently need transplant procedure due to high risk disease. We analyzed the results of haplo-SCT performed in years 2018-2023. Eighty one patients (46 males) at median age of 52 years underwent haplo-SCT using peripheral blood as a stem cell source in most cases. Indications included hematological malignancies (acute leukemias in 88% of cases). In 25 cases (31%) transplantation was performed in relapsed/refractory disease. Majority of patients (61%) presented with very high and high disease risk index (DRI). Conditioning regimens were as follows: nonmyeloablative - 46 cases (57%), myeloablative - in 18 (22%) and reduced intensity - 17(20%). 90% of patients engrafted. All patients received unified immunosuppressive treatment (post-Cy/TAC/MMF). Median follow-up time was 12 months The cumulative incidence of acute and chronic GVHD was 37.5% and 37.6%, respectively. Estimated 2-year overall survival (OS) was 43.1% and donor's age was the only factor influencing survival. The 2-year progression-free survival (PFS) was 42.5%, whereas relapse incidence (RI) - 35%. The cumulative incidence of non-relapse mortality (NRM) was 44% and was mostly due to infections. Haplo-SCT is a feasible treatment option for hematological patients. Younger donor improves post-transplant survival. Strategies to reduce infection-related mortality and relapse rate remain a challenge.

PTCy vs CNI-based GVHD prophylaxis in HLA-matched transplants for Hodgkin lymphoma: a study of the LWP of the EBMT.

ABSTRACT: Studies comparing the efficacy of posttransplant cyclophosphamide (PTCy) to conventional calcineurin inhibitor (CNI)-based graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) prophylaxis regimens in patients with Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) are scarce. This study aimed to compare the outcomes of patients with HL undergoing hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) from HLA-matched donors who received GVHD prophylaxis with either PTCy- or conventional CNI-based regimens, using data reported in the European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation database between January 2015 and December 2022. Among the cohort, 270 recipients received conventional CNI-based prophylaxis and 176 received PTCy prophylaxis. Notably, PTCy prophylaxis was associated with delayed hematopoietic recovery but also with a lower risk of chronic (25% vs 43%; P < .001) and extensive chronic GVHD (13% vs 28%; P = .003) compared with the CNI-based cohort. The 2-year cumulative incidence of nonrelapse mortality and relapse was 11% vs 17% (P = .12) and 17% vs 30% (P = .007) for PTCy- and CNI-based, respectively. Moreover, the 2-year overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and GVHD-free, relapse-free survival (GRFS) were all significantly better in the PTCy group compared with the CNI-based group: 85% vs 72% (P = .005), 72% vs 53% (P < .001), and 59% vs 31% (P < .001), respectively. In multivariable analysis, PTCy was associated with a lower risk of chronic and extensive chronic GVHD, reduced relapse, and better OS, PFS, and GRFS than the CNI-based platform. Our findings suggest that PTCy as GVHD prophylaxis offers more favorable outcomes than conventional CNI-based prophylaxis in adult patients with HL undergoing HSCT from HLA-matched donors.

In the era of Bortezomib-based Induction, intensification of Melphalan-based conditioning with Bortezomib does not improve Survival Outcomes in newly diagnosed Multiple Myeloma: a study from the Chronic Malignancies Working Party of the EBMT.

Bortezomib (Vel)- Melphalan 200 mg/m2 (Mel200) (Vel-Mel) has been utilised to intensify conditioning in autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (AHCT) for multiple myeloma (MM). This EBMT registry-based study compared Vel-Mel with Mel200 during upfront AHCT. Between 2010 and 2017, MM patients who received Vel-Mel (n = 292) conditioning were compared with 4,096 Mel200 patients in the same 58 centres. Pre-AHCT, compared to Mel200 patients, Vel-Mel patients had similar International Staging System (ISS) scores and cytogenetic risk profiles; a similar proportion had received bortezomib-based induction (85% and 87.3%, respectively) though they were younger with a better performance status. Vel-Mel patients were more likely to achieve CR post-induction (40.6% vs 20.3%, p < 0.001) and by day 100 of AHCT (CR/VGPR: 70.2 % vs. 57.2%, p < 0.001). There was no difference in 3-year PFS (49% vs 46%, p = 0.06) or early post-AHCT mortality. In multivariable analysis, Vel-Mel associated with inferior PFS (HR: 1.69 (1.27-2.25, p < 0.001) and OS (HR:1.46 (1.14-1.86,p = 0.002), similar to negative effects on PFS of advanced ISS (HR:1.56 (1.33-1.83, p < 0.001), high-risk cytogenetics (HR:1.43(1.18-1.74, p < 0.001) and poor post-induction response(<=PR)(HR: 1.43(1.25-1.62, p < 0.001) Overall, despite superior pre- and post-AHCT responses, there was no improvement in PFS or OS following Vel-Mel. This data supports the findings of the smaller prospective IFM study.