Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
1.
Haematologica ; 105(5): 1223-1231, 2020 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31582549

ABSTRACT

This follow-up study of a randomized, prospective trial included 192 patients with newly diagnosed severe aplastic anemia receiving antithymoglobulin and cyclosporine, with or without granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF). We aimed to evaluate the long-term effect of G-CSF on overall survival, event-free survival, probability of secondary myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) or acute myeloid leukemia (AML), clinical paroxysmal nocturnal hemoglobinuria, relapse, avascular osteonecrosis and chronic kidney disease. The median follow-up was 11.7 years (95% CI, 10.9-12.5). The overall survival rate at 15 years was 57±12% in the group given G-CSF and 63±12% in the group not given G-CSF (P=0.92); the corresponding event-free survival rates were 24±10% and 23±10%, respectively (P=0.36). In total, 9 patients developed MDS or AML, 10 only a clonal cytogenetic abnormality, 7 a solid cancer, 18 clinical paroxysmal nocturnal hemoglobinuria, 8 osteonecrosis, and 12 chronic kidney disease, without any difference between patients treated with or without G-CSF. The cumulative incidence of MDS, AML or isolated cytogenetic abnormality at 15 years was 8.5±3% for the G-CSF group and 8.2±3% for the non-G-CSF group (P=0.90). The cumulative incidence of any late event including myelodysplastic syndrome or acute myeloid leukemia, isolated cytogenetic abnormalities, solid cancer, clinical paroxysmal nocturnal hemoglobinuria, aseptic osteonecrosis, chronic kidney disease and relapse was 50±12% for the G-CSF group and 49±12% for the non-G-CSF group (P=0.65). Our results demonstrate that it is unlikely that G-CSF has an impact on the outcome of severe aplastic anemia; nevertheless, very late events are common and eventually affect the prognosis of these patients, irrespectively of their age at the time of immunosuppressive therapy (NCT01163942).


Subject(s)
Anemia, Aplastic , Antilymphocyte Serum , Anemia, Aplastic/diagnosis , Anemia, Aplastic/drug therapy , Anemia, Aplastic/epidemiology , Antilymphocyte Serum/therapeutic use , Bone Marrow , Cyclosporine/therapeutic use , Follow-Up Studies , Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor , Granulocytes , Humans , Immunosuppressive Agents/therapeutic use , Prospective Studies
2.
Ann Hematol ; 98(6): 1341-1350, 2019 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30915499

ABSTRACT

Eltrombopag (ELT), an oral thrombopoietin receptor agonist, has recently emerged as a promising new drug for the treatment of aplastic anemia (AA). How ELT is used outside of clinical trials in the real-world setting and results of this treatment are not known. We conducted therefore a retrospective survey on the use of ELT in AA among EBMT member centers. We analyzed the 134 patients reported in our survey together with 46 patients recently published by Lengline et al. The median follow-up from start of ELT treatment was 15.3 months, with 85.6% patients alive at last follow-up. Importantly, only 28.9% of our patients received ELT according to the FDA/EMA label as monotherapy in the relapsed/refractory setting, whereas 16.7% received ELT upfront. The overall response rate in our cohort was 62%, very similar to the results of the pivotal ELT trial. In multivariate analysis, combination therapy with ELT/cyclosporine/ATG and response to previous therapy were associated with response. Overall survival was favorable with a 1-year survival from ELT start of 87.4%. We identified age, AA severity before ELT start and response to ELT as variables significantly associated with OS. Two patients transformed to MDS; other adverse events were mostly benign. In sum, ELT is used widely in Europe to treat AA patients, mostly in the relapsed/refractory setting. Response to ELT is similar to the clinical trial data across different age groups, treatment lines, and treatment combinations and results in favorable survival.


Subject(s)
Anemia, Aplastic/drug therapy , Benzoates/therapeutic use , Hydrazines/therapeutic use , Pyrazoles/therapeutic use , Adult , Aged , Anemia, Aplastic/mortality , Drug Evaluation , Drug Utilization , Europe , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Kaplan-Meier Estimate , Male , Middle Aged , Myelodysplastic Syndromes/epidemiology , Myelodysplastic Syndromes/etiology , Proportional Hazards Models , Receptors, Thrombopoietin/agonists , Retrospective Studies , Young Adult
3.
Haematologica ; 103(3): 514-521, 2018 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29217776

ABSTRACT

Melphalan at a dose of 200 mg/m2 is standard conditioning prior to autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation for multiple myeloma, but a dose of 140 mg/m2 is often used in clinical practice in patients perceived to be at risk of excess toxicity. To determine whether melphalan 200 mg/m2 and melphalan 140 mg/m2 are equally effective and tolerable in clinically relevant patient subgroups we analyzed 1964 first single autologous transplantation episodes using a series of Cox proportional-hazards models. Overall survival, progression-free survival, cumulative incidence of relapse, non-relapse mortality, hematopoietic recovery and second primary malignancy rates were not significantly different between the melphalan 140 mg/m2 (n=245) and melphalan 200 mg/m2 (n=1719) groups. Multivariable subgroup analysis showed that disease status at transplantation interacted with overall survival, progression-free survival, and cumulative incidence of relapse, with a significant advantage associated with melphalan 200 mg/m2 in patients transplanted in less than partial response (adjusted hazard ratios for melphalan 200 mg/m2versus melphalan 140 mg/m2: 0.5, 0.54, and 0.56). In contrast, transplantation in very good partial or complete response significantly favored melphalan 140 mg/m2 for overall survival (adjusted hazard ratio: 2.02). Age, renal function, prior proteasome inhibitor treatment, gender, or Karnofsky score did not interact with overall/progression-free survival or relapse rate in the melphalan dose groups. There were no significant survival or relapse rate differences between melphalan 200 mg/m2 and melphalan 140 mg/m2 patients with high-risk or standard-risk chromosomal abnormalities. In conclusion, remission status at the time of transplantation may favor the use of melphalan 200 mg/m2 or melphalan 140 mg/m2 for key transplant outcomes (NCT01362972).


Subject(s)
Melphalan/administration & dosage , Multiple Myeloma/therapy , Adult , Aged , Dose-Response Relationship, Drug , Female , Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation/methods , Humans , Male , Melphalan/therapeutic use , Middle Aged , Recurrence , Survival Analysis , Transplantation Conditioning/methods , Transplantation, Autologous/methods , Treatment Outcome
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL