Increased risk of gastrointestinal acute GVHD following the addition of melphalan to busulfan/cyclophosphamide conditioning.

Risk factors associated with the development of aGVHD in the gastrointestinal tract have not been studied in depth. We retrospectively assessed 25 pediatric patients with MDS and JMML and compared the treatment outcome of two different conditioning regimens. Seventeen children (68%) underwent conditioning with busulfan (Bu), cyclophosphamide (Cy), and melphalan (Mel) and eight children (32%) with Bu and Cy. Gastrointestinal aGVHD stages II-IV (day 0-100) were observed in 47% (eight of 17) of the patients in the BuCyMel group and in none (0 of 8) in the BuCy group (p < 0.05). In patients who developed gastrointestinal aGVHD stages III-IV, a 24-h variation in the Bu concentration with a nighttime peak was noted. HC and liver aGVHD stages II-IV were observed in 47% (eight of 17) and 35% (six of 17) after BuCyMel conditioning and in 0% (0 of 17) and 12.5% (one of eight) after BuCy conditioning. The overall survival rate was 53% (nine of 17) in the BuCyMel group and 62.5% (five of eight) in the BuCy group. In conclusion, the addition of melphalan to the BuCy conditioning regimen resulted in severe gastrointestinal complications and did not improve overall survival.

Risk of recurrence following delayed large flap reconstruction after mastectomy for breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this retrospective matched cohort study was to evaluate the rate of recurrence among women with delayed large flap breast reconstruction after mastectomy for breast cancer. The recurrence rate among women treated at a single hospital was compared with that in an individually matched control group of women with breast cancer who did not have reconstruction after mastectomy. METHODS: Between 1982 and 2001, 125 women with previous invasive breast carcinoma underwent delayed large flap breast reconstruction with pedicled musculocutaneous or microvascular flaps (a median of 32 months after mastectomy). They were matched individually with 182 women with breast cancer who had a mastectomy but did not undergo breast reconstruction. Matching criteria were year of diagnosis, age at diagnosis and treating hospital. Medical records were evaluated until October 2007. Histopathological specimens for all included women were re-evaluated. The endpoint was locoregional or distant breast cancer recurrence. The risk of recurrent disease was calculated using a Cox proportional hazards analysis, adjusted for established prognostic factors. RESULTS: Median follow-up for the entire cohort was 146 months. The reconstruction group had a 2·08 (95 per cent confidence interval 1·07 to 4·06) times higher risk of recurrent disease than the mastectomy only group. CONCLUSION: Women with breast cancer who had delayed reconstruction with a large flap in this study had a higher risk of recurrent disease than those with mastectomy alone.