Adherence to and effectiveness of lenalidomide after 1 year of treatment in a real world setting.

BACKGROUND: In combination with dexamethasone, lenalidomide is prescribed in the oral treatment of Multiple Myeloma for patients who have received at least one previous therapy. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study is to evaluate medication adherence to lenalidomide of Multiple Myeloma patients, as well as Progression Free Survival and Overall Survival one year from the beginning of the treatment. SETTING: The study was carried out in Pescara Hospital, in Italy. All Multiple Myeloma patients who began lenalidomide therapy between January 1, 2012 and June 30, 2016 were included in our study. METHODS: Adherence to treatment was calculated by using the ratio between the Received Daily Dose and the Prescribed Daily Dose. Effectiveness in real world has been evaluated as Progression Free Survival and Overall Survival one year from the beginning of the treatment.Main outcomes measure: We assessed medication adherence and effectiveness of lenalidomide in the treatment of Multiple Myeloma. RESULTS: Adherence to the overall mean treatment was 0.73 ± 0.15, relative to 81 patients evaluated in our study. 32% of patients achieved an adherence equal to or greater than 80%. Real-life effectiveness in terms of Progression Free Survival and Overall Survival showed values of ​​53.75% and 88%, respectively, one year from the beginning of treatment. CONCLUSION: The analysis of adherence in Multiple Myeloma patients treated with lenalidomide one year from the beginning of therapy reveal a concerning lack of adherence. Moreover, the lack of correlation of the levels of adherence with patient-related variables shows that, in the case of Multiple Myeloma, adherence is not related to personal, social and environmental characteristics that may determine each patient's correct treatment implementation, but is directly influenced by disease evolution.

Triplet vs doublet lenalidomide-containing regimens for the treatment of elderly patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma.

Lenalidomide-dexamethasone improved outcome in newly diagnosed elderly multiple myeloma patients. We randomly assigned 662 patients who were age ≥65 years or transplantation-ineligible to receive induction with melphalan-prednisone-lenalidomide (MPR) or cyclophosphamide-prednisone-lenalidomide (CPR) or lenalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone (Rd). The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) in triplet (MPR and CPR) vs doublet (Rd) lenalidomide-containing regimens. After a median follow-up of 39 months, the median PFS was 22 months for the triplet combinations and 21 months for the doublet (P = .284). The median overall survival (OS) was not reached in either arms, and the 4-year OS was 67% for the triplet and 58% for the doublet arms (P = .709). By considering the 3 treatment arms separately, no difference in outcome was detected among MPR, CPR, and Rd. The most common grade ≥3 toxicity was neutropenia: 64% in MPR, 29% in CPR, and 25% in Rd patients (P < .0001). Grade ≥3 nonhematologic toxicities were similar among arms and were mainly infections (6.5% to 11%), constitutional (3.5% to 9.5%), and cardiac (4.5% to 6%), with no difference among the arms. In conclusion, in the overall population, the alkylator-containing triplets MPR and CPR were not superior to the alkylator-free doublet Rd, which was associated with lower toxicity. This study was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT01093196.

Chemotherapy plus lenalidomide versus autologous transplantation, followed by lenalidomide plus prednisone versus lenalidomide maintenance, in patients with multiple myeloma: a randomised, multicentre, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: High-dose melphalan plus autologous stem-cell transplantation (ASCT) is the standard approach in transplant-eligible patients with newly diagnosed myeloma. Our aims were to compare consolidation with high-dose melphalan plus ASCT versus chemotherapy (cyclophosphamide and dexamethasone) plus lenalidomide, and maintenance with lenalidomide plus prednisone versus lenalidomide alone. METHODS: We did an open-label, randomised, multicentre, phase 3 study at 59 centres in Australia, Czech Republic, and Italy. We enrolled transplant-eligible patients with newly diagnosed myeloma aged 65 years or younger. Patients received a common induction with four 28-day cycles of lenalidomide (25 mg, days 1-21) and dexamethasone (40 mg, days 1, 8, 15, and 22) and subsequent chemotherapy with cyclophosphamide (3 g/m(2)) followed by granulocyte colony-stimulating factor for stem-cell mobilisation and collection. Using a 2 × 2 partial factorial design, we randomised patients to consolidation with either chemotherapy plus lenalidomide (six cycles of cyclophosphamide [300 mg/m(2), days 1, 8, and 15], dexamethasone [40 mg, days 1, 8, 15, and 22], and lenalidomide [25 mg, days 1-21]) or two courses of high-dose melphalan (200 mg/m(2)) and ASCT. We also randomised patients to maintenance with lenalidomide (10 mg, days 1-21) plus prednisone (50 mg, every other day) or lenalidomide alone. A simple randomisation sequence was used to assign patients at enrolment into one of the four groups (1:1:1:1 ratio), but the treatment allocation was disclosed only when the patient reached the end of the induction and confirmed their eligibility for consolidation. Both the patient and the treating clinician did not know the consolidation and maintenance arm until that time. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival assessed by intention-to-treat. The trial is ongoing and some patients are still receiving maintenance. This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01091831. FINDINGS: 389 patients were enrolled between July 6, 2009, and May 6, 2011, with 256 eligible for consolidation (127 high-dose melphalan and ASCT and 129 chemotherapy plus lenalidomide) and 223 eligible for maintenance (117 lenalidomide plus prednisone and 106 lenalidomide alone). Median follow-up was 52·0 months (IQR 30·4-57·6). Progression-free survival during consolidation was significantly shorter with chemotherapy plus lenalidomide compared with high-dose melphalan and ASCT (median 28·6 months [95% CI 20·6-36·7] vs 43·3 months [33·2-52·2]; hazard ratio [HR] for the first 24 months 2·51, 95% CI 1·60-3·94; p<0·0001). Progression-free survival did not differ between maintenance treatments (median 37·5 months [95% CI 27·8-not evaluable] with lenalidomide plus prednisone vs 28·5 months [22·5-46·5] with lenalidomide alone; HR 0·84, 95% CI 0·59-1·20; p=0·34). Fewer grade 3 or 4 adverse events were recorded with chemotherapy plus lenalidomide than with high-dose melphalan and ASCT; the most frequent were haematological (34 [26%] of 129 patients vs 107 [84%] of 127 patients), gastrointestinal (six [5%] vs 25 [20%]), and infection (seven [5%] vs 24 [19%]). Haematological serious adverse events were reported in two (2%) patients assigned chemotherapy plus lenalidomide and no patients allocated high-dose melphalan and ASCT. Non-haematological serious adverse events were reported in 13 (10%) patients assigned chemotherapy plus lenalidomide and nine (7%) allocated high-dose melphalan and ASCT. During maintenance, adverse events did not differ between groups. The most frequent grade 3 or 4 adverse events were neutropenia (nine [8%] of 117 patients assigned lenalidomide plus prednisone vs 14 [13%] of 106 allocated lenalidomide alone), infection (eight [8%] vs five [5%]), and systemic toxicities (seven [6%] vs two [2%]). Non-haematological serious adverse events were reported in 13 (11%) patients assigned lenalidomide plus prednisone versus ten (9%) allocated lenalidomide alone. Four patients died because of adverse events, three from infections (two during induction and one during consolidation) and one because of cardiac toxic effects. INTERPRETATION: Consolidation with high-dose melphalan and ASCT remains the preferred option in transplant-eligible patients with multiple myeloma, despite a better toxicity profile with chemotherapy plus lenalidomide. FUNDING: Celgene.

Panobinostat plus bortezomib and dexamethasone versus placebo plus bortezomib and dexamethasone in patients with relapsed or relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma: a multicentre, randomised, double-blind phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Panobinostat is a potent oral pan-deacetylase inhibitor that in preclinical studies has synergistic anti-myeloma activity when combined with bortezomib and dexamethasone. We aimed to compare panobinostat, bortezomib, and dexamethasone with placebo, bortezomib, and dexamethasone in patients with relapsed or relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma. METHODS: PANORAMA1 is a multicentre, randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind phase 3 trial of patients with relapsed or relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma who have received between one and three previous treatment regimens. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) via an interactive web-based and voice response system, stratified by number of previous treatment lines and by previous use of bortezomib, to receive 21 day cycles of placebo or panobinostat (20 mg; on days 1, 3, 5, 8, 10, 12, orally), both in combination with bortezomib (1·3 mg/m(2) on days 1, 4, 8, 11, intravenously) and dexamethasone (20 mg on days 1, 2, 4, 5, 8, 9, 11, 12, orally). Patients, physicians, and the investigators who did the data analysis were masked to treatment allocation; crossover was not permitted. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (in accordance with modified European Group for Blood and Marrow Transplantation criteria and based on investigators' assessment) and was analysed by intention to treat. The study is ongoing, but no longer recruiting, and is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01023308. FINDINGS: 768 patients were enrolled between Jan 21, 2010, and Feb 29, 2012, with 387 randomly assigned to panobinostat, bortezomib, and dexamethasone and 381 to placebo, bortezomib, and dexamethasone. Median follow-up was 6·47 months (IQR 1·81-13·47) in the panobinostat group and 5·59 months (2·14-11·30) in the placebo group. Median progression-free survival was significantly longer in the panobinostat group than in the placebo group (11·99 months [95% CI 10·33-12·94] vs 8·08 months [7·56-9·23]; hazard ratio [HR] 0·63, 95% CI 0·52-0·76; p<0·0001). Overall survival data are not yet mature, although at the time of this analysis, median overall survival was 33·64 months (95% CI 31·34-not estimable) for the panobinostat group and 30·39 months (26·87-not estimable) for the placebo group (HR 0·87, 95% CI 0·69-1·10; p=0·26). The proportion of patients achieving an overall response did not differ between treatment groups (235 [60·7%, 95% CI 55·7-65·6] for panobinostat vs 208 [54·6%, 49·4-59·7] for placebo; p=0·09); however, the proportion of patients with a complete or near complete response was significantly higher in the panobinostat group than in the placebo group (107 [27·6%, 95% CI 23·2-32·4] vs 60 [15·7%, 12·2-19·8]; p=0·00006). Minimal responses were noted in 23 (6%) patients in the panobinostat group and in 42 (11%) in the placebo group. Median duration of response (partial response or better) was 13·14 months (95% CI 11·76-14·92) in the panobinostat group and 10·87 months (9·23-11·76) in the placebo group, and median time to response (partial response or better) was 1·51 months (1·41-1·64) in the panobinostat group and 2·00 months (1·61-2·79) in the placebo group. Serious adverse events were reported in 228 (60%) of 381 patients in the panobinostat group and 157 (42%) of 377 patients in the placebo group. Common grade 3-4 laboratory abnormalities and adverse events (irrespective of association with study drug) included thrombocytopenia (256 [67%] in the panobinostat group vs 118 [31%] in the placebo group), lymphopenia (202 [53%] vs 150 [40%]), diarrhoea (97 [26%] vs 30 [8%]), asthenia or fatigue (91 [24%] vs 45 [12%]), and peripheral neuropathy (67 [18%] vs 55 [15%]). INTERPRETATION: Our results suggest that panobinostat could be a useful addition to the treatment armamentarium for patients with relapsed or relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma. Longer follow up will be necessary to determine whether there is any effect on overall survival. FUNDING: Novartis Pharmaceuticals.

Daratumumab-based induction and autologous transplantation in concomitant multiple myeloma and chronic myeloid leukemia.

The coexistence of chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) and multiple myeloma (MM) is a rare clinical condition. By means of FISH and molecular analysis on both sorted CD138 plasma cells and cryopreserved CD34 stem cells, a distinct clonal origin of the hematological malignancies was demonstrated in our case. We report on the first patient diagnosed with CML and MM treated with daratumumab, bortezomib, thalidomide, and dexamethasone (Dara-VTd) induction, stem-cell collection, and autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT). The co-administration of Dara-VTd and imatinib proved feasible and highly effective in the management of both CML and MM. Despite concerns with stem cell mobilization and collection in patients exposed to daratumumab, in our experience the use of higher cyclophosphamide dose 4 g/m2 together with plerixafor granted optimal stem cell mobilization and collection, irrespective of daratumumab, concomitant myeloid neoplasm, and imatinib. Moreover, ASCT was easily performed with a rapid hematological reconstitution.

Paroxysmal nocturnal hemoglobinuria after autologous stem cell transplantation: extinction of the clone during treatment with eculizumab - pathophysiological implications of a unique clinical case.

The clinical and biological spectrum of paroxysmal nocturnal hemoglobinuria (PNH) is variable, ranging from classical hemolytic forms to PNH associated with aplastic anemia or other bone marrow (BM) failure syndromes. We report a previously undescribed case of PNH occurring after autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) in a patient affected by relapsing non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. The intensive chemotherapy and the ASCT resulted in a contraction of the effective hematopoietic stem cell (HSC) pool and a derangement of the immune system. The delayed engraftment and the BM hypoplasia represented a favorable environment for the expansion of the pathological clone. This case is paradigmatic even for the unexpected trend of the PNH clone during treatment with the terminal complement inhibitor eculizumab; in fact, the clone reduced until undergoing unexpected extinction, i.e. the recovery of normal hematopoiesis. Eculizumab seems not to play a direct role in HSC kinetics; the clinical remission probably occurred because the environmental conditions that led to the expansion of the PNH clone were transient and disappeared.

Efficacy and safety of pegylated liposomal doxorubicin in primary cutaneous B-cell lymphomas and comparison with the commonly used therapies.

OBJECTIVES: The therapy of advanced, relapsed or refractory primary cutaneous lymphomas is often unsatisfactory. Recent data indicate a favourable pharmacokynetic, pharmacodynamic and toxicity profile of pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (Peg-Doxo) in primary cutaneous T-cell lymphomas, while in primary cutaneous B-cell lymphomas (PCBCLs), the drug efficacy has never been assessed so far. METHODS: We performed a prospective phase II pilot clinical trial of Peg-Doxo monotherapy (20 mg/m(2)) in PCBCLs. One patient had a marginal zone B-cell lymphoma and four were affected by diffuse large B-cell lymphoma-leg type, all with widespread nodular lesions. RESULTS: All the patients achieved a complete response (CR = 100%) in a short period of time (median 3 months), even when pretreated with radio-chemotherapy. Two experienced a relapse. At follow-up, one patient died for progressive disease; four are in CR after 5, 52, 63 and 69 months. As concerning the toxicity profile, the treatment was well-tolerated, no one decreased or delayed the dose. The haematological toxicity was mild with only one case of grade III neutropenia; a patient showed a grade I neurotoxicity. Dermatological toxicity, in particular the palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia, did not occurred, probably because of both the low dosages of Peg-Doxo monotherapy and the oral prophylaxis with pyridoxine. CONCLUSIONS: In spite of the small number of patients, it emerges that monochemotherapy with Peg-Doxo has a significantly high clinical activity and a good safety profile in PCBCLs, even in aggressive forms, compared with other therapeutic regimens, which are completely reviewed. It suggests the need of further investigations in this field.

Lenalidomide Maintenance with or without Prednisone in Newly Diagnosed Myeloma Patients: A Pooled Analysis.

: We conducted a pooled analysis of two phase III trials, RV-MM-EMN-441 and EMN01, to compare maintenance with lenalidomide-prednisone vs. lenalidomide in newly diagnosed transplant-eligible and -ineligible myeloma patients. Primary endpoints were progression-free survival, progression-free survival 2 and overall survival with both regimens. A secondary aim was to evaluate the impact of duration of maintenance on overall survival and on outcome after relapse. A total of 625 patients (lenalidomide-prednisone arm, n = 315; lenalidomide arm, n = 310) were analyzed. The median follow-up was 58 months. Median progression-free survival (25 vs. 19 months; p = 0.08), progression-free survival 2 (56 vs. 49 months; p = 0.9) and overall survival (73 months vs. NR; p = 0.08) were not significantly different between the two arms. Toxicity profiles of lenalidomide-prednisone and lenalidomide were similar, with the exception of neutropenia that was higher in the lenalidomide arm (grade ≥ 3: 9% vs. 19%, p < 0.001), without an increase in the rate of infections. Overall survival (median NR vs. 49 months, p < 0.001), progression-free survival from relapse (median 35 vs. 24 months, p = 0.004) and overall survival from relapse (median not reached vs. 41 months, p = 0.002) were significantly longer in patients continuing maintenance for ≥2 years. We showed that the addition of prednisone at 25 or 50 mg every other day (eod) to lenalidomide maintenance did not induce any significant advantage.

Pegylated liposomal doxorubicin in the treatment of primary cutaneous T-cell lymphomas.

Pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (Peg-Doxo) is a promising drug for advanced/recalcitrant primary cutaneous T-cell lymphomas (CTCLs). This prospective phase II trial enrolled 19 patients. We observed overall and complete response rates of 84.2% and 42.1% (with no significant differences between stage I-IIA and IIB-IV patients), and 11% grade III/IV toxicity. After a maximum 46 month-follow-up, median overall (OS), event-free (EFS) and progression-free (PFS) survival were 34, 18 and 19 months. OS, EFS and PFS rates at 46 months were 44%, 30% and 37% respectively. Peg-Doxo seems to be an active and safe principle that should be used in plurirelapsed, early stage-MF and in combination with other chemotherapeutic agents in advanced and aggressive CTCLs.

Carboplatin and gemcitabine in the palliative treatment of stage IV non-small cell lung cancer: definitive results of a phase II trial.

BACKGROUND: Cisplatin-containing regimens represent the gold standard in the treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer, but carboplatin is often preferred for its better toxic profile when palliation is the aim of the treatment. The synergistic effect and tolerability of carboplatin-gemcitabine combination are well known. In this phase II trial, we evaluated the activity and safety of a schedule with carboplatin and gemcitabine, defined in our previous phase I trial. METHODS: Thirty-seven patients with measurable stage IV non-small cell lung cancer were treated with carboplatin, AUC 4.5 mg/ml/min on day 1, and gemcitabine, 800 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8, every 21 days. All patients were treated until disease progression or intractable toxicity and were evaluated before each course of chemotherapy for toxicity and after every 3 courses for response. RESULTS: After a median follow-up of over 10 months, complete response, partial response, and stabilization of the disease were observed in 3 (8.1%), 9 (24.3%), and 15 patients (40.5%), respectively. Median time to progression was 7 months. At this writing, 27 patients have died, with a median survival of 10 months, and 29 (78.3%), 16 (43.2%), and 11 (29.7%) patients are alive after 6, 12, and 15 months of follow-up, respectively. Toxicity was mild, and mainly hematological, with a significant correlation with the number of courses of chemotherapy (P = 0.0003). CONCLUSIONS: Our results are comparable with those reported in the literature and confirm the good activity and tolerability of the carboplatin-gemcitabine combination. Up to 4 courses of chemotherapy with carboplatin and gemcitabine may represent an interesting option in the palliative treatment of non-small cell lung cancer.

Phase II study of melphalan, thalidomide and prednisone combined with oral panobinostat in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma.

The combination of melphalan, prednisone and thalidomide (MPT) has demonstrated efficacy and acceptable toxicity in newly diagnosed and relapsed/refractory patients with multiple myeloma (MM). Panobinostat is a potent oral pan-deacetylase inhibitor (pan-DACi). In preclinical and clinical studies, panobinostat showed good anti-myeloma activity in combination with several agents. This phase II study evaluated the combination of a fixed dose of MPT with escalating doses of panobinostat (three times weekly for 3 weeks, followed by a 9-day rest period) in relapsed/refractory MM. We used a two-stage design to determine whether the combination was safe and effective. At least a partial response was observed in 38.5% of patients. The maximum tolerated dose of panobinostat in combination with MPT could not be determined due to the high rate of dose-limiting toxicities experienced with panobinostat at doses of 10 and 15 mg. The most common grade 3/4 adverse events were neutropenia (71%) and thrombocytopenia (35.5%). In conclusion, MPT in combination with panobinostat three times weekly for 3 weeks followed by a 9-day rest period is not well tolerated in patients with relapsed/refractory MM. Future studies should evaluate alternative dose schedules of panobinostat.

Aspirin, warfarin, or enoxaparin thromboprophylaxis in patients with multiple myeloma treated with thalidomide: a phase III, open-label, randomized trial.

PURPOSE: In patients with myeloma, thalidomide significantly improves outcomes but increases the risk of thromboembolic events. In this randomized, open-label, multicenter trial, we compared aspirin (ASA) or fixed low-dose warfarin (WAR) versus low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) for preventing thromboembolism in patients with myeloma treated with thalidomide-based regimens. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 667 patients with previously untreated myeloma who received thalidomide-containing regimens and had no clinical indication or contraindication for a specific antiplatelet or anticoagulant therapy were randomly assigned to receive ASA (100 mg/d), WAR (1.25 mg/d), or LMWH (enoxaparin 40 mg/d). A composite primary end point included serious thromboembolic events, acute cardiovascular events, or sudden deaths during the first 6 months of treatment. RESULTS: Of 659 analyzed patients, 43 (6.5%) had serious thromboembolic events, acute cardiovascular events, or sudden death during the first 6 months (6.4% in the ASA group, 8.2% in the WAR group, and 5.0% in the LMWH group). Compared with LMWH, the absolute differences were +1.3% (95% CI, -3.0% to 5.7%; P = .544) in the ASA group and +3.2% (95% CI, -1.5% to 7.8%; P = .183) in the WAR group. The risk of thromboembolism was 1.38 times higher in patients treated with thalidomide without bortezomib. Three major (0.5%) and 10 minor (1.5%) bleeding episodes were recorded. CONCLUSION: In patients with myeloma treated with thalidomide-based regimens, ASA and WAR showed similar efficacy in reducing serious thromboembolic events, acute cardiovascular events, and sudden deaths compared with LMWH, except in elderly patients where WAR showed less efficacy than LMWH.

Outcome and toxicity in the modern era of new drugs for multiple myeloma: a reappraisal for comparison with future investigational trials.

The introduction of new drugs such as thalidomide, lenalidomide, and bortezomib has led to novel treatment strategies and significantly improved the outcome of patients with multiple myeloma (MM). The enhanced knowledge of myeloma pathogenesis has allowed the identification of new therapeutic targets and many clinical trials are either planned or in progress to evaluate these more selective drugs in the near future. The results of these studies, however, will have to be compared with the results of existing novel therapies for the treatment of MM in order to define whether new protocols do not duplicate current new standards and constitute a real improvement. We reviewed the results of a series of phase I, II, III studies with thalidomide, lenalidomide, and bortezomib combinations for newly diagnosed MM in order to define a reasonable standard in terms of activity, efficacy, and toxicity and to have a potentially useful starting point for comparisons with future investigational trials. Three-drug regimens appear to double the complete remission (CR) rate (20%), though regimens containing 4 drugs triple the CR rate (30%), compared with those containing only 2 agents (10%). These improvements in the depth and quality of response translate into a progressive increase in the progression-free survival rate at 2 years (from approximately 54%-62% to 75%, respectively). Conversely, by using additional agents, a marked increase in hematologic toxicity has been described (8%, 28%, and 28% respectively), whereas nonhematologic toxicity appears to be similar (26%, 24%, and 27%, respectively). These results suggest that new trials in the future will constitute significant progress if they can improve on the current relatively favorable efficacy/toxicity ratio. Nonetheless, exciting new combinations in development do hold promise and results from these studies are eagerly awaited.

Lesional skin chemokine CTACK/CCL27 expression in mycosis fungoides and disease control by IFN-alpha and PUVA therapy.

Recruitment of neoplastic T cells to skin is a critical step in the pathogenesis of mycosis fungoides (MF) lesions. Cutaneous T-cell attracting chemokine (CTACK)/CCL27 attracts memory T cells to skin, resulting in increased cutaneous expression. The interactions between neoplastic cells and skin immune system require further elucidation. CTACK/CCL27 expression and density of dendritic cells (DC), CD8+ and CD4+ lymphocytes were investigated in skin lesions of 52 early-stage MF patients treated by interferon (IFN)-alpha in combination with photochemotherapy (psoralen plus ultraviolet A, PUVA). Skin lesion biopsies obtained at diagnosis and after treatment were studied by immunohistochemistry. Initial CTACK/CCL27 expression was abnormal/suprabasal in 36 patients. Normal/basal CTACK/CCL27 expression tended to correlate with a high DC density and low CD4+ cell density in the neoplastic infiltrate. Treatment induced a significant increase in CTACK/CCL27 expression (chi(2) test: P=0.004). Overall, 33 patients relapsed [median event-free survival (EFS), 46 months] during follow-up (median, 92.5 months, range, 43-165). Normal/basal CTACK/CCL27 expression at the end of treatment correlated with lower rates of recurrence and a longer median EFS (111 months vs. 39 months with suprabasal expression; log rank test: P=0.031). CTACK/CCL27 overexpression in early-stage MF might thus be related to a balance between neoplastic cells and immunomodulant DC. Normal CTACK/CCL27 expression after treatment designates a subset of patients with favorable disease behavior. The mechanisms underpinning CTACK/CCL27 overexpression after therapy in the remaining patients, who are at greater risk of recurrence, warrant further investigation.