Treosulfan-Based Conditioning Regimen In Pediatric Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation: A Retrospective Analysis on Behalf of the Spanish Group for Hematopoietic Transplantation and Cellular Therapy (GETH-TC).

Increasing data on treosulfan-based conditioning regimens before hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) demonstrate the consistent benefits of this approach, particularly regarding acute toxicity. This study aimed to describe the results of treosulfan-based conditioning regimens in children, focusing on toxicity and outcomes when used to treat both malignant and nonmalignant diseases. This retrospective observational study of pediatric patients treated in Spain with treosulfan-based conditioning regimens before HSCT was based on data collection from electronic clinical records. We studied a total of 160 treosulfan-based conditioning HSCTs to treat nonmalignant diseases (n = 117) or malignant diseases (n = 43) in 158 children and adolescents. The median patient age at HSCT was 5.1 years (interquartile range, 2 to 10 years). The most frequent diagnoses were primary immunodeficiency (n = 42; 36%) and sickle cell disease (n = 42; 36%) in the nonmalignant disease cohort and acute lymphoblastic leukemia (n = 15; 35%) in the malignant disease cohort. Engraftment occurred in 97% of the patients. The median times to neutrophil engraftment (17 days versus 14 days; P = .008) and platelet engraftment (20 days versus 15 days; P = .002) were linger in the nonmalignant cohort. The 1-year cumulative incidence of veno-occlusive disease was 7.98% (95% confidence interval [CI], 4.6% to 13.6%), with no significant differences between cohorts. The 1-year cumulative incidence of grade III-IV acute graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) was higher in the malignant disease cohort (18% versus 3.2%; P = .011). Overall, the malignant cohort had both a higher total incidence (9% versus 3%; P < .001) and a higher 2-year cumulative incidence (16% versus 1.9%; P < .001) of total chronic GVHD. The 2-year cumulative transplantation-related mortality was 15%, with no difference between the 2 cohorts. The 5-year overall survival was 80% (95% CI, 72% to 86%) and was higher in the nonmalignant cohort (87% versus 61%; P = .01). The 2-year cumulative incidence of relapse was 25% in the malignant cohort. The 5-year cumulative GVHD-free, relapse-free survival rate was 60% (95% CI, 51% to 70%) and was higher in the nonmalignant cohort (72% versus 22%; P < .001). A treosulfan-based radiation-free conditioning regimen is feasible, achieving a high engraftment rate and 5-year overall survival, and is an emerging option for the first HSCT in nonmalignant diseases.

Risk Factors and Mortality of COVID-19 in Patients With Lymphoma: A Multicenter Study.

Patients with cancer are poorly represented in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) series, and heterogeneous series concerning hematology patients have been published. This study aimed to analyze the impact of COVID-19 in patients with lymphoma. We present a multicenter retrospective study from 19 centers in Madrid, Spain, evaluating risk factors for mortality in adult patients with COVID-19 and lymphoma. About 177 patients (55.9% male) were included with a median follow-up of 27 days and a median age of 70 years. At the time of COVID-19 diagnosis, 49.7% of patients were on active treatment. The overall mortality rate was 34.5%. Age >70 years, confusion, urea concentration, respiratory rate, blood pressure, and age >65 score ≥2, heart disease, and chronic kidney disease were associated with higher mortality risk (P < 0.05). Active disease significantly increased the risk of death (hazard ratio, 2.43; 95% confidence interval, 1.23-4.77; P = 0.01). However, active treatment did not modify mortality risk and no differences were found between the different therapeutic regimens. The persistence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2-positive polymerase chain reaction after week 6 was significantly associated with mortality (54.5% versus 1.4%; P < 0.001). We confirm an increased mortality compared with the general population. In view of our results, any interruption or delay in the start of treatment should be questioned given that active treatment has not been demonstrated to increase mortality risk and that achieving disease remission could lead to better outcomes.