Cyclosporine in combination with mycophenolate mofetil versus methotrexate for graft versus host disease prevention in myeloablative HLA-identical sibling donor allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation

Prophylaxis and management of graft-versus-host disease after stem-cell transplantation for haematological malignancies: updated consensus recommendations of the European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation

Graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) is a major factor contributing to mortality and morbidity after allogeneic haematopoietic stem-cell transplantation (HSCT). In the last 3 years, there has been regulatory approval of new drugs and considerable change in clinical approaches to prophylaxis and management of GVHD. To standardise treatment approaches, the European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation (EBMT) has updated its clinical practice recommendations. We formed a panel of one methodologist and 22 experts in the field of GVHD management. The selection was made on the basis of their role in GVHD management in Europe and their contributions to the field, such as publications, presentations at conferences, and other research. We applied the GRADE process to ten PICO (patient, intervention, comparator, and outcome) questions: evidence was searched for by the panel and graded for each crucial outcome. In two consensus meetings, we discussed the evidence and voted on the wording and strengths of recommendations. Key updates to the recommendations include: (1) primary use of ruxolitinib in steroid-refractory acute GVHD and steroid-refractory chronic GVHD as the new standard of care, (2) use of rabbit anti-T-cell (thymocyte) globulin or post-transplantation cyclophosphamide as standard GVHD prophylaxis in peripheral blood stem-cell transplantations from unrelated donors, and (3) the addition of belumosudil to the available treatment options for steroid-refractory chronic GVHD. The EBMT proposes to use these recommendations as the basis for routine management of GVHD during allogenic HSCT. The current recommendations favour European practice and do not necessarily represent global preferences.

Cancer Therapy-Related Hypertension: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association

Contemporary anticancer drugs have significantly improved cancer survival at the expense of cardiovascular toxicities, including heart disease, thromboembolic disease, and hypertension. One of the most common side effects of these drugs is hypertension, especially in patients treated with vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitors, as well as tyrosine kinase inhibitors and proteasome inhibitors. Adjunctive therapy, including corticosteroids, calcineurin inhibitors, and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatories, as well as anti-androgen hormone therapy for prostate cancer, may further increase blood pressure in these patients. Cancer therapy-induced hypertension is often dose limiting, increases cardiovascular mortality in cancer survivors, and is usually reversible after interruption or discontinuation of treatment. The exact molecular mechanisms underlying hypertension are unclear, but recent discoveries indicate an important role for reduced nitric oxide generation, oxidative stress, endothelin-1, prostaglandins, endothelial dysfunction, increased sympathetic outflow, and microvascular rarefaction. In addition, genetic polymorphisms in vascular endothelial growth factor receptors are implicated in vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitor-induced hypertension. Diagnosis, management, and follow-up of cancer therapy-induced hypertension follow national hypertension guidelines because evidence-based clinical trials specifically addressing patients who develop hypertension as a result of cancer therapy are currently lacking. Rigorous baseline assessment of patients before therapy is started requires particular emphasis on assessing and treating cardiovascular risk factors. Hypertension management follows guidelines for the general population, although special attention should be given to rebound hypotension after termination of cancer therapy. Management of these complex patients requires collaborative care involving oncologists, cardiologists, hypertension specialists, primary care professionals, and pharmacists to ensure the optimal therapeutic effect from cancer treatment while minimizing competing cardiovascular toxicities.

Impact of omitting post-transplant minidose-methotrexate doses in allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation

Given prophylactic methotrexate (MTX) is often held in the setting of toxicity we investigated the impact of omitting minidose-MTX dose(s). Outcomes were compared between patients who had 1-3 doses omitted and those who received all four planned doses of minidose-MTX. Of 370 consecutive patients, 50 had MTX dose(s) omitted. When MTX was omitted, initial management was mycophenolate mofetil (MMF; 36/50 patients) with or without corticosteroids (14/50 patients). Rates of grade 3-4 acute GVHD were similar between groups. Omission of minidose-MTX resulted in an increased risk of chronic GVHD (cGVHD; HR 2.27; p = .024) and decreased overall survival (HR 1.61; p = .024). However, other transplant-related outcomes were comparable. In summary, omission of minidose-MTX doses was not associated with an increased risk of acute GVHD when an alternative was added (e.g. MMF ± corticosteroids). This did not abrogate the increased risk of cGVHD or decreased overall survival.

Weight-based mycophenolate mofetil dosing predicts acute GVHD and relapse after allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation

OBJECTIVES

Higher MMF dose can reduce acute GVHD risk after allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT). We examined the effect of MMF dose, relative to patient actual body weight (mg/kg/day), on outcomes of 680 adults after HCT.

METHODS

MMF was combined with cyclosporine (n = 599) or sirolimus (n = 81). We divided MMF dose/kg/day in quartiles.

RESULTS

The median time to grade II-IV acute GVHD was 32 days. The incidence of grade II-IV acute GVHD at day 30 was 30% in 1st (<29), 20% in 2nd (29-34), 16% in 3rd (35-41), and 19% in 4th (≥42) quartile (P < .01). Corresponding relapse incidence at 1 year was 16%, 25%, 27%, and 31%, respectively (P = .01). In multivariate analysis, as compared to 1st quartile, higher dose of weight-based MMF reduced grade II-IV acute GVHD (HR = 0.64 for 2nd, HR = 0.48 for 3rd, and HR = 0.55 for 4th quartile), but increased the risk of relapse (HR = 1.63 for 2nd, HR = 1.75 for 3rd, and HR = 2.31 for 4th quartile).

CONCLUSIONS

Weight-based MMF dose had no significant impact on engraftment, chronic GVHD, or survival. These data suggest that higher weight-based MMF dose reduces the risk of acute GVHD at the expense of increased relapse and supports conducting prospective studies to optimize MMF dosing after HCT.

Post-transplantation cyclophosphamide versus antithymocyte globulin in patients with acute myeloid leukemia undergoing allogeneic stem cell transplantation from HLA-identical sibling donors: A retrospective analysis from the Acute Leukemia Working Party of the European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation

BACKGROUND

Graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) is a major complication after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HSCT). Addition of antithymocyte globulin (ATG) or post-transplantation cyclophosphamide (PTCY) to standard immunosuppressive agents reduces GVHD in different donor settings.

METHODS

We compared the outcomes of adults with acute myeloid leukemia undergoing allo-HSCT from HLA-identical sibling donors after the use of PTCY (n = 197) or ATG (n = 1913).

RESULTS

Patients in the PTCY group were younger than those in the ATG group (median age, 47 vs 54 years; P < .01). Peripheral blood was the most frequently used stem cell source, being significantly more frequent in the ATG group than in the PTCY group (95% vs 70% P < .01). The conditioning regimen was more frequently myeloablative in the PTCY group than in the ATG group (59% vs 48%; P < .01). Time to neutrophil engraftment was shorter in the ATG group than in the PTCY group (17 vs 20 days; P < .01). No differences were observed according to the other transplantation outcomes, except for chronic GVHD of all grades and extensive chronic GVHD at 2 years, which were significantly lower in the ATG group compared with the PTCY group (P < .02).

CONCLUSION

PTCY is feasible in an HLA-identical sibling setting, and despite similar outcomes, ATG may be associated with lower incidence of chronic GVHD.

Combination of Low-Dose, Short-Course Mycophenolate Mofetil With Cyclosporine and Methotrexate for Graft-Versus-Host Disease Prophylaxis in Allogeneic Stem Cell Transplant

OBJECTIVES

With the standard regimen for graft-versushost disease prophylaxis in allogeneic stem cell transplant with human leukocyte antigen-matched donor, grade II-IV acute graft-versus-host disease occurs in 30% to 50% of sibling and up to 80% of unrelated recipients. Studies with limited patient numbers have shown efficacy and safety of mycophenolate mofetil for graft-versus-host disease prophylaxis. We investigated the effect of low-dose mycophenolate mofetil added to a standardized prophylaxis regimen for graft-versus-host disease in related human leukocyte antigen-matched allogeneic stem cell transplant.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this prospective randomized clinical trial, we compared cyclosporine and methotrexate versus the combination of cyclosporine, methotrexate, and mycophenolate mofetil in all patients who underwent human leukocyte antigencompatible related donor allogeneic stem cell transplant for acute leukemia during 3 years at the Bone Marrow Transplant Unit at Namazi Hospital, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences (Shiraz, Iran).

RESULTS

All 134 patients in both groups underwent successful engraftment. Recovery times for neutrophils and platelets were not significantly different between groups (P < .05). Incidence of acute graft-versus-host disease in the cyclosporine, methotrexate, and mycophenolate mofetil group was less than in the cyclosporine and methotrexate group (21.6% vs 40.9%; P = .041). Incidence of grade II-IV acute graftversus-host disease in the mycophenolate mofetil group was 15.2% versus the control group at 33% (P = .045).

CONCLUSIONS

Our single-center study suggests the combination of mycophenolate mofetil, cyclosporine, and methotrexate is superior to the standard regimen of cyclosporine and methotrexate for graft-versushost disease prophylaxis after human leukocyte antigen-matched related donor allogeneic stem cell transplant.

Comparison of reduced-intensity/toxicity conditioning regimens for umbilical cord blood transplantation for lymphoid malignancies

To investigate which reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC)/reduced-toxicity conditioning (RTC) is superior for umbilical cord blood transplantation (UCBT) for lymphoid malignancies, we retrospectively compared three widely used RIC/RTC regimens: fludarabine/melphalan/total body irradiation (FM-TBI, n = 524), fludarabine/cyclophosphamide/total body irradiation (FC-TBI, n = 96), and fludarabine/busulfan/total body irradiation or melphalan (FB-based, n = 159). Among patients with acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) (n = 314), there were no differences in overall survival (OS) by conditioning regimen. Among patients with malignant lymphoma (ML) (n = 465), FM-TBI and FC-TBI regimens had similar OS, whereas FB-based regimen had lower OS (hazard ratio [HR], 1.73; P < 0.01) than did FM-TBI regimen due to higher non-relapse mortality (HR, 1.72; P = 0.02). In addition, mycophenolate mofetil-containing GVHD prophylaxis was associated with better OS than methotrexate-containing GVHD prophylaxis among patients who received FM-TBI (HR, 0.65; P = 0.03) and FC-TBI (HR, 0.25; P < 0.01) regimens due to a decreased relapse risk. In summary, our results suggest that all three RIC/RTC regimens have comparable clinical outcomes in ALL, while the FM-TBI or FC-TBI regimens combined with mycophenolate mofetil-containing GVHD prophylaxis is preferable in RIC/RTC-UCBT for ML. Large prospective studies are warranted to confirm these results.

Prophylaxis and management of graft versus host disease after stem-cell transplantation for haematological malignancies: updated consensus recommendations of the European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation

Graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) is a major factor contributing to mortality and morbidity after allogeneic stem-cell transplantation. Because of the small number of results from well designed, large-scale, clinical studies there is considerable variability in the prevention and treatment of GVHD worldwide. In 2014, to standardise treatment approaches the European Society of Blood and Marrow Transplantation published recommendations on the management of GVHD in the setting of HLA-identical sibling or unrelated donor transplantation in adult patients with haematological malignancies. Here we update these recommendations including the results of study published after 2014. Evidence was searched in three steps: first, a widespread scan of published trials, meta-analyses, and systematic reviews; second, expert opinion was added for specific issues following several rounds of debate; and third, a refined search to target debated or rapidly updating issues. On the basis of this evidence and the 2014 recommendations, five members of the EBMT Transplant Complications Working Party created 38 statements on GVHD prophylaxis, drug management, and treatment of acute and chronic GVHD. Subsequently, they created the EBMT GVHD management recommendation expert panel by recruiting 20 experts with expertise in GVHD management. An email-based, two-round Delphi panel approach was used to manage the consensus. Modified National Comprehensive Cancer Network categories for evidence and consensus were applied to the approved statements. We reached 100% consensus for 29 recommendations and 95% consensus for nine recommendations. Key updates to these recommendations include a broader use of rabbit anti-T-cell globulin; lower steroid doses for the management of grade 2 acute GVHD with isolated skin or upper gastrointestinal tract manifestations; fluticasone, azithromycin, and montelukast should be used for bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome; and the addition of newer treatment options for resteroid-refractory acute and chronic GVHD. In addition, we discuss specific aspects of GVHD prophylaxis and management in the setting of haploidentical transplantation and in paediatric patients, but no formal recommendations on those procedures have been provided in this Review. The European Society of Blood and Marrow Transplantation proposes to use these recommendations as a basis for the routine management of GVHD during stem-cell transplantation.

Clinical Outcomes Using Mycophenolate and Tacrolimus for Graft-versus-Host Disease Prophylaxis in Patients Undergoing Allogeneic Stem Cell Transplant: A Single Institution Experience

For recipients of allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT), mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) plus tacrolimus combination is mostly used in reduced-intensity (RIC), and nonmyeloablative conditioning (NMAC) whereas methotrexate and tacrolimus combination is preferred in myeloablative conditioning (MAC). We present single institution outcomes in patients undergoing allogeneic HSCT with both MAC and NMAC/RIC regimen using MMF and tacrolimus for graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) prophylaxis. Data from all adult patients who underwent allogeneic HSCT from 2007 to 2017 was collected from Data Back to Centers web-based application of Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research (CIBMTR). A total of 150 patients were included with the mean age of 46.9 years. For the patients who received MAC (n=109), the cumulative incidence of grade II-IV acute GVHD at day 100 was 37%, grade II-IV acute GVHD at one year was 51%, and chronic GVHD at one year was 38%. For the patients who received NMAC/RIC (n=41), the cumulative incidence of grade II-IV acute GVHD at day 100 was 31%, grade II-IV acute GVHD at one year was 28%, and chronic GVHD at one year was 36%. This institutional analysis shows that the combination of MMF and tacrolimus yields acceptable outcomes for the prevention of acute and chronic GVHD.

Inferior Outcomes with Cyclosporine and Mycophenolate Mofetil after Myeloablative Allogeneic Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation

Combination therapy with a calcineurin inhibitor (CNI), such as cyclosporine (CSA) or tacrolimus (Tac), and methotrexate (MTX) or mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) is a widely used approach to graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) prevention. Data on the comparative effectiveness of MMF compared with MTX are limited and conflicting, however. We analyzed data from the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research for adult patients undergoing first myeloablative hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) from an HLA-identical matched related donor (MRD; n = 3979) or matched unrelated donor (URD; n = 4163) using CSA+MMF, CSA+MTX, Tac+MMF, or Tac+MTX for GVHD prevention between 2000 and 2013. Within the MRD cohort, 2252 patients received CSA+MTX, 1391 received Tac+MTX, 114 received CSA+MMF, and 222 received Tac+MMF. Recipients of CSA+MMF had a higher incidence of acute GVHD grade II-IV (hazard ratio [HR], 1.65; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.24 to 2.20; P < .001) and grade III-IV (HR, 1.92; 95% CI, 1.31 to 2.83; P < .001) compared with Tac+MTX. The use of CSA+MMF was also associated with inferior overall survival (OS) (HR, 2.31; 95% CI, 1.73 to 3.09; P < .001) due to higher transplantation-related mortality (TRM) (HR, 4.03; 95% CI, 2.61 to 6.23; P < .001) compared with Tac+MTX. Within the URD cohort, 974 patients received CSA+MTX, 2697 received Tac+MTX, 68 received CSA+MMF, and 424 received Tac+MMF. CSA+MMF was again significantly associated with a higher incidence of grade III-IV acute GVHD (HR, 2.31; 95% CI, 1.57 to 3.42; P <0001), worse OS (HR, 2.36; 95% CI, 1.67 to 3.35; P < .001), and higher TRM (HR, 3.09; 95% CI, 2.00 to 4.77; P < .001), compared with Tac+MTX and other regimens. Thus, this large retrospective comparison of MMF versus MTX in combination with CSA or Tac demonstrates significantly worse GVHD and survival outcomes with CSA+MMF compared with Tac+MTX.

The Role of Co-stimulatory/Co-inhibitory Signals in Graft-vs.-Host Disease

Allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (allo-HCT) is an effective immunotherapeutic approach for various hematologic and immunologic ailments. Despite the beneficial impact of allo-HCT, its adverse effects cause severe health concerns. After transplantation, recognition of host cells as foreign entities by donor T cells induces graft-vs.-host disease (GVHD). Activation, proliferation and trafficking of donor T cells to target organs and tissues are critical steps in the pathogenesis of GVHD. T cell activation is a synergistic process of T cell receptor (TCR) recognition of major histocompatibility complex (MHC)-anchored antigen and co-stimulatory/co-inhibitory signaling in the presence of cytokines. Most of the currently used therapeutic regimens for GVHD are based on inhibiting the allogeneic T cell response or T-cell depletion (TCD). However, the immunosuppressive drugs and TCD hamper the therapeutic potential of allo-HCT, resulting in attenuated graft-vs.-leukemia (GVL) effect as well as increased vulnerability to infection. In view of the drawback of overbroad immunosuppression, co-stimulatory, and co-inhibitory molecules are plausible targets for selective modulation of T cell activation and function that can improve the effectiveness of allo-HCT. Therefore, this review collates existing knowledge of T cell co-stimulation and co-inhibition with current research that may have the potential to provide novel approaches to cure GVHD without sacrificing the beneficial effects of allo-HCT.

Upper gastrointestinal acute graft-versus-host disease adds minimal prognostic value in isolation or with other graft-versus-host disease symptoms as currently diagnosed and treated

Upper gastrointestinal acute graft-versus-host disease is reported in approximately 30% of hematopoietic stem cell transplant recipients developing acute graft-versus-host disease. Currently classified as Grade II in consensus criteria, upper gastrointestinal acute graft-versus-host disease is often treated with systemic immunosuppression. We reviewed the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research database to assess the prognostic implications of upper gastrointestinal acute graft-versus-host disease in isolation or with other acute graft-versus-host disease manifestations. 8567 adult recipients of myeloablative allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant receiving T-cell replete grafts for acute leukemia, chronic myeloid leukemia or myelodysplastic syndrome between 2000 and 2012 were analyzed. 51% of transplants were from unrelated donors. Reported upper gastrointestinal acute graft-versus-host disease incidence was 12.1%; 2.7% of recipients had isolated upper gastrointestinal acute graft-versus-host disease, of whom 95% received systemic steroids. Patients with isolated upper gastrointestinal involvement had similar survival, disease-free survival, transplant-related mortality, and relapse as patients with Grades 0, I, or II acute graft-versus-host disease. Unrelated donor recipients with isolated upper gastrointestinal acute graft-versus-host disease had less subsequent chronic graft-versus-host disease than those with Grades I or II disease (P=0.016 and P=0.0004, respectively). Upper gastrointestinal involvement added no significant prognostic information when present in addition to other manifestations of Grades I or II acute graft-versus-host disease. If upper gastrointestinal symptoms were reclassified as Grade 0 or I, 425 of 2083 patients (20.4%) with Grade II disease would be downgraded, potentially impacting the interpretation of clinical trial outcomes. Defining upper gastrointestinal acute graft-versus-host disease as a Grade II entity, as it is currently diagnosed and treated, is not strongly supported by this analysis. The general approach to diagnosis, treatment and grading of upper gastrointestinal symptoms and their impact on subsequent acute graft-versus-host disease therapy warrants reevaluation.

Better outcomes of modified myeloablative conditioning without antithymocyte globulin versus myeloablative conditioning in cord blood transplantation for hematological malignancies: A retrospective (development) and a prospective (validation) study

Cord blood transplantation (CBT) is an effective option for treating hematological malignancies, but graft failure (GF) remains the primary cause of therapy failure. Thus, based on myeloablative conditioning (MAC) of busulfan with cyclophosphamide (Bu/Cy) or total body irradiation with Cy (TBI/Cy), fludarabine (Flu) was added to Bu/Cy and cytarabine (CA) to TBI/Cy for a modified myeloablative conditioning (MMAC). To compare the prognosis of MMAC with MAC, we conducted a retrospective study including 58 patients who underwent CBT with MAC or MMAC from 2000 to 2011. Neutrophil and platelet engraftment rate, overall survival (OS) and disease free survival (DFS) were significantly higher in the MMAC group (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 2.58, 2.43, 0.36 and 0.37; p < 0.01, p = 0.01, p = 0.02 and p = 0.02, separately). Nonrelapse mortality (NRM) was comparable (p = 0.183). To validate the outcomes noted in the MMAC group, we conducted a prospective single‐arm clinical trial including 188 patients who underwent CBT with MMAC from 2011 to 2015. Engraftment rate, survival and NRM of the MMAC group in the prospective trail (MMAC‐P) were similar to the MMAC group in the retrospective study (MMAC‐R). This study is the first to demonstrate the superiority of MMAC to MAC in CBT for hematological malignancies.

What's new?

Cord blood transplants can help patients with blood cancer, but too often, the transplant fails due to immune rejection or other problems. Typically, patients receive myeloablative conditioning (MAC) prior to CBT, but more intense regimen might improve transplant success. Here, the authors compared the success of modified myeloablative conditioning (MMAC) with conventional MAC by looking at 58 patients over an 11‐year period. They then followed up with a four‐year prospective study, including 188 patients who received cord blood transplant with MMAC. The modified conditioning regimen boosted graft success and improved survival of patients with hematological cancers.

Pharmacokinetics of intravenous mycophenolate mofetil in allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell-transplanted Japanese patients

PURPOSE

Mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) is increasingly used among Japanese patients undergoing allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-SCT). Because pharmacokinetic data for MMF in the Asian population are limited, we conducted this investigation.

METHODS

Intravenous MMF (1000 mg/dose) was administered to 10 patients along with cyclosporine or tacrolimus for 10 days after allo-SCT; it was administered every 8 h in peripheral blood stem cell- and bone marrow-transplanted patients, and every 12 h in cord blood-transplanted patients. MMF was administered orally at the same dose from day 11. Plasma concentrations of mycophenolic acid (MPA) were measured by high-performance liquid chromatography.

RESULTS

The MPA AUC_0 - tau was 31.9 ± 3.4, 26.2 ± 2.4, and 21.0 ± 2.2 µg*h/mL, the mean C_trough was 0.25, 0.35, and 0.37 µg/mL, and the C_max was 10.8, 9.2, and 5.5 µg/mL on days 2, 9, and 16, respectively. The AUC_0 - tau and C_max were significantly higher after intravenous MMF dosing than after oral MMF dosing. All patients exhibited successful neutrophil engraftments in a median time of 18 days. Grade II acute graft-versus-host disease (GvHD) of the skin was observed in two patients, and one patient developed limited chronic GvHD. Individual cases of transient and curable grade III oral mucositis and diarrhea were observed; however, MMF was not discontinued. No other severe complications or infections were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Intravenously administered MMF was safe and possibly effective in achieving higher MPA plasma concentrations for GvHD prophylaxis after allo-SCT in Japanese patients.

Outcomes of matched sibling donor bone marrow transplantation in children using single-agent calcineurin inhibitors as prophylaxis for graft versus host disease

BACKGROUND

Optimal graft versus host disease (GVHD) prophylaxis prevents severe manifestations without excess immunosuppression. Standard prophylaxis includes a calcineurin inhibitor (CNI) with low-dose methotrexate. However, single-agent CNI may be sufficient prophylaxis for a defined group of patients. Single-agent CNI has been used for GVHD prophylaxis for human leukocyte antigen (HLA)-matched sibling donor (MSD) bone marrow transplants (BMTs) in young patients at the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia for over 20 years. Here, we describe outcomes using this prophylactic strategy in a recent cohort.

PROCEDURE

We performed a single-institution chart review and retrospective analysis of consecutive children undergoing MSD BMT who received single-agent CNI for GVHD prophylaxis between January 2002 and December 2014.

RESULTS

Fifty-two children with a median age of 6.1 years (interquartile range [IQR] 2.5-8.3) and donor age of 6 years (IQR 3-10), with malignant and nonmalignant diseases (n = 35 and 17, respectively) were evaluated. Forty-three (82.6%) received oral prophylaxis with single-agent tacrolimus after initial intravenous therapy. Rates of GVHD were consistent with reported rates on dual prophylaxis: the overall incidence of grades 2-4 acute GVHD was 25.5%, grades 3-4 GVHD 9.8%, and chronic GVHD 10.4%. The cumulative incidence of relapse among children with malignancy was 20% at a median of 237 days (IQR 194-318) post-transplant. Two-year overall survival was 82.7% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 69.4-90.6%) and event-free survival was 78.9% (95% CI: 65.1-87.7%). No patient experienced graft failure.

CONCLUSIONS

Single-agent CNI is a safe, effective approach to GVHD prophylaxis in young patients undergoing HLA-identical sibling BMT. Additionally, single-agent oral tacrolimus is a reasonable alternative to cyclosporine in this population.

The combination of cyclosporine and mycophenolate mofetil is less effective than cyclosporine and methotrexate in the prevention of acute graft-versus host disease after stem-cell transplantation from unrelated donors

Acute graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) is the major treatment-related complication after stem-cell transplantation (SCT) from unrelated-donors. Several GVHD prophylaxis regimens have been explored, but no regimen has shown superiority. We analyzed transplantation outcomes in 472 consecutive unrelated-donor SCT recipients, using cyclosporine/methotrexate (MTX, n = 314) or cyclosporine/mycophenolate-mofetil (MMF, n = 158) for GVHD prophylaxis. Neutrophil engraftment was faster after MMF, days 11 and 14, respectively (P = .001). Acute GVHD grade II-IV and III-IV occurred in 47% and 28% after MMF compared to 27% and 12% after MTX, respectively (P < .001). Nonrelapse mortality (NRM) was 44% and 24%, respectively (P < .001). Death associated with GVHD occurred in 25% and 8% (P < .0001), while other NRM causes occurred in 19% and 16%, respectively (P = .39). Relapse mortality was similar. Overall survival was better after MTX, 40% and 29%, respectively (P = .006). However, this difference had only borderline significance when adjusting for differences in patient characteristics (HR, 1.3, P = .08). To minimize potential selection bias we analyzed outcomes on the basis of an intention-to-treat like analysis. During the years 2008-2009, the leading GVHD prophylaxis regimen for unrelated-donor SCT included MMF (89% of transplants). During the other periods, MTX was used predominantly (82% of transplants). The two periods were otherwise well-matched. Acute GVHD occurred more often in 2008-2009. Death associated with GVHD occurred more often, while other NRM causes occurred less often resulting in similar NRM and overall survival. In conclusion, cyclosporine/MMF is associated with faster engraftment and possibly with less organ toxicity than cyclosporine/MTX. However, it is associated with increased rates of acute GVHD and GVHD-associated deaths.